age survey

[david_lyga]

<h2 >A VERY RELEVANT SURVEY</h2>

 

 

<blockquote >I think that it almost becomes mandatory to know just how old the members and subscribers of both APUG.ORG and PHOTO.NET are in order to develop an understanding as to whether 'film' is here to stay or is truly dying out. Collectively, we love to wax about our love for analog but our mantras usually lack quantitative affirmation. Folks, there is NOTHING like knowing that YOUNG people are immersed into this method of capture and not only the 'old ones' who stay with it through familiarity and habit.<br /> <br /> I am 62 and grew up with analog capture. As a teenager I had 'no choice' in the matter. Thus, it is easy for me to be such a diehard. But I would be intrigued if people under, say 35 or 30, can attempt to honestly say that they feel likewise. When I say this I mean GENUINELY feel likewise and not simply enthralled with 'something new' as opposed to the pervasive digital environment. For this younger age: you genuinely had a choice when you got your first 'serious' camera, as 'serious' still digital has been with us for about 15 long years. You did not have only one option.<br /> <br /> Be honest with your assertion. And, obviously, the older ones need to state their (approximate) age in order to give balance to this survey. Am I prying too much? Am I asking for something not relevant? I think not. - David Lyga</blockquote>

[Matt Laur]

<blockquote>

<p>Am I asking for something not relevant?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Well, it might be passingly interesting. But it's not relevant to me at all. I do find the either/or binary aspect of the question, and the "mandatory" tone to be setting up (or looking for) a conflict where none exists.</p>

[richsimmons]

<p>Mandatory? No. Not even almost. And there are quite a lot of post from people who are still preferring the film experience and judging by the 83 new posts in the film forum, I'd say it's still quite a lively topic. </p>

[alan_zinn]

<p>I check the <em>old guy</em> box: Have one film camera left, film in the fridge, and one lab in the hood. I shoot at least 500 digi shots a week on average. I complete at least two new PS pictures every day.<br>

I think simply looking at available information such as course lists for photo classes will tell you a lot. At the start of Fall terms here in Boston the photo stores load up on darkroom supplies. Another strategy would be to have a look at darkroom supply catalogs such as Freestyle. I'm wondering why is Lomo such a hot item now in art supply stores? Next thing ya know they'll put a phone in one.</p>

[dzaebst]

<p>Well, I'm interested in the age thing too...but only because I really want to know how a diplodocus burger tastes. They apparently became extinct just before I was born. I am told they were lower in fat :>D</p>

[Spearhead]

<p>In the early days of Facebook, there was a survey that judged your emotional age. I came out at 15, that should suffice.</p>

[William Kahn]

<p>It might be interesting to see how the numbers play out. But, I think the relevancy would be reduced by a preconception that it's a matter of age, per se, versus preference. There are age <em>ranges</em> that need to be considered. For instance, the Really Old-Timers; you know the ones, still shooting 8X10 view cameras on wooden tripods, using Sylvania "Blue Dot For Sure Shot" flash bulbs and disappearing for days in wet darkrooms. Then, there are the Hybrids, those of us who grew up with film and made the transition to digital at some point, by preference and/or necessity. What age ranges would this group include? And, last but not least, the Innocents, those born so recently that they wouldn't recognize a roll of film if it jumped up and bit 'em on the butt.</p>

<p>If the survey doesn't have enough complexity to shed some light on these questions, I think it would fail.</p>

<p>By the way, I also check the Old Guy box. But, you probably guessed that...</p>

[craig_shearman1]

<p>I'm 51. Grew up with film. Currently shoot all my professional jobs with digital and most of my personal work also. But I have a basement full of Nikon film gear (along with a Leica, a view camera, a couple of TLRs and other miscellaneous) and a complete darkroom (Omega D2 and others) gathering dust that I feel guilty about.<br>

<br />I find my age colors my opinions on issues other than just digital. Drives me nuts when people obsess over nuances of what WB setting to use when we used to only have two -- daylight and tungsten. People who are just starting to experiment with flash but automatically want to jump to radio triggers when PC cords did just fine for decades. People who don't understand that the Vivitar 285HV was one of the best flash units ever made. People who think you have to scan every frame of film to know that's on the roll instead of just holding it up to the light. Or think that digital images are archival. I could go on and on... :)</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Not to be a buzzkill, but...</p>

<blockquote>

<p>"I think that it almost becomes mandatory to know just how old the members and subscribers of both APUG.ORG and PHOTO.NET are in order to develop an understanding as to whether 'film' is here to stay or is truly dying out."</p>

</blockquote>

<p>A survey of the ages of photo.net and apug members won't tell you anything useful about the health of the film medium. It will only tell you the ages of photo.net and apug members.</p>

<p>Go post the same survey on 4chan /p/. You'll get a completely different demographic but equal enthusiasm for film. It still won't reveal much of anything useful about the prospective market for film. Flickr would probably offer yet another perspective on the issue of film enthusiasts and demographics - may perspectives, in fact, since Flickr is made up of countless specialty sub-groups.</p>

<p>The only useful statistics would be directly related to sales of film and related materials. The manufacturers and retailers already have that information (or they should).</p>

<p>For what it's worth, I'm 54 and have been using film since receiving my first camera and darkroom kit at age 8 or 9.</p>

[mark_drutz]

<p>Dennis, diplodocus tastes like chicken.</p>

<p>Actually this is an interesting question. I'm 68. I shot film for 40 years. Now I shoot digital only.</p>

[tom_mann1]

<p>Did I miss a link? Is there an actual on-line survey, or do you want us to just respond in this thread?</p>

<p>Assuming the latter, I'm 64 y.o.. I have shot since I was about 8 years old; got my 1st paying photo job at 12 y.o., and shoot events, people and equipment as about 5% of my day job. I currently shoot almost entirely digital, with at most a few rolls of film per year thrown in just for nostalgia, but I don't really miss film in any serious way.</p>

<p>Tom M</p>

[sarah_fox]

<p>Sure, I'll play...</p>

<p>Age: 0.5 centuries<br>

Began with film at age 8<br>

First darkroom work at age 11<br>

First paying gigs at age 14<br>

Went digital in 2004, having shot only about a dozen rolls of film since then<br>

Currently hankering to bulk load some Tmax 400, but mostly for play ;-)</p>

[SCL]

<p>FWIW, I'm 68, still have 14 film cameras I use, do my own B&W darkroom work, farm out color....have a ton of bulk film in the freezer. After saying that, most of my work these days is digital...I just like the convenience of quick feedback in the learning curve. But for relaxation or planned artistic work, film gets used about 40% of the time. Not professional, although I've had PJ work published in the distant past.</p>

[CoryAmmerman]

<p>Guess I'm a relative youngster here, at 34. I started with film a decade or so ago. Now I shoot mostly digital with a little bit of film mixed in. Pretty much all of my film use is with a few classic 35mm cameras. If I ever set up a darkroom in the future, I'll probably shoot more film.</p>

[jim_j2]

<p>I'll play also,<br>

I grew up on film, then got my own SLR back in the late 70's. Because I was around the Equator and SCUBA diving. I soon acquired an Underwater housing to fit that first SLR which was a Canon AT-1!<br>

Although all the FD stuff is long gone, I still maintain a couple of Canon EOS film bodies, the Elan 7e and EOS 3, but I haven't shot any film for nearly 4 years now. But, it's a comfort (I guess) to know that I could if I wanted to! Besides, neither would bring near their worth on the used market.<br>

I too check the Old Geezer's box!</p>

[hjoseph7]

<p>Let's see now I started with film back in the <strong>early 1980's</strong>, shooting mostly in B&W with manual cameras. I had my first darkroom when I was in my mid 20's. In the <strong>early 1990's</strong> I mostly stayed away from photography due to more pressing life issues. Most of my photo equipment was sold during that time.<br /><br />By the <strong>mid 1990's</strong> I began dabbling into photography again with Auto Focus cameras and color film. The AF was a welcome technological change for me(not many people complained about). From <strong>2000-2005</strong> during the so-called "Digital Revolution" I stubbornly shot and developed my own film. I went to photography school were we learned how to shoot film. I worked with a company that used film. I shot weddings and portraits using film. I went to museums to see works done in film. I bought tons of film equipment on eBay !<br /><br /><strong>In late 2005</strong> I decided that it was time to change, or become obsolete, so I purchased my first <strong>over 1 grand</strong> camera, a digital camera. With the digital camera came another, then another, then another, then a scanner, then a printer, loads of software, and a computer with hi-def screen, flash cards, external storage devices etc. I often wondered if I was really saving any money ? In any case, I practically retrained myself to "Go Digital".<br /><br /><strong>By 2010</strong> I went completely digital and hardly if ever shot film. No more waiting 3 hours at the 1 hour photo store. No more wasted cans of film because the developer expired or I was to drunk to know what happened. No more cleaning up after making prints. No more toxic, smelly chemicals, no more shoe boxes to save my film/slides. Learning was easy no more writing stuff on empty film cartridges and note pads. No more spending money on film. No more ruinned film by inexperienced CVS operators.<br /><br />I never sold my film equipment though, because I never got a chance to enjoy it ! As a matter of fact <strong>by 2012 </strong>I had finished purchasing all the manual lenses I ever wanted for my two 35mm manual film cameras and my Medium format film camera.<br /><br />My Darkroom went back up and is now better than ever. I'm finding out about alternative processes using film. Film has become my new hobby, but I got to admit it's like going out to the ball park, you can only do it so often.<br /><br />*I did not post my age but you can guesstimate by looking at the highlighted dates.</p>

[Spearhead]

<p>BTW, this is not a "survey." A "survey" is generally quantitative research. There's nothing the least bit scientific or meaningful about the way this is configured. Useful data would include a reasonable sample of the users of photo.net (or any other website) rather than a random request that attracts people in line with your stated objective. Also, a survey is not biased with a stated objective that is totally subjective. If you need to have a group of random strangers give you "affirmation," as you put it, then ask for affirmation. But don't call it a survey, it's not.</p>

[GerrySiegel]

<p>If you want, as is clear, an affirmation that film is still being used I agree that Lex's suggestion regarding the volume of sales of film is a better index. I notice BTW that B and H catalog still lists a new current EOS 1<em> film</em> camera with all the "fixins"....I am now 75 and not quite a geezer yet. I still have a shelf of film equipment that I keep and use once in a blue moon. It served me well. Old friends that I am loathe to sell off, I will leave them to a grandkid who wants to experiment or be different.... I embrace the digital world because it serves me better. <br /> You know the script. The ability to get real time feedback on what I do with lighting and composition has been of wonderful value, and helps me to still incrementally improve where it counts, for me. It still costs but less than river cruises and such. ( I just ordered a new DSLR body even though it will be old hat in a year. But so what.) <br /> I respect the fellowship of film users. It is still valid technology for those who choose it or find it preferable. I get it. But your survey won't mean anything as Jeff rightly points out. <br /> Leaping into the digital void for me, I have a new iPAD that keeps my calendar, stores books, and <em>also</em> now shoots 5 megapixel images. Yipes, I can't keep up. But I have reached a point of digital semi satiation for my brain cells that I realize I no longer can absorb all the 300 page manuals and art filters and video frame rates and on and on.... Just enjoying the technology for its immediacy and ease of access and what I can grapple with. Meaning no trips to processors, no hypo stains, no big dark rooms and I can crop and mess around in dry comfort. That kind of stuff..gs</p>

[alan_zinn]

<p>Hey! 70's the new 50.</p>

[KenPapai]

<p>I'll admit this: I am 41-59 years old. I saw an AC/DC concert in the mid-70's.<br>

Used to shoot 100's rolls 35mm film, now I shoot less than 3 rolls/year having gone 99% digital 12 years ago.</p>

<p>I used to do ALL SORTS of darkroom work too when I was 13-19 years old.</p>

<p>YMMV. -Ken</p><div></div>

[jcuknz]

<p>I am 80 and glad to have left film with which I started seriously in 1952. Just as I embraced Electronic News Gathering back around 1984 as a superior medium to film so I quickly engaged with digital, not sure when it seems SO long ago. Probably two years ago I finally sold off my film gear which had been gathering dust on its cases for yonks. <br>

I also remember a 'great step forward' for this man when perhaps back around 1962 or so I got my first auto exposure movie camera which freed me from the continual worry about what exposure to give, enabling me to concentrate on the subject matter. It also had a zoom lens.</p>

[nathangardner]

<p>26. Bought AE-1 in 2004, got a 20D in 2006 as soon as I could afford it. Haven't looked back. Put a roll of Neopan in an A2 over a year ago for fun and have yet to shoot the entire roll.</p>

[charles_stobbs3]

85, Me, my Retina IIa and slow Kodachrome (10, 25) were a team for years but when 25 disappeared I started to get antsy. I reluctantly switched to Kodachrome 64. My wife brought an early Casio digital home from her school one weekend in the late 80's and it was better than I had expected. I had a couple of digitals for taking and emailing snaps of visiting relatives. Meanwhile I discovered EBay and started buying older film cameras and became more interested in cameras as toys. When Kodachrome 64 went off the market followed by Elite Chrome I found myself using digital almost exclusively, including the latest toy, a 2 megapixel cell phone.

[pcnilssen]

<p>On her 96th birthday, my grandmother said to me: "I am clear in my head, and I can count, so I know exactly how old I am - but I still feel like 25!"</p>

<p>Age is just a number.</p>

<p>I still feel like 25 too! :)</p>

[cyanatic]

<p>What happened to the OP? A drive-by survey?</p>

<p>Older than 35, younger than 60. Grew up using film for everyday snaps, not as a photographer. Brownies, Polaroids, disposable cameras. Drug store development. Enjoyed looking at photographs by "famous" photographers, but had no interest in being a photographer. Or so I thought. <br>

Digital changed all that by awakening the dormant photographer within me. Because the feedback was instantaneous, I could quickly (and inexpensively) learn, correct, evaluate, change, experiment, etc. I have no interest in debating, comparing, or contrasting film to digital. I use what I use, and others use what they use.</p>

<p>I don't think film will ever "die". But the size of commercial support for film will be driven by what drives any other business...the size of the market for it. The more film adherents, the more money to be made, the more companies will support film. Film adherents shrink and the companies supporting film shrink. There is currently a segment of the "young" from whom film has a certain cool factor. It may last, it may not.</p>