Both have the same desired end result, to capture memories from your special day. Yet more and more, the topic of film vs. digital photography is gaining attention. When choosing a photographer for your wedding day, there is much to take into consideration. To give you some insight on the advantages of film and digital photography we sat down with Bay Area photographer Jennifer Kloss Heffner who shoots in both mediums! 
You consider yourself a “hybrid” shooter. Why?
I’m a hybrid shooter because I shoot with both digital and film equipment--I have taken what is best about digital and what is best about film and blended those qualities together. Each medium has its pros and cons--different weddings and lighting situations require different equipment to create just the right feel to best reflect that event.
What do you see as the pro’s and cons of each?
My photography training is in film so that medium will always have a sort of romanticism for me. And, more importantly, there is an undeniable clarity and quality of detail with film that is impossible to duplicate. But it is definitely more expensive. With the rise of digital technology and the accessibility of information about digital cameras, I jumped on the bandwagon. The benefits were obvious--the instant gratification, the immediate knowledge that came from experimentation, and, of course, the lower costs. For me, I find that I cannot capture the correct feeling and quality in the details and emotions with digital--there is an obvious quality difference in the final images. Also, when shooting some film, I am able to remain a more mindful shooter--I can't afford to simply aim my camera and fire off as many frames per second as I can, hoping that, in the editing, I will find a "good one". Film keeps me on my toes--it forces me to watch people and the nuances of their interactions--to anticipate a person's laugh or an expressive tilt of the head. It keeps me looking for the genuine emotion and love on a wedding day that is sometimes missed by a rapid-fire digital shooter. To simply say that one is better than the other is ignorant--they really do both have benefits. Which is exactly why I have chosen to blend both into one hybrid style.
Currently, most photographers only shot with digital. Why do you think this is?
I think that digital photography allowed a lot of people to cross the line from hobbyist to pro--they could quickly learn the basics and get started without a great deal of investment They could shoot images and immediately see the results--they didn't have to feel as comfortable and confident in their photographic abilities. About a year ago, out of frustration when looking at some images shot outdoors, I decided that the additional costs of film were worth the benefits to my clients. I wanted to offer my clients what I would want for my own wedding--put simply, the best possible images. And that was when my hybrid style of shooting got started. 
What advantage do you think you offer over other photographers by shooting with both film and digital?
I continue to feel like my work has never been better. Each wedding is better than my last--I'm in my groove, blending the old technology with the new technology to offer something perfect.
Thursday, February 23, 2012 at 12:51AM 
