Discussion in 'Casual Photo Conversations' started by Sanford, May 5, 2017.
I know this site has more seniors than AARP, but is there anyone here who has never used film?
Pair that with the question I've been thinking about: who here knew what it was like to *not* be able to instantly make your pictures available to the whole world?
Or . . . how many ways are there to start another film/digital flame war?
I used film from when I started shooting pictures until I bought my first digital camera. Then I became a convert, and I've been hooked ever since.
I know quite a few young folks who have never used film but are fascinated by it similar to hipsters gravitating toward vinyl.
When asked about film, I tell them just don't chimp and wait 2 days to download picture, and you will have enjoyed the film experience.
Boy scout merit badge in photography - late 1940s (Could you qualify for a 1948 Boy Scout Photography Merit Badge?)
Went digital in 2004
ca 2005 started collecting old cameras, etc. - used more film than ever, although for serious work I use digital
I'm one Julie - I remember it taking what now seems like forever to shoot a roll of Kodachrome then sending it out to be processed then getting the slides back weeks later. Almost always I'd forgotten more that half the shots I took, but there was a sense of excitement in the anticipation of seeing the results, a feeling that modern technology has basically eliminated.
But you wouldn't go until you had "enough rolls." And then, how many people would ever see your pictures, tops? Compared to today ... ?
Same for me. When I got my first digital, it was with the intend to use it alongside my film cameras. Got cured of that notion rather quickly!
I recall the hassle dealing with 80 exposed slide films from a 6-week trip through the Western part of the US (even mailed some to the lab along the way). With digital nowadays, I could get that many images onto one memory card. Would most likely come back with at least 10 times the number of images too. In addition to knowing that I got the shot, rather than seeing the slides after the trip's over.
And I know quite a few young people that I mentor who are using film because they are not entirely convinced of what they have all been sold as the next great thing, IE digital. None of them started with film but use it with great success and enjoyment because of how different the journey is with it and how utterly beautiful the results are. You should get to know more young people, they are not all looking to do things to be cool but because they really believe in their choices.
I started using digital when the newspaper I was working at in 1994 was one of the first three in the country to move towards the use of it. But I also knew that it would never really replace film for me, only add on another tool option. I use it more now than ever, my largest investments in my business and largest invoices are with projects shot on film.
instantly make your pictures available to the whole world?
I don't see why my pictures should be available to the whole world.
We are a microwave culture. We need people to carry on making their own mayonnaise and grandma's chili recipe. Digital is like opening a can. If you have the time and enjoy the process, go for it I urge. Process is the operative word. It takes time. Who has time. Is photography the only pastime. Does it give rewards to you that your loved ones can also admire. Do it add to your contribution to what counts to you. If not the world, at least your kin and offspring. Does it get you off to new adventures. Now we are getting into a larger picture well beyond a "process" which to me is what film chemistry vs digital recording is about. Hats off to each one who knows what they want and seeks it out. I learned to mix chemicals and did all the agitation in tanks and later paid someone to do that stuff. I had no time to spare.
The minimum age to join AARP is fifty - barely middle aged. It's still 30 years older than digital.
I'm one of those who started out with film and a Kodak X-15. I got away from film in large measure in about 2004 and for a few years shot only digital. I use it for things like weddings but honestly don't see an advantage in one form over the other. Lately though I've been getting bored with digital and have done most of my work on HP-5 and Tri-X. Photography for me is in fact a process and that is part of the attraction. Something about seeing an image come up in a tray of developer....
I think most teenagers and younger kids have not shot film. Even fewer have ever experienced the darkroom and its associated attributes. Many teens have certainly used - and own - Instax cameras. But I don't think that instant film is quite the same thing.
BTW I actually think that newer generations are not going to be using image manipulation apps. They'll be using much simpler software that offers more limited but useful feature sets (clarity/alchemy; auto levels; film simulations; batch watermarking). They'll see things like Photoshop, Pixelmator etc. as hangover ideas from the '90s. Kind of how we see typewriters. Sure, they're fun, but I would rarely use one for anything serious.
But here's another angle: how many of us, who have shot film - a lot of film - have shot large format? I haven't. I look forward to it. In fact, I can't wait! But shooting T-Max in a Leica M is nothing like shooting T-Max in a Sinar P. I don't have to have experience with large format to know that much.
I have no problem showing my pictures to the whole world. In fact there's no f'n point in taking photos if nobody can see them.
"I know this site has more seniors than AARP, but is there anyone here who has never used film?"
I am a senior and I gave away all my never used film when I bought a digital camera.
Modern technology has not dimmed the enjoyment I get when I get home after a day of shooting, downloading the images and then watching them pop up in LR to see what I did or didn't capture. Just as fun as waiting to pick up the box of slides or package of prints in my opinion. Everyone has their own view on the film and digital experience. I like them both!
Spent a good chunk of time this morning trying to remember how photojournalists portrayed by James Woods and John Savage managed to get their film out of El Salvador under the noses of the border guards in the film, Salvador. I think they gave the guards blank rolls, but where did they hide the real ones? Anyway, that was a roll-of-film moment.
The odd thing was, though, that not having an outlet made me *more* obsessive about the possibility. Working each picture to perfection seemed to matter more because the goal of wide visibility was so insanely out of reach.
Absolutely! I'm not reminiscing about "better" or "more fun"; just comparing and wondering about how it was different.
[QUOTE="Karim Ghantous, post: 5560341, member: 20594"
I have no problem showing my pictures to the whole world. In fact there's no f'n point in taking photos if nobody can see them. [/QUOTE]
Not nobody but my photographs to be seen by me only.
Separate names with a comma.