Camera from 2008-2010

Discussion in 'Beginner Questions' started by tyrabanks, Jan 7, 2021.

  1. +1
    In my mid teens I bought an old (1920s) 1/4 plate camera, and on first use I was most disappointed that the pictures it produced didn't look at all 'old fashioned'. And of course they weren't - then.

    If I was to dig those pictures out today, they'd look much, much older!

    More recently I've bought - very cheaply - a few hardly-used but discarded digital cameras. Mostly 8 to 12 megapixel ones from around 2005 or a bit later. As with the 1920s plate camera, the pictures they produce today look like they were made...... today.
    Bettendorf likes this.
  2. That look is really a matter of post-processing and totally camera-independent. Get a cheap,used dslr and free PS plug-ins like the excellent Nik Collection. Experiment...Otherwise, just shoot HDR on a phone, adjust and pray.
  3. This is reminding me of the art forgers who try to find materials that are appropriate for the time.
    Modern pigments are very different, but with some work, one can recreate older formulations.
    Some might buy old but not famous paintings to reuse the canvas.

    There are some who try to make modern photographs with the look of the early 1900's,
    where there are significant differences. I suspect it would be difficult to tell 2010 from 2020
    at screen resolution, but maybe not at higher resolution. Though since the camera information
    goes into the JFIF file, it would be easy to check to find out if a newer camera was used.
  4. I was using a Panasonic FZ-20 in 2004 or so. Even those image were quite good. After that I got a DX format camera (Nikon D200) and used it for the next 13 years. I don't think there's anything you could say about image quality over the last ten years other than the improvement in cell phone shots. Possibly the initial premise is false?
  5. I have wondered sometimes, when I have some negatives and don't remember which camera they came from, identifying it by the exact frame shape. Some have rounded corners, some not so rounded. I might have tried it once, when I was almost sure which one it was.

    Color films often have some distinctive color effects, some of which are easily visible and known.

    I suspect some effects of the Bayer filter in digital cameras would come through in the
    images, maybe cheaper cameras would have more distinctions. And bokeh is well
    known for its visibility, at least in some images. It might contribute more subliminally
    in others.
  6. Maybe, but it varies more with make and model than it does over time.

    One of my favourite digital cameras is an all-plastic Kodak with Schneider zoom lens. The colour from it has a fairly unique rendering with strong reds and blues. However, another - supposedly improved - Kodak from slightly later has a disappointingly 'meh' look.

    I suspect you could pick a handful of cameras, all made in the same year, and get a different colour rendering from every one of them. And none of them would have a signature look for that particular year.
  7. OK, but there is still probably enough difference that you can extract make, and time in two dimensions. Model would depend on how many different sensors, and specifically filter designs, they use. Time on how often they changed them.

    Though it is probably easier to extract from the JFIF data, so you would have to remove that.
    Do editing programs have the option to remove it and add their own data as the creator of the resulting file?
  8. As others have said, its a lot more than just the camera: people's entire attitudes and ways of carrying themselves change every few years, plus fashions, colors, cars, etc, etc.

    Leaving that (big) part of it out, and assuming you do just want to emulate a particular technical "look", it would help if you link to samples. We need to know if the specific MySpace photos that interest you were made with the crude phone cameras of the era, or normal pocket digital point-and-shoot. The phone cameras were almost all total garbage in the early '00s, creating distinctively awful snaps that anyone could tell came from a phone. But the pocket "real" cameras were surprisingly good by 2002 already: I have many many travel pics from a tiny Nikon CoolPix 3.2 MP that still rival anything I took with a thousand-dollar DSLR. Other popular pocketables were the Canon SureShots and a variety of Panasonic, Sony, whatever pocket cams.

    By 2008 phone cams took a big leap with the introduction of the first iPhone, tho they are still easily identified now as a somewhat dated "phone cam look".

    It might even be as simple as there were no such things as instant "filters" like you see in modern phones and social media apps: most of the early social media pics are unretouched, ordinary straight out of camera photos with no predictable, everybody does it style filters.
    Last edited: Jan 13, 2021
  9. Around that timeframe my wife and I were on vacation and one day were photographing the same subject (we were in the high desert). She had a Canon p&s and I had a Panasonic one (with a Leica Vario something or other lens), both 8mpx. Comparing our shots, the Canon color was 'cool' and the Panasonic 'warm'. I never had another Panasonic, but she would have four Canons and all of them had a cool tone to them out of the camera.
  10. I had a series of Panasonic Lumix pocket-sized point & shoot cameras beginning probably around 1999-2000 and up. Most of them were kinda bare bones but with decent enough lenses. I'd guess that if one could find any complete set (camera, batteries, & charger), any lesser quality SIM card could work and you'd have everything you'd need to replicate early 21st century photos? Low mp count, funky old pocket camera, what else would she need?

    US/NY on eb@y Panasonic LUMIX DMC-FX3 6.0MP Digital Camera - Black Bonus Crumpler Pouch Incl 885170005143 | eBay

    EDIT: it is also true that with proper costuming and/or lighting, any modern camera with masterful photo editing, one could emulate probably any era- but this kinda kills the spirit of a thing, wouldn't you agree? Our OP has stated that she doesn't know a lot about cameras, yet she has a vision. I'm not one to insist she reshape her vision. I encourage her to hang onto and run with it. The above link is to a camera, a battery, and a charger. 35.00, USD.

    For that matter, I know a couple people who shoot using OLD cameras- like early 20th century cameras with late 19th century lenses. The resulting photographs are unlike any other.

    COULD one replicate this "look" with modern equipment? Maybe but then who would even care? Glass plate photos or tintypes made on antique gear in the mid 21st century are heavenly. A digital mock-up of that is just another (among literally millions) digitally produced photo that any reasonably astute schmuck could crank out at will with as little as a phone and a laptop.

    One may fake it all day long, but in the end, NOTHING beats authenticity.
    Tyra, go for it sister!
    Last edited: Jan 20, 2021
  11. Tyra, I seriously doubt we are related at all but we share our surname.
    Best luck with your vision and the project.
    Tom Banks aka Ricochetrider

Share This Page