Ain't that the truth. Another thing, too, is that whenever I have film cameras out and I try to shoot pictures of my friends or family while we're hanging out or at a family event, they never really take the time or have the patience to let me burn through a roll of film! Yesterday, I got back a gorgeous developed roll of Velvia 50 I took at my cousin's university graduation last month and I have to say that it's one of the best rolls I've shot so far (there were a couple of really nice digital pics I took that day, though). All I need now is a nice slide projector (hopefully a carousel one) to show my slides the way they were meant to be shown! (I have yet to test my Super 8 projector that I found in mint condition).
Originally Posted by jeffreyg
I shoot film mainly for one reason: archivability. Second reason: I love holding the negatives and slides in my hands and knowing that every exposure I shoot is a labor of love. But it's hard fighting the "GO GO!" fast digital habits. One time I ruined the last few exposures on a roll of Tri-X because I got too ahead of myself and opened the camera before rewinding. Third and final reason: I feel like I have more control over my picture with the simplicity of operating a film camera. I have honed my instinct on controlling things like bokeh and things like that with my film camera. I don't have to fool with any internal settings while the action's happening. I mainly use digital indoors and in low light. Outside, in the light, film is my number one choice.
It seems now that many "consume" and go through pictures like it's popcorn or a race to the finish line to look at all the pictures. People seem to react positively to having prints around, though. I have a ton of prints that I have pinned up in my cubicle and people always comment on them. Looking at them on a computer screen is okay for me, but once in a blue moon it seems way too impersonal for me.
Last edited by TexasLangGenius; 01-10-2012 at 02:56 AM. Click to view previous post history.
Typical digital zombies say: "Adapt or die!" "The world is changing, change with it!" "Analog is old and nasty! EEEEEEEWWWWWW!" "Why should I pay money for getting my pictures when I can have everything NOW?" "Why shoot manual when you can have the camera do everything automatically?"
Primary 35mm camera - Pentax K1000
Secondary 35mm camera - Mamiya/Sekor 1000 DTL - M42 Mount
Medium Format: Mamiya RB67
There does seem to be a shift to having things in hardcopy though. A lot of photographers, graphic artists etc etc etc seem to have ipads and the like with their folios on them. This is a good idea at times, but people absolutely do like seeing things in hardcopy (eg. a real print regardless of the medium). From people I cross paths with from time to time in various fields, I am told that there is a slow shift back to actual visual art in hardcopy form. I personally think that is true also, if it is then that it is fantastic. There is nothing like seeing a nice folio with 8x10 prints for instance and absolutely nothing like looking at beautiful prints hung on a wall in a real life frame!
I guess we will see what the future holds.
Personally I am a huge proponent of hardcopy archiving (I am married to a librarian/archivist!).
Originally Posted by Danielle
Negatives in the future may be hard to enlarge and print, but prints are gold. Whenever I get a roll [processed (I send out) I get the prints.
To me the best way of getting hardcopy from digital is the welcome rise of the photobook. The templates are excellent and some brands offer very good acid-free archival paper. They layouts are better than rows/columns of 4x6 prints, and the softcopy of the book usually saved as a PDF, which is now an ISO standard, tweaked for digital archiving. If people ask me how I archive my digital photos I point them to this option. It's also very economical. I think we all get too much screen time and photobooks are probably the most approachable format I've come across for efficient and stylish display.
As a current art student I can tell you that charcoal is still a well used medium even more so than pencil. Even as a photography student I had to take Drawing I and Figure Drawing before I could much of anything else.
Originally Posted by Hatchetman
Also, at my school Photo I is still nearly all darkroom work. The other students still seem enthusiastic about it. Film will survive.
Bachelor of Fine Arts and Bachelor of Arts: Journalism - University of Arkansas 2014
Canon A-1, Canon AE-1, Canon Canonet GIII 17, Argus 21, Rolleicord Va, Mamiya RB67, Voigtländer Bessa
From what I wrote on LFInfo:
Originally Posted by semi-ambivalent
Since the main medium of personal image gathering is now the cell phone, of course it makes sense that the pictures will be of "look at me," "look at stupid," and "here's this thing." That's the kind of pictures that get made using a cell phone. Photographic images have gone from the concept of "the moment" to "a moment."
Antonio Perez was spotted fleeing peasants armed with cameras, pitchforks, torches, rope, sub-machine guns and tripods with long spikey points at the end as Kodak was delisted from the NYSE and filed for bankruptcy. Kodak film, once the choice of the Divine, used for capturing many poignant moments of mankind's existence from creation, the discovery of fire, and that stupid dog next door shagging that gnome lawn ornament, has been on the decline since people figured out that they really don't want memories to last forever
. The company will be reorganized into a yet another latte coffee seller, and then go into bankruptcy again because the resulting product tastes worst than Starbucks drinks.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)