New Yorker piece on cameras

I'm afraid that these "words of wisdom" from this youthful geographical name-dropper won't change my enjoyment of both film and digital photography. And we don't all view our images "on tiny screens" either. Some of us take the business of photography a little further than that. TW
 
Hey, I have an F-801 (8008)! Nice how he got that blown out branch in the middle of his picture like that. Also, Sontag didn't know anything (I mean anything) about photography so quoting her at the end is kind of funny.

;)
 
That article really does ignore numerous aspects of photography.

Froth!
 
When I'm in a jeep, driving over a rocky pass above 12,000 feet or hiking over a nearby trail, I purposely don't want to be networked. There is no cell phone service on Ophir Pass in Colorado (not as of the summer of 2012) as well there shouldn't be.

The marmots and columbines, the swiftly moving clouds creating harsh shadows that morph with every second, are all things that should be left off the grid, in my opinion.

Some things on this earth are meant to be seen in person, up close like the sweet dew on a bright crimson Indian Paintbrush flower, or in a grand vista while a little lightheaded from the 3000 ft ascent. The photo is made that much more meaningful when I get to look at it years later and remember having to catch my breath before taking in the valley below.

At that altitude even in the summer you can sometimes see your breath because it's that cold up there. The network is never going to know that feeling of the cool, rarefied air in your lungs and hear the barking of a nearby marmot warning the others nearby of the invading human.

That place and places like it are the perfect areas for cameras, old and new but nothing can compare to that 35mm, 120 or 4x5 or even larger transparency for the person who took the photo. So crisp and clear you can almost jump right back into the scene.

In the busier part of life, I find there is a kind of magic to shooting film amongst the hustle and bustle of the city. I don't mind the wait. I don't need the network to reassure me of my images' worthiness, I'll see that on the light table and if it's rubbish, then it's rubbish. Better in the round file than a bunch of knee-jerk published bad photos.

Film or digital but a camera with a real lens with real aperture control, selective focus and its own share of aberrations makes it obvious that true cameras will never be replaced by cell phones. You can't put a 21mm Super Angulon or 50mm Summicron into an iphone. Nor any great optic for that matter.

I'm not worried, cameras are here to stay, I'm sure. They will certainly change but as long as people want to have control over their compositions, they have to use real optics with real optical controls and various focal lengths that you just can't get in a 6mm thick phone.

Phil Forrest
 
All I could think was how much nicer that forest would have looked if shot on black and white with medium format.
 
very very nice, Phil. Glad that a bit of NY froth impelled such a nice draft of an essay on your part. Hope you feel impelled to flesh it out more.

Takes me back to marmots and pikas and alpine flowers of Independence Pass which I crossed more frequently than Ophir, sometimes with a Yashica 44, sometmes with an OM/50. Thanks for that.
 
Thanks Zuiko and Robert.

Almost every summer my family takes a jeep or two up to the very high rockies in south-central Colorado. We like to stay away from more heavily traveled areas so we go to campgrounds more off the beaten path and explore old dead mining camps above timberline. Last time I was there I had only three days of acclimation to 7000ft elevation before we crested Ophir Pass the first time that trip. I decided I'd hike the last mile and felt like my lungs were going to explode. I got some good shots though; images that you have to stop the jeep to get (which you just can't do there without blocking the "road") and images which a lot of folks probably don't take the time to make.

I've always had a very "olfactory memory" as one may call it.
I remember when I was very little the smell of pine needles and that sweet, almost maple smell of ponderosa pine when visiting my great-uncle Pete and great-aunt Edna near Cripple Creek. They are just little slivers of memories but the snow back then was absolute magic for a four-year old. We have a few photos from that place that mom took with her Yashica 124. I always loved watching things through that groundglass.

I first got to shoot my own roll with that camera when I was eight years old. It was on a trip to Silverton on the Durango-Silverton railroad. I wanted to shoot nothing but the train but mom said I had to save some film for the town. When I grab a TLR and look into that groundglass, to this day just a millisecond of the smell of coal soot is remembered and I'm reunited with my very first desire to make photos.

The first camera I owned was a Kodak 110 Instamatic and I took it everywhere with the Boy Scouts. I think I still have that thing in a footlocker but every time I see one of those I'm reminded of the smell of sage and the silt while backpacking through Canyonlands Utah.

On another backpacking trip in northern New Mexico when I was 14 I took along that same camera. Those images remind me of the low impact camping we were doing and the taste of charcoal in my mouth after "brushing" my teeth with it. There are a ton of bears up there and bear attacks are a real risk so we couldn't take any nice smelling soap or toothpaste.

My Pentax ME Super was my first SLR (I had to buy one as mom got sick of me using her Spotmatic.) The ME carries memories of the smells of mountain biking, my first job after high school at Philmont Scout Ranch, the bike shop I worked at, the thick oily smell of the flight deck of the USS John C. Stennis, my first published photos of a machinist working on an auxiliary diesel engine.

On my deployment in 2000, I was on weather watch one night in the southern Indian Ocean, transiting from the Arabian Gulf to our next port call, Fremantle. I had been out in the near dark for several hours and could see everything illuminated by the stars and a sliver of the moon. 190 feet below, I heard a rushing sound and looked out starboard to see a whale breaching the surface and blowing air out its blowhole. Only the specular highlights of the water's reflection were actually visible but my eyes were used to the dark so I go to see this great show as if it were put on just for me. There are some things that aren't meant to be photographed because of their fleeting nature and incredible beauty. Technically, I don't think that photo could have been made even if I had a camera at the ready. It was just too dark.

Without Willy Wonka inventing smellivision, I can't share these memories with that kind of dimension. It's for me only as it's my experience but we all have our own individual experiences in life and photography and art. We make the photo not just because we like what we see but because we are in the moment and want to remember as well as share. The moment we click that shutter, we have five senses experiencing life and maybe a sixth sense or an instinct or whatnot that compels us to make the photo at that moment. The tactile feedback from our cameras is tied to our senses that we've captured that moment. I just don't get that from a virtual button on a touchscreen.

I can write ad-nauseum here on the "net" or from my phone at some remote location but no matter how linked in to the electronic world I may be, I can't put you in my position at that moment; so I think the connection is best left off and the stories shared at a later date when we have had time to appreciate our existence in that place wherever it is, selfishly consuming raw it like it is our little slice of perfection for just a few moments.

Phil Forrest
 
Thanks for an interesting article. I need to be shaken and awaken from time to time for newer and evolving nature of photography. We all see on TV's constant video feeds and networking -cell, sat or starship.
 
I want the next Leica M7 "Intergalactic", which will develop and scan Tri X by itself, will crop and edit the pictures, and then will send the good ones to MOMA for exhibiting. As a documentary extra, it will send the jpegs of my cat into the inter-gallactic space for the aliens to analyze, and it will also use an inverse image stabilization sensor, to see if I am not developing Parkinson's disease, in which case, my doctor will be alerted automatically via Twitter. At this point, I will be able to say, that my current camera models are redundant.
 
I really find it funny the urge these guys feel to justify themselves for using their iphones after they lost interrest in other forms of photography. There is very little said in this article really.
 
He makes some good points about the convenience of handphone cameras.

However, he should note that not everyone needs instant digital gratification nor instant sharing of photos on social media.
 
I love the New Yorker, so be kind here. They need filler material ever since they opened their website, you know.
I read the piece as a pleasantly written 'blog entry laced with pointless observations.

I liked Phil's commentary (above) more :)
 
daveleo said:
I love the New Yorker, so be kind here. They need filler material ever since they opened their website, you know.
I read the piece as a pleasantly written 'blog entry laced with pointless observations.

I liked Phil's commentary (above) more :)
Click to expand...

I'm following you Dave. Agree 100%. It reads like holiday filler material. A Wikipedia recent photography history, made personal. Ross and Shawn would turn in their graves.
 
I thought it was an interesting read. Most people want the convenience of a camera phone. I work near One World Center. There are definitely more camera phones being used then "real" cameras. I would say that in order of preference of popularity from what I have witnessed -

1. camera phones
2. point and shoots
3. dSLRs
4. a rare siting of a film camera.
 
He only wanted to photograph to show his buddies... not because he loved photography. Social networking being confused with photography again.

Phones are great for non-photographers and even great for some photographers. However, most people that are into photography can see a clear difference between using an iPhone and using a camera.
 
The tide will turn. I went to a university graduation ceremony recently. I was shocked to see how many families had only an iPhone or an iPad to photograph their brilliant offspring. I photographed my student with the Monochrom and with his family and friends it was their turn to be shocked at what is possible. On Christmas Day, however, I have to concede that my sister in law took better photos than mine (not technically) with just her point and shoot camera. She has some interest and can enjoy being better equipped than most in actually having a dedicated camera. But my wife's photos of the children with film in the early '90s with a second hand Olympus Mju (Stylus) were better again, with the highlights never blown on colour negative film. And my parents took better pictures than those, on the family Zeiss Ikon, where some reasonable photographic skill was required to even get a reasonable exposure at all. We'll see the rise of the dedicated family camera again soon I suspect.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom