Goat Meat, LDMU, and The Real Reason Film Will Always Be More Fun Than Digital

<-----Pablito LOVES goat, any kind of goat. Why do you think he's grinning so? He had his picture taken after eating a big plate of stewed goat!!!
 
I lived with a Jamaican woman for about ten years. When I first met her she was thrilled to discover that I liked goat. It seems that most white Americans won't touch it! Anyway, Vivette made the best curried goat that I ever tasted. I miss it almost as much as I miss her. Now what this has to do with film is the big mystery ;-)
 
Now you got me to thinking. Maybe 35 years ago I had a sun bleached goat skull complete with horns hanging in the living room. I have no idea as to what became of it. One of the mysteries of life.

The goat had been a pet belonging to Spencer Tiger when he still lived on the Miccosukee Indian Reservation about 1976. It died of "natural causes".
 
Last edited:
I'll always remember eating bar-b-q goat sandwiches at the Otha Turner Blues picnic in Sentobia Mississippi a couple of days after hurricane Katrina. We were completely crazy with stress, but figured we might as well be crazy at the blues picnic instead of just at the hotel, which is what we had been doing for the previous few days. When the food ladies realized we were from New Orleans, they wouldn't take our money anymore ... just gave us as much bar-b-q goat as we could eat. It felt good.
 
Al Kaplan said:
Now what this has to do with film is the big mystery ;-)
Click to expand...

Okay... back to what I was saying earlier... and what Goat curry and film have to do with each other...

To recap... Love self, people gravitate toward me, I secretly find then annoying, to clear head I often go to this cheap (but very good) Indian buffet for lunch several times a week. $7.50 all you can eat... Lovin' all their dishes, especially the goat. So, why don't I eat 15 plate of goat? I could you know. If the owner complained, I'd get the FTC(?) on him... Actually I wouldn't, Amar's a nice guy...

But anyway, I don't because of the "economiopsychological" concept of the "law of diminishing marginal utility". Inna nutshell, the more you have of something, the less you like it. That first plate of goat curry? Yuummmmmmmmm... Second? Good, not as good as the first... I don't think I've ever gone for a third. Familiar with that old classic WB cartoon? Two mice get into a warehouse full of cheese. They eat all they want. Cheese now disgusts then, so the try to off themselves by allowing the cat to catch them... Cat freaks, loses mind, hilarity ensues...

Same concept with newspaper vending machines... You put your $0.50 in, the door opens, you could take every paper. You don't (well, you did once as a kid, but felt guilty about it)... Again, because of the law of diminishing marginal utility...

If you ate a chocolate chip cookie, and rated on a 1-10 scale how much you like it on a piece of paper it would be a 9. Second, 9, third 8, fourth 6, ... 30th - 0!

Digital cameras take the fun out of photography because they're "all you can eat buffets"... First picture great, 10,000th jpeg of your cat on a window cill?

Because you have no constraint on the number of frames you shoot, each shot becomes less fun or enjoyable due to the law of diminishing marginal utility.

Unlike film, in digital the frame loses its significance. We want indeed need this constraint of a very finite number of frames to enjoy using them. We don't want to "waste" a shot because we're on 16 of a 24 frame roll. Even moreso, frame 9 of 6x6 loaded in your TLR. Each frame is precious. What should I shoot? How should I frame this for max impact? All of this adds to the level of engagement and therefore enjoyment.

With digital - the image capture "all you can eat (shoot)" buffet, the act of consumption loses its value. Film is the excitement of the NFL. Each game means something - there's only 16. As opposed to the NHL, where you wait until the real season starts, the playoffs where there is a constraint and every game most certainly matters.

Digital photography is less enjoyable because there is no psychological significance to shooting a frame because it's a bottomless pit. You're not engaged trying to get the best out of the frame because you can shoot 1,000 more if you don't get it right. It's like being a hunter shooting at a bird on the tree... one shot, miss it, that's it. The bird flys away. In digital another bird lands immediately in the same spot. Who cares if you miss it? It is the very constraint of having a limited number of frames, that makes film far more fun than digital shooting due to the law of diminishing marginal utility.

Next I will disuss - as recent brain images would support, for many there is a tactile pleasure in dominance over small mechanical objects that border on a sexual experience with similar brain responses, frequencies, and mapping. People who like manual transmissions, watches, manual film cameras have a tactile fetish in what appears to be akin to a sexual experience. (Note the number of men vs. women who post here...)
|
|
 
NickTrop said:
Next I will disuss - as recent brain images would support, for many there is a tactile pleasure in dominance over small mechanical objects that border on a sexual experience with similar brain responses, frequencies, and mapping. People who like manual transmissions, watches, manual film cameras have a tactile fetish in what appears to be akin to a sexual experience. (Note the number of men vs. women who post here...)
|
|
Click to expand...

I'm looking forward to this part - "fondlers" unmasked :D!

I'm sure you're onto something in all of this though Nick - at a rational level I know my digital cameras produce superior results (most of the time) to what I can do with film, but at another level I just don't like using them - there is a real tactile pleasure in using an M6 or an Olympus OM that you just don't get as the owner of a digital "wonderbrick". And I agree with your marginal utility theory as well.

Good work!
 
Where is your reference to the neuroimaging of "fondlers" as I would love to read it? Now, if you will excuse me, I need to be alone with my Leica and my Omegas.
 
Haha....Nick, I've enjoyed many of your posts over the past couple years, but these 2 take the prize.

Perhaps you and I could get together over coffee and discuss it further sometime?

And yes, the same rule does NOT apply to alcoholic beverages in general.
 
NickTrop said:
(Note - the law of marginal utility does not apply to beer, salted peanuts, or potato chips)
Click to expand...

....and bacon.

Nick, do you think your experience would change if one were to only use the 16 mb card that comes with some digital cameras?

You could start a recycling program (since they otherwise get thrown in the trash), and then resell them for the 'film-like' experience. And package them with the fondling research papers, Tri-X simulator, and beer nuts (the beer nuts simulate that experience of a RFF meet where people handle cameras, eat beer nuts, and drink beer). You heard it here first.
 
blw said:
Haha....Nick, I've enjoyed many of your posts over the past couple years, but these 2 take the prize.

Perhaps you and I could get together over coffee and discuss it further sometime?

And yes, the same rule does NOT apply to alcoholic beverages in general.
Click to expand...

The "cover" if you're a male is you pay for my drinks. Upscale but not stuffy bars, no coffee shops. I usually stick to micro or imports draft or Belgium ale bottles... Piraate is my favorite beer and if it's served, I will stay a little longer depending on if I can stand you or not. You can also buy some bar food pickies... my choice. I'm okay with anything but chicken wings, should I arrive late.

I will meet only with women who are attractive (it's not that I'm gonna "try anything" but realize I will be seen in public with you, and I might bump into someone I know...), any age, in which case it's Dutch, but I will accept a beer if its offered (only one, as beyond that I don't want to feel obligated to you or anything... And women try to get me lickied up sometimes to have their way with me...)

As stated earlier in my post, people tend to annoy me. Up front, I will find you annoying quickly and only pretend to be interested. It's often said that "active listening" is an important skill. I say, that's incorrect. Pretending to actively listen is the thing. Nearly everyone is totally self absorbed in their pathetically boring existence and think their miserable lives are somehow "fascinating" and others give a s---t. I don't, not at all... but am good at pretending to, but really I'm not even listening and am mentally "looking at my watch". I always leave abruptly - figure 45 minutes to an hour...

If you can deal with this, it's cool.
|
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom