Known for his thoughtful approach to visual storytelling, Teo Crawford joins us on the VALOI blog today. We asked him a few questions about his journey with film photography, his scanning setup, and his advice for photographers building out their own workflow.
For anyone in the VALOI community who hasn’t stumbled upon your YouTube channel yet, tell us briefly who you are, what drew you to film photography, and how your hybrid workflow became such a core part of your creative output?
I’m Teo, a photographer from Austria. I like to share videos about photography in general and my personal experiences around photography on YouTube. I’m too young to state that I started off shooting film right away. I learned photography with a digital camera, however in 2020 I had been curious about film photography for a while and I happened to find my Dad’s old Pentax K1000 in a cupboard. The camera’s heavy mechanical metal build quality was unlike any camera I had ever picked up, which deeply intrigued me. Once I found out that it probably still works (I wasn’t expecting that actually) I decided to try it out. And so in late 2020 I shot my first roll and ever since then I’ve gradually shifted to mainly shooting film.
When we look at your photography, there’s a real emphasis on atmospheric light and daily details. Can you walk us through your process from loading the roll to pressing the shutter? How much of that is planned versus reacting to the moment?
While I really like planned or staged photography, most of my work is merely reactive. I tend to use photography as an artistic medium that can also fulfil the purpose of simply documenting things that stand out to me. And those things simply happen to usually be pretty lighting, a particular atmosphere, a pattern or people. I usually have a loaded camera at home that I can just pack when I leave the house and I slowly use the frames across a couple weeks.
Leica M6, Kodak Gold 200
Is there an artist, book, or specific body of work in history that completely changed how you look through a viewfinder? And do you find yourself thinking about those influences when you're working?
There is actually a photographer who had a massive influence on me. I had the pleasure of studying from Andrew Phelps. He taught a couple courses in my uni and he deeply changed my view on photography. I come from a background of trying to produce the technically superior photograph and achieving results that are commercially viable despite being shot with a camera that would not be considered suitable for commercial work.
I hadn’t noticed this entire world of artistic and documentary photography in which the content of the photograph itself is what mattered more than the technicalities.
I had firmly attached myself to this way of working that I hadn’t noticed this entire world of artistic and documentary photography in which the content of the photograph itself is what mattered more than the technicalities. To this day, I feel like that was a pivotal change for me and shaped how I approach photography now.
Ricoh TF900, Portra 400
What resources do you recommend for someone trying to move past basic photography and really master the craft of both shooting film and scanning it themselves?
Do what suits you. Some people learn the most effectively by reading a book on the topic. Books on this topic exist. However others prefer YouTube videos. We live in a time in which we are blessed with a huge choice of videos to watch and compare, that can guide us on our own path. In the end though, all resources are merely guiding forces that point in a direction. I think actually working on the craft is what will result in actual progress. It took me years of iteration to finally have a workflow in film photography that I do not view as lacking. The scanning was especially hard. I began with some utterly basic setups that got the job done, theoretically, but the results were quite flawed and I had to slowly figure out which part of the process caused which flaws. Some issues stemmed from the camera or the lens.
Other issues can stem from the development or the lab. And finally there are issues that can stem from the scanning setup or the digital conversion method. Speaking from my experience, I’d say working through all of these issues has been the best resource to gain a rounded understanding of what I’m doing and what I was doing wrong in the past.
What is the most 'technically imperfect' photo you’ve ever taken that you still absolutely love? What does that say about the importance of gear versus timing?
I can’t think of any photograph that in particular stands out to me, however this is a somewhat recent example. I was trying out the new Rollei 35AF and made a silly mistake, I had set the aperture to f/16 without realising it. This caused the camera to always shoot with very low shutter speeds to let enough light hit the film. In this photograph that worked quite nicely because it abstracts the image in a way that makes it more interesting than it would have been without the abstraction. Through the motion blur, the subject itself loses importance and the photograph concentrates more on perceived movement, tonal contrast and colours.
And I happened to get lucky with the colours here, because the scene itself was not too colourful while the person in front of me was wearing a blue jacket while holding a red umbrella and a red bag, which add some nice colour contrast. This is one of those cases in which the mistake actually makes the photograph more interesting than it would have been if shot correctly.
December 2025, Innsbruck, Austria, Rollei 35AF, Portra 800.
When you're out taking photographs, do you look for the light first or the subject? And does that priority change when you are back at home lighting your negatives on the scanning bed?
I don’t really have a priority there. I simply try to be aware of my surroundings and wait for something to appear interesting to me. This can sometimes be the lighting, sometimes the subject and sometimes both, that’s the jackpot of course. Ideally both are interesting. If only one is interesting, the other has to at least be okay.
However if there’s an interesting subject but horrible lighting, I might even decide to not take the photograph because I already know I will not like it - but that rarely happens, because lighting is rarely THAT bad… maybe at night when there isn’t much light at all.
That way of viewing the photograph doesn’t really change later in the scanning process.
Leica M6, Kodak Gold 200
People often ask why we go through the effort of shooting analog. Have you ever had to explain to a non-photographer why we go through the multi-step journey of taking photos on film, processing it, and then using a digital camera to scan it back into a computer?
Of course I have, especially to people above a certain age, who grew up in a time when shooting film was the norm. To them digital photography is the newer, superior and more convenient choice, so it can be puzzling to see a younger person shoot with a medium that is obsolete in their mind. I understand that and I also understand how ironic some parts of this process can appear… I mean, I scan my film photos with a digital camera. I’m not surprised about that fact making some heads tilt.
What is your 'comfort' film stock? One you load when you just want to enjoy the process? Following that, is there a specific film stock you absolutely love the physical look of, but find uniquely challenging (or incredibly rewarding) to scan and color-grade at home?
My go-to film is Kodak Gold 200. It’s the perfect balance for me. It has more of its own characteristics already baked in than films like Portra 160 or Portra 400 which are more flexible, however less of a pre-defined look than Kodak Ultramax 400.
I’ve become a bit boring now in the sense that I simply shoot what I know that I like and rarely experiment with different films. So currently there isn’t really any film that I like but find too challenging. I simply stick to Kodak Gold most of the time and choose other films merely for their sensitivity, such as Portra 400 or 800 when I need more flexibility in darker situations.
Leica M6, Kodak Gold 200
What are some of the most memorable places you have visited and what are some essential items for you when travelling and for taking photos?
I’m a rather minimalist photographer, I like simplicity. All I need is a camera, a 35mm f/2.8 lens and some colour film. A recent fond memory is a train ride I took in January that I think is the best train ride I’ve been on in my life. The first quarter of this year I was back in Japan again (I’m half Japanese and spend a lot of time in Japan) and travelled to the countryside to document the Japanese winter. This train ride was from Tōkamachi to Nagano, an old one-carriage train that takes its passengers through the mountains. I had been excited all week already because I love snow and this exploration of snowy Japan was a dream coming true to me. And the morning I boarded this train was a very snowy morning. However the snow storm hadn’t quite moved on yet when the train began its journey so the lighting was very flat and the visibility out the window was quite limited. However, about half an hour into the train ride, the clouds began to break up and the sunlight came through, lighting up the gorgeous snowy landscapes around the train. I excitedly shot an entire roll on that train, it was so beautiful.
January 2026, Japan, Leica M6, Kodak Gold 200
If you could only use one camera and film combination, what would it be and why?
I have to re-iterate that I’m a simple man when it comes to photography. Just give me any film camera and a 35mm f/2.8 lens and a roll of Kodak Gold 200 and I’ll be happy. I used my Dad’s Pentax K1000 for many years until it sadly had some internal damage (I can’t blame it, it’s 40 years old). Since then I’ve used another Pentax K1000 and a Pentax Spotmatic F, which however also broke, because they weren’t in a great condition anyway.
Since the beginning of this year I’ve been shooting with a Leica M6, which has been a fascinating change. It’s the first time for me shooting with a film camera that actually doesn’t have any issues, not even minor ones, which has been refreshing. And I’ve warmed up to the rangefinder system and appreciate its strengths. But I’m not tied to this camera. If I can get my hands on a perfectly functional Pentax K1000, I’ll happily shoot with it too.
Leica M6, Kodak Gold 200
Is there something that you believe is missing from your photographic process, that you would like to include, but haven’t gotten the time, money or energy to incorporate? What is it?
I think for me this would be more intentionality and dedication. There are many projects I would like to tackle, all documentary photography, that require more dedication than I am able to give to them at the moment. I run a small business, my YouTube channel, which is a fantastic way to incorporate my passion for film photography in my life and work, however it takes up a lot of my time and I dream of retiring one day and fully concentrating on photography projects.
What is your take on the current state of film photography industry? What are your hopes and dreams regarding it?
I’m so happy to see that the industry has been revived after almost dying. There appears to be a small bunch of photographers who simply prefer the analogue medium in photography. Companies like Kodak had to shift considerably to serve this loyal but small customer base which is entirely different to what they used to be, a global giant producing the world’s photography products.
We have been buying up 40-year-old film cameras for $100–$200 that we’ve become used to them being this price... As long as the second-hand market is thriving, making new film cameras does not make much economic sense.
However I think the camera industry sadly hasn’t been able to shift in this way and it’s understandable because the task is utterly difficult. Camera brands such as Leica, Pentax and Rollei have released new film cameras recently, however only Leica has been successful in this regard. However the new Leica film camera is a niche luxury product, so not really the accessible kind of gear that can grow the industry by helping newer film photographers and beginners.
Pentax and Rollei tried, however, seem to have failed. But that was no surprise because they face a very very hard competitor: The second hand market. We have been buying up 40 year old film cameras for $100-$200 that we’ve become used to film cameras being this price, which leads to a lack of willingness to spend a multiple of that on a new Pentax 17 or a Rollei 35AF, which costs much more but is arguably not better in quality. But it is simply not possible to create a new film camera with the same quality as the old ones at the same second-hand price. So as long as the second hand market is thriving, making new film cameras does not make much economic sense.
This is a pity, but at the same time I’m deeply grateful for the thriving second hand market. This has made film photography accessible and thanks to online stores such as Kamerastore the process has become more reliable because there are actual technicians checking and fixing these old cameras to extend the life of the old gear. And I am a massive supporter of keeping old cameras alive.
Leica M6, Kodak Gold 200
If you could travel back to any era in history, what would you want to photograph? And would you want to develop and print it in a traditional darkroom, or bring those negatives back to 2026 to scan them with modern gear?
I think the thriving post-war era, around the 1960s, would be a phenomenal time to photograph. I long for an optimistic world that sees progress ahead, not worry and dread. I don’t know if I might be romanticising the post-war era, but I would be curious to see the world during that time and photograph the people. However I would probably not develop the film myself, except there is no other option. The one part of film photography that I’m happy to skip is the chemicals. So I’d try to get my film developed and then bring the negatives back to the future to scan at home.
Leica M6, Kodak Gold 200
If you had to shoot a high-stakes editorial on a single roll of film, what camera-and-lens setup would you trust to get the shot, and what macro lens/digital body combination would you trust to scan it with the absolute highest fidelity?
I think I would concentrate on what I know and what I’m comfortable with. At the moment that is the setup I currently use - the Leica M6, the Leica Summarit 35mm f/2.5 lens and Kodak Gold. Then I’d let the lab handle the chemical developing process and finally scan my negatives at home with my current setup. The Sony A7IV with the Sony 90mm f/2.8 Macro lens and the VALOI easy35 V2.
0 comments