NPR Story about 'Young Folks' Using Film

Think how much fun the young folks would have with a halfway decent camera. But maybe that's the whole point -- if in their view digital serves their needs perfectly, then film is purely a medium for "artistic," unexpected results. I just think at some point I'd get tired of too much hit or miss.
 
I just wish these articles wouldn't ignore the young people putting out quality work on film, especially the newest generation of large format photographers who are hidden from even each other it seems.
 
The Hipstamatic App attempts to recreate the aesthetic and "look" of old film cameras and films, as well as the Holgas and Lomos that Urban Outfitters sells. It's not surprising that some kids would migrate from their iPhones to actual film cameras, even if they're cheap ones. As far as I can tell, the aesthetic is not one that values sharpness or the other attributes of image quality that usually get discussed here.
 
KoNickon said:
Think how much fun the young folks would have with a halfway decent camera.
Click to expand...

we do.

you have to understand that there are hipsters who will buy a piece of plastic junk because it's retro and then there are the rest of us young folks (Im not 25 just yet) all have the best old camera we can afford, and it's not even that rare for us to use medium and large format cameras.

it's just like with record players. the only friend I know who owns one has a technics sl-1200; I personally have a thorens td-125.

kids may not have Leicas or Rockports but they eat up anything good that isn't expensive.
 
Whatever you do, it's about the passion and the effort you put in to achieve the result. It doesn't really matter if it's a digital camera or a film camera. You can just snap away while chatting, texting, being on the phone or you can walk around and observe and focus on taking photographs.
 
Another one of these articles? What's next, another one on vinyl? ;) Every few months we are going to see these types of articles when the writer thinks they just happened upon a "new" trend.
 
My other half now shoots film which I develop and scan for her. She likes to see the end result and appreciates the anticipation involved with film. "Her" camera is an Olympus Mju-1 (ebay 99p) and she adores it far more than her digicam. I am not allowed to show her the negatives prior to scanning as she loves the surprise and the joy of seeing the finished photos.
 
It's unfortunately that NPR mentioned Lomography because a lot of people focused on that bit of the podcast, but from what I heard, it sounds like the people interviewed primarily enjoy the process/experience of shooting film--similar to most users here.

There are newcomers to film every day. Some join RFF/APUG, others snap away happily by themselves. Some get interviewed on NPR, some don't.
 
28mm said:
It's unfortunately that NPR mentioned Lomography because a lot of people focused on that bit of the podcast..
Click to expand...
On the contrary, if it would only focus on 'serious' film camera use, it would miss out on a lot that makes film 'film'.

For instance, one thing that really sets even the cheapest lomography cameras apart is their ability to do multiple exposures. A majority of serious cameras can't do that, or only with great effort and gymnastics. And multiple exposure is one area where film completely outshines digital..

Another is that the magazine section of the lomography website showcases lots of different approaches to using film. From highly experimental to serious. True, there's a bias towards lo-fi stuff, but there's still enough different material to balance that.
 
pvdhaar said:
For instance, one thing that really sets even the cheapest lomography cameras apart is their ability to do multiple exposures. A majority of serious cameras can't do that, or only with great effort and gymnastics. And multiple exposure is one area where film completely outshines digital..
.
Click to expand...

Many, many top film cameras can do double exposures. Maybe not Leicas (easily) but most top level 35mm slrs can, and of course all 4x5 and view cameras can.

Multi exposure with digital does not make much sense as you can just combine the images later.
 
Pablito said:
Many, many top film cameras can do double exposures. Maybe not Leicas (easily) but most top level 35mm slrs can, and of course all 4x5 and view cameras can.
Click to expand...
Sure, but the majority of film cameras floating around are P&S and low cost SLRs.


Multi exposure with digital does not make much sense as you can just combine the images later.
Click to expand...
Multiple exposure isn't the same as superimposed images. The non-linear response to light of film makes it the tool of choice for multis. Especially the response to exposure that's below the film threshold is key to good ME.
Digital superimposed images don't even come near.
 
pvdhaar said:
For instance, one thing that really sets even the cheapest lomography cameras apart is their ability to do multiple exposures. A majority of serious cameras can't do that, or only with great effort and gymnastics. And multiple exposure is one area where film completely outshines digital..
Click to expand...

I think you better rethink this claim... It is so easy with many mechanical serious SLRs.
 
If each of us "adopts" one young film photographer, we can change the world!

[maybe not]
 
Raid -- brilliant! I literally 'laughed out loud'. Gosh, I wish there was a shorter way of saying that. I bet the 'young folks' know how to abbreviate it...

Anyway, I'm with the posters above. If there interest in shooting film (from any age group), I'm all for it. Heck, if the 20-somethings were making pinhole cameras using tin foil and coffee cans, I'd cheer them on.
 
jsrockit said:
Another one of these articles? What's next, another one on vinyl? ;) Every few months we are going to see these types of articles when the writer thinks they just happened upon a "new" trend.
Click to expand...

What's wrong with the article?
We don't have to raise awareness regarding digital photography today.
But if we don't do it for film photography, it will disappear.

How can people say "it doesn't matter which medium you choose" without recognizing that one medium is in need of help than the other.

IMPORTANT: "Help" here is not about the quality or potential, but help from the blindness and the common perception that convenience is always better than inconvenience.

Let me repeat what I recently heard from a young person doing her first darkroom course in college. It's liberating. It opens up her mind which was previously bound to digital only. Now she can truly choose. That's true freedom of medium, the ability to choose without a noose due to the shrinking awareness and the potential disappearance of one compared to the other.

People who has experience in both mediums can declare "I prefer digital" all you want, but please don't rob that same ability to choose from the next generation.

I want my -- now in third-grade -- daughter to be able to choose film when she is 18 years old if she wanted to. But if people keep saying "you can choose whatever" but at the same time sneer at any attempt to raise awareness on the medium that you don't prefer, most likely she won't have that choice in the future.
 
This is what I meant by stating:

"If each of us "adopts" one young film photographer, we can change the world!"
 
Where's the article on young photographers using film because it's a fine medium, just like digital, and not a fetish?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom