Why you should still shoot film

FX trading said:
How about having some fun- let's think of new names to differentiates mass-market digital images from high-end (film, principally) photography.

This will enable clearer differentiation of the two products in the marketplace.

All suggestions welcome, and ideally these should be further disseminated.
Click to expand...

Hmmm...How about this:

Photo vs Fohtixel
Photographer vs Fohtixelator
Camera v Fohtixela

Usage:

"Is that a new photo hanging on your wall?"
"Did you see the fohtixel I got in my email today?"

"We hired a photographer for our wedding who is giving us an album for our photos"
"We hired a photixelator for our wedding who is giving us a DVD of fohtixels"

"Is that a camera in your pocket, or are you just pretending to like Leicas?"
"Is that a 100 Gigapixel fohtixela you are pointing at me?"

:D:D:D

/T
 
Why shoot film?

Because it makes me happy...it's a good enough reason for me. Do I have to explain myself to anybody? Am I guilty of something for using film? Don't think so.. Recently I shot the same landscape with Zorki, Leica, Agfabox, Rolleiflex and a Nikon coolpix s4. All in BW film (s4 in BW mode). Digital was the sharpest, with more detail, grain free, crisp...really kicked ass to film....I ended up framing the Rollei's result.
 
shenkerian said:
I can't tell if you're being sarcastic.

Nice M6J by the way. How do you like it?
Click to expand...
Not at all- the digital imaging industry has expropriated photographic terminology and are
using quite a lot of it in a misleading manner to further their objectives.

Thanks re the M6J- but I find that I prefer the MP a la carte I (recently) purchased from another poster on this thread
 
Last edited:
sitemistic said:
"Not at all- the digital imaging industry has expropriated photographic terminology and are using quite a lot of it in a misleading manner to further their objectives."

This would include Canon, Nikon and Leica. What are their objectives?
Click to expand...
Commercial survival and furthering shareholder interests. Canon have been very creative (commercially), Leica far too defensive- let's hope that the new management are more assertive and have a clearer vision of where they are going.

All will (and have to) do all they can to survive as a corprate entity- good luck to them. However, there is no reason to only push one part of the business- as imaging companies, they should have clearly defined strategies for all their products.

If Lomo can successfully produce and sell cameras in their (growing) niche, surely Leica can as well without recourse to celebratory editions?
 
Last edited:
sitemistic said:
O.K. But how big a market can there be for $3,000 film rangefinders?
Click to expand...

Big enough for Leica if they tap into new growing markets in the BRICs, and if they are successful with products such as their mid-range Summarits recntly introduced.

The same way that Lomo have promoted Lomography, it is high time that the perception of film currently marketed is updated so as to emphasize creativity, upscale fun and dynamism
 
toyotadesigner said:
As I said: most people of the next generation get along with just 600 to 800 words. This brainless dummy gets along with two handful, with the words f*** and f***ing being the primary and obviously most important ones. Amazing.

This is one of the many trash pieces that's dumped into the world's largest waste basket: youtube.

It really scares me when I consider that this generation with almost zero intelligence will have to pay our retirements and pension plans.;)
Click to expand...

That's what your parents said about you. That's what parents ALWAYS say about the younger generation.

/T
 
I do agree that time is passing by- and it is urgent to bring new young users into film. There should be some ad hoc events to encourage and develop this market, with participation by active industry players (Ilford?? Leica?? Zeiss??)
 
Tuolumne said:
That's what your parents said about you. That's what parents ALWAYS say about the younger generation.

/T
Click to expand...
Remember also that for the next generation our "first world" countries are in the process of being eclipsed by new interlopers, so things will be far more interesting than you think!
 
FX trading said:
Remember also that for the next generation our "first world" countries are in the process of being eclipsed by new interlopers, so things will be far more interesting than you think!
Click to expand...

Hmmm..yes, perhaps the Chinese will pay my Medicare bill. :D

/T
 
I don't think film cameras are going to add much bottom line to Leica, or Canon or Nikon ever again.[/quote]



Who would have thought that Lomo would be so successful again, with a growing worldwide Lomography industry, exhibitions, and endorsements (from Putin of all people!).

As far as the size of the market, BRICs have more than enough potential to keep production lines humming-

The point is that the defensive defeatism recently prevalent in the film world has to be replaced by a sense of fun and adventure- and probably new management in the industry as a whole.

Go out and have some fun-you only live once!
 
This is simple, according to my 100 yr old dictionary, a photograph is defined as an image made using light sensitive materials processed in chemicals.

therefore digital photography isnt actually photography under than definition, it is digitography, just as videography isn't photography.
 
I cant say about the rest of the world, but herethe number of magazines (made from paper not online) has increased in the past 10 years.
 
young people make up a big segment of the new magazine industry here, and theyre not all advertsing driven. digital printing-publishing technology has enabled them to produce magazines at an affordable price for smaller markets. I guess these kids don't want to sit in front of their PC's and read about cars and snowboarding etc.
 
d_ross said:
This is simple, according to my 100 yr old dictionary, a photograph is defined as an image made using light sensitive materials processed in chemicals.

therefore digital photography isnt actually photography under than definition, it is digitography, just as videography isn't photography.
Click to expand...

Good point- perhaps SDI (still digital image) sounds contemporary enough- how about something along those lines?
 
Film photography is in decline. There's no sense denying it, and I don't think there's any reason to lament it. Prior to photography, painting was a much more common hobby. The same will happen to film photography, regardless of the growth of BRICs (and the N-11, if you're up-to-date in Goldman Sachs research). But film photography will continue to serve as both hobby and art form, as painting clearly has. It simply won't be mainstream.

Also, digital photography is photography. If you insist on prescriptionism, there's nothing in the term "drawing with light" that dictates silver salts or dye clouds.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom