Photography Economics

[Calzone]

Jan,

You chided that one should not buy an expensive camera and not use its full capabilities. I for one am attempting to more fully utilize both analog and digital capabilities, and perhaps I am somewhat the exception to what you mentioned.

I would say that economics is likely the restriction that limits capabilities, and also in analog photography the potential is also underutilized and also goes unexploited. How many film shooters are shooting large format cameras and are contact printing on Kodak AZO paper for resolution and long tonal scale? I think the main reason why so few go there is costs.

Then there is a lot of interesting photograpghy that say gets presented on Instagram or by bloggers with the intent of just being presented online or on cell phones. I would not discount this part of photgraphic culture. I think it is important, and it simply is what it is.

Many people enrich their lives with photography, but just because I am trying to build a portfolio and make fine art prints, does this make my way superior, and also like many others I do what I can.

For two years I was judged rather harshly for not printing (both wet and digitally). It was not because I didn't want to, but because it was not really feasible economically the way I personally wanted to expore each medium. Meanwhile I concentrated on just image capture, and that was a good thing. Not that I'm trying to defend myself, but I'm hearing more or the same.

BTW I find even color slide film to be more costly than B&W film, and processing costs (outside lab) are beyond my means. Again I limit myself, and I do what I can.

Cal

 

[Calzone]

:you, George Osborn, Charles Ponzi and 6 others like this

Stewart,

Sorry for the headache. LOL.

I am no good, I tell you.

Cal

 

[Sparrow]

Stewart,

Sorry for the headache. LOL.

I am no good, I tell you.

Cal

..................... 😀

 

[jschrader]

I seldom print these days, I have no gallery, and my print drawers are full. Not sure what I would do with prints. Like many on the RFF I am now looking at books.

Well, I found a solution that suits me

I print double-sided and bind them to a book. One a year, roughly.
Here:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=144020

 

[jsrockit]

I seldom print these days, I have no gallery, and my print drawers are full. Not sure what I would do with prints. Like many on the RFF I am now looking at books.

I agree. I print when I have something to print for. other than that, I print a few times a year to make sure stuff looks the way I want when printed big. In the meantime, I make a book each month which I consider to be like contact sheets / work prints for multiple projects I've been working on long term.

While many think having a 16-36mp camera is overkill, I don't. I think it is smart to work with a larger MP camera and downsize images than to work with a lower MP camera and upsize (if you can afford to do so). You just never know what you'll need to do in the future with your files. It's nice to be able to print really large if necessary. And, storage is cheap. It all depends on what you intend to do with your photography.

 

[jsrockit]

But your extremely expensive $2,3k monitor cannot match the quality of a well made print or a slide projection.

Like it or not, screens are used to show work in galleries and museums... and do a pretty good job of doing so. However, I'm more of a content person than a pixel / grain peeper, so we may obsess over different things. I do prefer prints and books though to screens.

I have never thought of slide projection to be a perfect way to show work either though... I feel the slides lose something going through the projection process. However, it still works fine enough to get the point across.

 

[HHPhoto]

Stores in my area stock film cameras new, but they are a hard sell, mostly because there is such a glut of used film cameras. I just took home a nice Nikon F4, for $130, how can Nikon compete with that? Almost new, boxed ones are $250 USD. One can buy a like new EOS 1 for $80.

Nikon is making brand new F6s for more than 10 years now.
So there is a market.
I've bought a brand new F6 myself some years ago. Best 35mm SLR ever.
It is worlds ahead of the F4 and F5.
And of course you get a new camera with 3 year garantue, and not a 25, 20, 15 year old camera which you don't how abused it had been by the former owners.

Of course the used market is an important competition for the camera manufacturers.
But that is also the case with digital. Now more and more customers are buying used instead of new. That is also one reason for the ongoing collapse in digital camera sales.

The manufactuers are facing this problem with both media, film and digital.

And concerning your comment on "bathroom darkrooms":
Please read my posts attentively.
I have not written about bathroom darkrooms.
Most darkroom users are using other rooms in their houses as darkrooms. The bathroom users are a tiny minority.
E.g. I have used at first a room in the cellar, later a former small kitchen which was not needed as a kitchen anymore.
In both rooms is was / is easily possible to make prints of highest, professional quality.

Cheers, Jan

 

[HHPhoto]

Like it or not, screens are used to show work in galleries and museums... and do a pretty good job of doing so.

Of course.
But that does not change their immanent physical limitations. They just cannot compete with high quality prints and slide projection.

I have never thought of slide projection to be a perfect way to show work either though... I feel the slides lose something going through the projection process.

They don't if you use proper equipment: High quality slide projectors with excellent projection lenses, best slide mounts, excellent screen.
All available for extremely low cost, both new and used.

If you see projection this way, you will be hooked. Promised.

Cheers, Jan

 

[Calzone]

Like it or not, screens are used to show work in galleries and museums... and do a pretty good job of doing so. However, I'm more of a content person than a pixel / grain peeper, so we may obsess over different things. I do prefer prints and books though to screens.

What Jan suggests is sometimes true: My Eizo has limitations.

For small prints the 13x19 inch image on my display when printing say 8 1/2 x11's the Eizo might not be of lower resolution (downsizing).

Making a 13x19 print the 13x19 image on the display is really comparable resolution and strongly resembles the output of my printer. Granted never exact.

But when making enlargements bigger than 13x19 then upsizing kicks in and what Jan says is absolutely true: the enlarge prints display higher resolution than my hardware calibrated display.

BTW the discounting of quality of a hardware calibrated monitor is not absolute and it does depend on print size. Truth be told if Eizo made a bigger hardware calibrated monitor I would of saved up and bought it because it is money well spent. It is a great tool for editing and saves a lot of paper and ink.

Not defending my purchase, but correcting for distortion with fact/truth.

Cal

 

[HHPhoto]

BTW I find even color slide film to be more costly than B&W film, and processing costs (outside lab) are beyond my means. Again I limit myself, and I do what I can.

Well, I am doing both. BW film and printing, and reversal film (color and BW) and projection.
Actually, both is rather cheap.
Reversal film is even a bit cheaper, because you already have a positive picture, no prints needed (but of course also possible, if you want a print from your slide as well).

Cheers, Jan

 

[jsrockit]

What Jan suggests is sometimes true: My Eizo has limitations.

I get that. However, it's just another method of looking at photos. All this talk of superiority of a viewing medium means nothing if the photos aren't worth looking at. If they are worth looking at, we will view them in any form we can.

 

[jsrockit]

They don't if you use proper equipment: High quality slide projectors with excellent projection lenses, best slide mounts, excellent screen.
All available for extremely low cost, both new and used.

If you see projection this way, you will be hooked. Promised.

I went to school for photography and have seen proper equipment in relation to slides. It's just another viewing method for me. I guess I'm more of a message over medium type.

 

[jsrockit]

For two years I was judged rather harshly for not printing (both wet and digitally). It was not because I didn't want to, but because it was not really feasible economically the way I personally wanted to expore each medium.

Cal, most of that came from me. I went about it the wrong way (as I do often since I tend to lack tact if I get worked up) and continue to feel bad about it. I just wanted to see the work because we photographed together often. Sorry for the drama. I'm a flawed human still learning how to act. 😱 In a way, the drama has made me relax and realize that not everyone's approach is the same.

 

[Calzone]

There seems to be a theme of "bashing" and now "judging harshly" on this thread.

I think there are certainly those who might wonder why I no longer print and try to show and sell, but I doubt seriously anyone [but me] is judging anyone harshly.

I am personally just fully stocked with prints. 🙂

I do admit I do like slide projectors.

Fred,

In my case it seems like damned if I do, and damned if I don't, but perhaps the correct reality is more accurately damned if I don't and damned if I do (in regards to printing). LOL.

At this point even using the best tool for the job, supporting pluralism, not taking sides, and supporting inclusion has all kinds of crazy spins and riffs. Double LOL.

Funniest thing is that I'm just the opposite of you. I have mucho negatives and RAW files and not many prints.

Anyways call me a trouble maker. I am known to bring out the best and worst in people, but there is a lot of character and entertainment value in this thread. Lot's of crazy thinking, but also some thoughtful posts.

Hope its all good.

Cal

 

[Calzone]

Cal, most of that came from me. I went about it the wrong way (as I do often since I tend to lack tact if I get worked up) and continue to feel bad about it. I just wanted to see the work because we photographed together often. Sorry for the drama. I'm a flawed human still learning how to act. 😱 In a way, the drama has made me relax and realize that not everyone's approach is the same.

John,

No foul. Like a trauma victum I went there by creating this thread and revisited my past. You are not the only person who was rather forceful into wanting me to print. Like I often say I annoy people the way I do things, and perhaps that is my way. I do really know how to piss people off and make people crazy. My gal really took exception, especially since I spent tens of thousands of dollars and years of just image capture. Boy was she annoyed.

Now she is kinda quiet when she sees the results, but I kinda know she is kinda afraid of the costs. At this point its don't ask don't tell.

Anyways you should not feel you were the only person pressuring me, and if you think or though that I was a little crazy and didn't understand my logic (because it seemed crazy to you) understand that you were not alone.

Interesting though some of the spin, the arguing, the logic and the thoughtful posts. For me there's a big world out there, and like becoming a millionair there are a million ways to become a millionair.

If people don't print, I'm O.K. with that, even if I do, one big reason not to print is don't waste your money if you don't plan on printing enough to avoid clogs.

At this point my behavior (concentrating on just image capture) totally makes sense because now I can fully utilize my printing capabilities, and economically this is the way to go.

Cal

 

[Calzone]

Well, I am doing both. BW film and printing, and reversal film (color and BW) and projection.
Actually, both is rather cheap.
Reversal film is even a bit cheaper, because you already have a positive picture, no prints needed (but of course also possible, if you want a print from your slide as well).

Cheers, Jan

Jan,

My logic is two is less than four. I purposely limit because it is good for me, and it is what I could afford. For me the money has to come from somewhere and I made my choices. Of course this is what is right for me.

Cal

 

[Calzone]

Great if you live in a large house with a "former small kitchen" or have a basement, but many of us on the RFF live in cities, not in suburban homes.

Jan,

My current 2-year lease is $33K a year, and I got a good deal going, but my one bedroom apartment is about 650 square feet. Even continueing to develope film overwelms my space.

Just to get to the level of adding an extra bathroom and upgrading likely into a two bedroom apartment will cost a minimum of $3k more a year, and it would be very difficult to print at any reasonable large size. Not the best.

Public darkrooms to me are like public restrooms, not a pleasure to use.

Cal

 

[Calzone]

Even university darkrooms are problematic, but if the professors keep on the students about keep clean, they can be great. I was lucky enough to teach at a university with three Leitz enlargers among the couple of dozen others.

There are wet studio rentals near me, but they would run about 12k a year, 6k is possible, but not easy.

I have a two bedroom, but no water there, so really useless as a darkroom -- and it is full of bicycles.

Fred,

My two titanium racing bikes are in public storage (one is a mountain bike, the other road) Forgot about the $178.00 a month that I pay for storage (Basically a walk in closet). That's where my enlarger is stored with my easel, Leica boxes, spare gear, and a few guitar amps. I ride an IBIS Mountain Trials set up as a single speed as my city bike, and that bike is stored in the bike storage room in my "luxury" building in SpaHa.

Back in the 70's in college, as Photo Editor and Darkroom manager of the school newspaper I basically had my own darkroom with an office. I use to go in on a Friday with a box of paper and leave Sunday. I was a driven artist who learned how to wet print very well, but at that time I identfied as a painter.

Cal

 

[emraphoto]

No.
Digital photographers are saying that again and again for more than 12 years now.
But if you make a real, economic valid calculation including inflation, you will see that film and especially processing is often even significantly cheaper today compared to the "golden era of film" 20 years ago.
Film selection is bigger in some market areas as well (e.g. more choices today with IR and high resolution BW films).
And we will see more films again in the future. For example from Film Ferrania, Adox, Rollei-Film and InovisCoat.
We will have a film revival similar to the development we've seen in the market for mechanical watches and vinyl.

And by the way: That someone like you who has spend a fortune for a Leica Monochrom is saying that film is too expensive.......sorry, I have to shake my head.
With that fortune you could have bought enough film and processing for the rest of your life 😉.

Also impossible to understand these people who buy the latest expensive digital cam all 2 or 3 years and then saying that shooting film is expensive.

Cheers,
Jan

i have always found the 'film is expensive' comment a bit puzzling. it simply does not fit with my experience.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Great if you live in a large house with a "former small kitchen" or have a basement, but many of us on the RFF live in cities, not in suburban homes.

Cities and suburbs are not the only options. There are also towns and villages.

Cheers,

R.