It came to my attention that The New Paper published an excerpt of my interview with them on page 14 ( 15 June 2013 ). Unfortunately, the article is a GROSS MISREPRESENTATION of the 15 minute interview I had with them.
First and foremost, let me just say that I’m a film photographer at heart, a passion that I had since the first day I held a camera. During the interview, I went at great lengths to explain to the editor why I chose the film medium for wedding photography in a day and age where digital photography is so prevalent. I also explained how film photography gives me the kind of excitement and anticipation like no other medium can. As a photojournalist, that anticipation is important and it’s that very instinct that differentiates one photographer from the other. The cinematographic approach that has been my signature style was made possible because of the film medium. Movies today are still shot on film. My black-and-white works that I’m most noted for are still shot on silver halide film. I still develop these films myself by hand.
I also went on to explain that the cult following of Lomography cameras has given film photography a revival. More and more people are shooting on film these days. I myself am an avid Lomographer. People who have followed my works for a while can attest to that. I’ve been using lomography cameras even in my professional work and have taken countless wedding photos with my trusty Holga 120N and Diana F+. As a matter of fact, the lomography LC-A+ has been a regular feature in most of my assignments now.
However, none of these were published.
If the article has given you the impression that I’m quitting film photography anytime soon, I can assure you again that that is certainly not the case. I’m a film photographer at heart, and will always be!