The answer I would give is that film has physical integrity. It is not a lot of numbers waiting for arrangement, but a physical capture of the image. In short it has the here, right now, zen existance.
Last edited by cliveh; 02-11-2012 at 05:37 PM. Click to view previous post history.
“The contemplation of things as they are, without error or confusion, without substitution or imposture, is in itself a nobler thing than a whole harvest of invention”
I might say something like, "Oh, I have many tools at my disposal and film cameras do some things much better than my cell phone. When I am seriously interested in creating images, my choice is film because of its ability to give me the results I find most pleasing. I also enjoy the processes involved in producing my images with a film camera."
i don't know exactly what you mean ...
Originally Posted by Maris
a sensor isn't light sensitive, an image isn't drawn with light ?
having a cellphone image light jet printed
through a sophisticated enlarger head
onto light sensitive paper and souped in chemistry
at a mini lab isn't drawn with light ?
its like suggesting slides aren't authentic ...
i don't think authenticity has much to do with it ...
it is just a different technology ... one isn't more authentic or photographic than the other ..
Originally Posted by jnanian
This isn't a question of right or wrong, good or evil, etc. It's about using the medium that helps you do what you want to do.
I think we get way too caught up in technicality of producing photographs. Photography happens about 6 inches behind the camera (of any kind)....
Well... 8 inches if you have a big head.
Develop, stop, fix.... wait.... where's my film?
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
[ Insert meaningless camera listing here ]
I don't think I have had anyone say they thought film was "pointless", but I certainly have had questions from those who are curious.
My response depends on a number of factors.
In many cases, the question comes from someone who has used film in the past. For those people, I respond by indicating how much I enjoy using film. In addition, I mention that I still do my own black and white darkroom work, that film and processing is (relatively) readily available in my area, and that modern films are really wonderful in comparison to films from even 25 years ago.
Also, if someone notices what I am doing, it is fairly likely that I'll be using medium format equipment. Many former film users still recognise the larger medium format equipment as being in some way "special", and therefore it seems to be easier to explain why I use it.
And for those that have never shot film, I think the combination of the "unusual" equipment I use, my enthusiasm about the subject, and my phrase "I've been using and enjoying film for 40+ years, why should I change now" helps convince them that I have good reasons for the choice.
“Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”
Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2
Tell them that Kodak's film sector increased by 20% last year. And who wouldn't prefer a home cooked meal to McDondalds?
Haa, Mustafa, If you were to be a shepherd in the mountain you would be John Muir. Your insights and unique take on the world open the doors for others.
Originally Posted by Mustafa Umut Sarac
"I'm an artist. I don't take pictures, I make them."
At the crux of it all is that I use whatever I have the experience and skill at using, and what is best suited to me and the end product.