I resisted purchasing my first digital camera for professional work until 2006 — some 5 years after Nikon’s introduction of the D1. Up to that point, I worked primarily with Nikon F5 35mm and Mamiya RZ medium format film cameras. But, for my personal work I preferred the Leica M. In fact, one of my most satisfying periods of time working as a travel photographer was when I had completely abandoned 35mm SLR cameras in favor of Leica rangefinders. As a birthday present to myself, I recently acquired a “new” Leica M6 camera and simultaneously rediscovered my love for film photography.

Keith's "new" Leica M6 film camera with Zeiss 50mm f/2.0 Planar lens. The M6 -- first introduced in 1984 -- is a completely mechanical, battery independent, hand-built tool, that can outperform any modern digital camera in the hands of a skilled photographer. The Leica M style camera concept has not changed significantly since the M3 was first produced in 1954. © Keith Dunlop

Prior to the introduction of the single-lens-reflex (SLR) camera, the Nikon F in 1959, use of rangefinder cameras by professional photojournalists was common. For traveling photographers, rangefinders were, and still are, an attractive option because of their small size compared to SLR’s, and their simplicity in operation.

I worked in Guatemala on a travel assignment in 2003 exclusively with a pair of simple Leica M film cameras and three fixed focal length lenses, and never once wanted for more “advanced” equipment. This was the first time I worked professionally without the comfort of my automated SLR’s. I photographed without the security nets of auto-focus, quick-firing motor drives, and zoom lenses. I returned with approximately 1,100 images over the course of the 16 day assignment, and completely fulfilled my objectives. By comparison, during the first three events of 2010 wedding season, I shot over 5,450 digital images — all captured during a period of roughly 25 cumulative hours.  That roughly equates to five times the image count over a mere 1/16th period of time. This shot count is nearly doubled when I consider those added by my second shooter. All told, nearly 9,300 digital images — a staggering figure that should give any photographer pause to reconsider their methods.

Gracie, age 6, poses for a portrait while wearing my favorite black wool cap. (Leica M6, 50mm Zeiss f/2.0 ZM Planar lens, shot on Ilford HP-5 processed in DD-X.) © Keith Dunlop

I should stress that this is not a essay concerned with the tiresome debate of film vs. digital, for I find that discussion meaningless in the context of creating a photograph. Henri Cartier-Bresson said it best opening his seminal book “The Mind’s Eye” with the following declaration:

Photography has not changed since its origin except in its technical aspects, which for me are not a major concern.

And while I consider film and digital cameras simply different tools upon which to accomplish the same objective, I do believe that modern digital image techniques have made photographers lazy. With a modern digital SLR it is far too easy to fire off as many frames as the media card can hold without regard for the image — just look at my personal example. The 32gb memory cards currently available provide for a staggering capacity to capture thousands of images in a very short period of time. Thus, there is no incentive to consider the importance of the composition of an individual image. Why would there be, when you can quite easily fire off a burst of multiple images with the hope that one might be acceptable? Photographers no longer think about “the image”, rather they think about not missing “the shot”. Thus, photographers become consumed with quantity over quality, with the hope that somehow a quality image might be found, after-the-fact, during post-production.

Bresson suggests photographers adopt the following attitude:

One must always take photographs with the greatest respect for the subject and for oneself.

Accomplishing a Bresson-like philosophy of photography requires a tremendous discipline on the part of the photographer. One must be methodical and precise in technique, and adapt a level of concentration during image capture that fosters creation of a great photograph in-camera, rather than on the computer screen later. I have to admit that I have many times fallen into the latter category. But, working with a  simpler film camera, such as a Leica M6, helps me to remember why I became a photographer in the first place. It wasn’t to come home from a wedding assignment with 3,000 images on my CF card, but rather to make photographs that attempt to capture the beauty in form, geometry, and emotion of a particular moment in time.

I haven’t completely gone off the reservation — my professional work will still be primarily shot and processed digitally. But I have come to realize that over-reliance on the convenience of modern digital imaging technology can have unintended consequences. One of those consequences, for me, has been to allow technology to interfere with my responsibilities as a photographer to create photographs. Working with simpler tools — ones that require a far greater level of input from the artist — is one way photographers can remain in touch with the artistic intuition that our clients hire us for. For this reason, I will continue to use my M6, alongside my digital cameras, and my clients will likely see the inclusion of a selection of film-based images in their proofs this year.