JPSuisse
Well-known
Luis
I disagree with your insinuation. I like disposable cameras. Especially about 2 years ago when I ran into one that was undeveloped and about 8 years old. I got some great pictures of personal value to me.
Maybe for disposable writing? Maybe not. But certainly not for disposable memories. You limit yourself too much. Even though I have a Leica, I don't underestimate the value of these little devices.
JP
I disagree with your insinuation. I like disposable cameras. Especially about 2 years ago when I ran into one that was undeveloped and about 8 years old. I got some great pictures of personal value to me.
Maybe for disposable writing? Maybe not. But certainly not for disposable memories. You limit yourself too much. Even though I have a Leica, I don't underestimate the value of these little devices.
JP
FrankS
Registered User
In photography, there is a continuum that we are all on, from the camera collectors/equipment nerds at one end, to the artistes for whom the image is all that matters and gear is irrelevant, at the other. Most of us fall somewhere in-between; some a little more to one end, some a little more to the other. Each person can find the spot that suits them best and makes them happy. Let's respect that. Snobbery of any type is unattractive and small-minded. This is my opinion.
LeicaFoReVer
Addicted to Rangefinders
This article must have been posted in
www.disposablecameraforum.com
now the prices of disposable cameras will go high. Damn it!
www.disposablecameraforum.com
now the prices of disposable cameras will go high. Damn it!
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Which was indeed why I started that thread, to see what people were thinking when they actually made an effort to think, rather than responding reflexively.
Cheers,
R.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
OK ... so we have our five new mods!
When comes the function that allows an entire thread to be placed on one's ignore list?
When comes the function that allows an entire thread to be placed on one's ignore list?
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Frank,
Or perhaps there are two continuums (continua?) that are only partially related: those who care about kit, and those who don't, and those who take pictures, and those who don't. The late, great Terence Donovan cared deeply about equipment AND was one of the best professional photographers of the 20th century.
Cheers,
R.
FrankS
Registered User
Your's is a more accurate model Roger, I was keeping it simple to illustrate a point.
Keith: That is a user function: thread selection.
JohnTF
Veteran
Funny, if she liked her Canon G9 (I "like" my G9 and G10 so far), why did she not pick one up at the duty free (G11), instead it's malfunction became the attention grabber, the hook of the article, fair enough.
Under the right conditions, and it would behoove you to know what those are, you can get quite acceptable results from almost any disposable camera, even the recycled ones, (not terrible difficult to do if you avoid the capacitors in the flash circuit). The latitude of the film is pretty good, the processing C41 and RA4 are almost bullet proof, but you would have to give up the degree of control most of us prefer when the camera is not pre-set.
I hear folks on vacation all the time talk about how amazed they are that disposable cameras with film even work, as if the technology of film was somehow turned off in the "digital" age, even though their highest aspiration is a 4x6" print.
Am surprised she did not use the camera in her cell phone. ;-)
I always pack my Czech Pionyr or my M8 with pinhole attachment for my back up to the Canons G series. ;-) The Pionyr is multiformat, if someone has not lost the inserts.
Who does not have at least one P&S spare camera of some sort?
Bit gimmicky, and fluff, but she got attention. Am sure the woman buying Tampons was happy to see that reported along with her portrait published. Pity the box was not in the frame. The photos are better than the writing. As to not worrying about losing her camera, I think most photographers worry as much about losing their film or flash drives as much as losing a camera. She also intimated that everyone who shoots chimps on every shot, detracting from the process. Again, fluff.
I did shoot a roll with my Avatar when I bought it in Prague, wanted to make sure it worked, and I did get change from my $8000 bill in my pocket, I just set it for ten feet, 1/100 or so and some crazy early Leica f stop close to f/11.
Don't care much for the Bokeh though from her shots, mine were superior only in that regard. ;-)
Regards, John
Under the right conditions, and it would behoove you to know what those are, you can get quite acceptable results from almost any disposable camera, even the recycled ones, (not terrible difficult to do if you avoid the capacitors in the flash circuit). The latitude of the film is pretty good, the processing C41 and RA4 are almost bullet proof, but you would have to give up the degree of control most of us prefer when the camera is not pre-set.
I hear folks on vacation all the time talk about how amazed they are that disposable cameras with film even work, as if the technology of film was somehow turned off in the "digital" age, even though their highest aspiration is a 4x6" print.
Am surprised she did not use the camera in her cell phone. ;-)
I always pack my Czech Pionyr or my M8 with pinhole attachment for my back up to the Canons G series. ;-) The Pionyr is multiformat, if someone has not lost the inserts.
Who does not have at least one P&S spare camera of some sort?
Bit gimmicky, and fluff, but she got attention. Am sure the woman buying Tampons was happy to see that reported along with her portrait published. Pity the box was not in the frame. The photos are better than the writing. As to not worrying about losing her camera, I think most photographers worry as much about losing their film or flash drives as much as losing a camera. She also intimated that everyone who shoots chimps on every shot, detracting from the process. Again, fluff.
I did shoot a roll with my Avatar when I bought it in Prague, wanted to make sure it worked, and I did get change from my $8000 bill in my pocket, I just set it for ten feet, 1/100 or so and some crazy early Leica f stop close to f/11.
Don't care much for the Bokeh though from her shots, mine were superior only in that regard. ;-)
Regards, John
Last edited:
Leigh Youdale
Well-known
Chicken or Egg
Chicken or Egg
For me, this actually nails the problem. Tyler Hicks had a real story which was supported by the photographs. The technical quality of the photographs was secondary to the story.
What we were presented with here was hardly a story of any interest at all and supported by photographs of mediocre quality. Double zero.
If the story had been really interesting and the photos as we saw them, or if the photos had been noteworthy but the writing was a bit 'naff', then it would have made the cut. In my view it failed to be an effective piece of journalism on both counts.
Chicken or Egg
For me, this actually nails the problem. Tyler Hicks had a real story which was supported by the photographs. The technical quality of the photographs was secondary to the story.
What we were presented with here was hardly a story of any interest at all and supported by photographs of mediocre quality. Double zero.
If the story had been really interesting and the photos as we saw them, or if the photos had been noteworthy but the writing was a bit 'naff', then it would have made the cut. In my view it failed to be an effective piece of journalism on both counts.
BillBingham2
Registered User
OK ... so we have our five new mods!
When comes the function that allows an entire thread to be placed on one's ignore list?
She was teetering on the edge but seems to OK.
Not a surprise with the disposable were reused. Doubt any are made in Cuba, they are probably recycled from tourists who had the film processed in Cuba. I was thinking of making a Super Flash from combining a dozen of the flashes but ran out of time.
Kodak was marketing an upscale disposable with a better lens and B&W film up until a few years, might still be.
We (Linda and I) gave everyone at our wedding (17 years ago) disposables to take pictures and got some fun shots. A friend offered to do the real stuff, much better and oddly more inclusive.
B2 (;->
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
What a set of bad looking shots! Cuba is a magnificent place for photography... I guess the photographer could have done much better photographs with a pair of good cameras and two lenses... And great film! I'm not just talking about tonality, contrast, etc., but also about composition, selective focus, etc... What a shame she used those crappy cameras! Horrible images in general... Lots of improvements to think about, and for sure, as a result of the third rate gear used, her creative skills were badly, sadly limited... Images like those, transmit a lot less than they could under the right circumstances...
Cheers,
Juan
Cheers,
Juan
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
OK ... morbid curiosity has forced me to have a look at the pics and they are indeed shizenhousen!
But that's not the point I guess ... she did it ... the publication chose to give it space and the rest is history!
But that's not the point I guess ... she did it ... the publication chose to give it space and the rest is history!