Please read my thread
here, and chime in with your own personal views or feelings regarding the desire to shoot a film Leica but my realization that digital just seems to work better for me.
I'm very conflicted, and need to know I'm not the only photographer struggling with these issues...
Well, first off, this thread is ridiculous because it's simply referencing an earlier thread of the same topic. Why start a new thread, when it would have provided better context to continue the first thread?
Regarding the choice of older camera technology verses newer, it's a simple fact that newer technology provides opportunity to do things not offered by the older; or, at least to do things easier, more conveniently. This is not to say that the aesthetic experience is better; usually it's the reverse - the older technology has better mechanical aesthetics.
Don't misunderstand my point: I'm the guy who's been shooting paper negatives in pinhole cameras for the last 15+ years, and maintain a B/W darkroom, and use manual typewriters and fountain pens for writing because the aesthetic experience is more pleasing. Writing via manual typewriter can sometimes get me in a frame of mind where the words come out better. But it's not nearly as convenient or expedient as word processing on a computer. The same goes for photography. We've got to drop all the false pretense and finally admit to ourselves that perhaps HCB would have been using a cell phone camera, or digi-point and shoot, were he a young man, just embarking on discovering photography after having had some training in the fine arts.
You know, as much as I enjoy B/W photography, especially the aesthetics of the silver gelatin fiber print, and as much as I like the aesthetics of handling manual cameras, the problems associated with processing and drying film while trying to avoid the inevitable dust and scratches, and printing each negative as finely as possible, where each one requires a test strip and perhaps some dodging and burning, I've come to the point where the time and convenience advantages of digital photography start to significantly impact my choice of which camera I take. Especially if, in the end, it's the image that counts. Someone once said (originally applied to small 35mm film cameras) that the best camera was the one you have with you. This still rings true, in this day and age of palm-sized cameras and cell-phones that take pictures every bit as good as the P/S of a few years ago.
I still drag out my 8x10 box camera and sheet film holders loaded with paper negatives (the type of camera considered standard when 35mm was first invented, was the new-fangled technology), in fact, I did so just this week. But I wouldn't take it on vacation to document the trip (although I did so a few years ago to Arches NP, 4x5 pinhole) without seriously considering bringing the digital along also. And I know which one is more convenient, and even delivers superior images.
We're pretty much living a fantasy, like those people that do medieval jousting in the local city parks, dressing up in period costume and making mead and personal body armor (SCA, Society for Creative Anachronism). That's what it's like, using a rangefinder and film this day and age. It's not about the image, or the photograph itself; if it were, there'd be better choices. It's about the rangefinder experience, the aesthetics.
But when it comes down to simply enjoying one's vacation and coming home with good pictures, it may not be the best tool for the job. Just like if I were to try and load my tripod and 8x10 box cameras and sheet film holders in my luggage when flying to a vacation spot. Back in the day, a caravan of pack mules was what was required.
And as a modern-day callitype photographer, to me it appears as if you rangefinder users have seriously compromised on tradition and have bought into the dark side of pursuing the latest and greatest for the sake of convenience, with your film rangefinders. Or so it could seem, placed in that context. Really; you aren't traditional enough, being caught in that interstitial between ancient and contemporary.
~Joe
