lorriman
Established
I didn't have the chance to answer some of the (unexpected) replies to my feedback. And things were getting interesting when the thread was closed.
The per-shot cost of film has a tendency to encourage a more deliberate approach to taking an individual photograph. Waiting for the moment, planning, care and attention. It's almost necessary to photograph that way when using film. That's the kind of photography that I want to see. I want to share in the satisfaction of the success of a well executed photo and not wade through millions of photos that I reckon likely owe more to chance than human effort.
There are other factors also, which are important to me. I'm a nostalgia and atmosphere nut. It's important for me to see a photograph as a story from the past. Digital psychologically transports me right in to the frame as if it were happening right now, which is pointless and undermines the purpose: why not just have another walk or picnic and enjoy the moment. This is one of the reasons I kick away any plastic toys or objects when photographing kids. The plastic destroys nostalgia atmosphere. I appreciate lomography for this reason also though the arty-farty bent of lomographers irritates me; too much teenage self-regarding nonsense. Granted a 150 years ago I would have been asking for a 'painting' marker, but I'm not claiming to be entirely rational.
For these reasons I reckon there is really quite a big divide between film and digital. It's even greater when you aren't in it simply for the imagery. My emphasis is story, nostalgia, atmosphere etc. I wouldn't mind skipping all those pics of objects and buildings also. Unite this to the deliberation involved in a film pic and I think that film photography is a breed apart and worthy of special recognition.
So for me it's not enough that the picture is good. I want more than that, to answer Roger.
So why not Apug? Because they want my money in order to see the galleries and I'm just too cheap.
The per-shot cost of film has a tendency to encourage a more deliberate approach to taking an individual photograph. Waiting for the moment, planning, care and attention. It's almost necessary to photograph that way when using film. That's the kind of photography that I want to see. I want to share in the satisfaction of the success of a well executed photo and not wade through millions of photos that I reckon likely owe more to chance than human effort.
There are other factors also, which are important to me. I'm a nostalgia and atmosphere nut. It's important for me to see a photograph as a story from the past. Digital psychologically transports me right in to the frame as if it were happening right now, which is pointless and undermines the purpose: why not just have another walk or picnic and enjoy the moment. This is one of the reasons I kick away any plastic toys or objects when photographing kids. The plastic destroys nostalgia atmosphere. I appreciate lomography for this reason also though the arty-farty bent of lomographers irritates me; too much teenage self-regarding nonsense. Granted a 150 years ago I would have been asking for a 'painting' marker, but I'm not claiming to be entirely rational.
For these reasons I reckon there is really quite a big divide between film and digital. It's even greater when you aren't in it simply for the imagery. My emphasis is story, nostalgia, atmosphere etc. I wouldn't mind skipping all those pics of objects and buildings also. Unite this to the deliberation involved in a film pic and I think that film photography is a breed apart and worthy of special recognition.
So for me it's not enough that the picture is good. I want more than that, to answer Roger.
So why not Apug? Because they want my money in order to see the galleries and I'm just too cheap.
This is a film vs digital discussion.
rbiemer
Unabashed Amateur
I am not convinced that digital can't be deliberate or that digital is any less capable of capturing "story, nostalgia, atmosphere etc."
I think these things are entirely due to the skill or intent of the person and not the gear.
As well, no matter which medium we start with, every photo on this site--or anywhere else on line--is digital by the time it gets here.
Rob
I think these things are entirely due to the skill or intent of the person and not the gear.
As well, no matter which medium we start with, every photo on this site--or anywhere else on line--is digital by the time it gets here.
Rob
dmr
Registered Abuser
I might (again) question the fact that the real-world total per-shot cost is higher for film than digital.
Granted the marginal cost of the nth-plus-one click with digital is close to negligible, the cost of a current-technology DSLR (let alone accessories and such), when factored into the number of meaningful shots taken, pushes that cost per used image up quite a bit.
I've done the math several times for my current shooting habits. I spend far less on film and processing than I would have spent if I would have purchased a higher-end DSLR three years ago and used it exclusively.
Oh, and yes, I do agree that those who value film tend to pay more attention to technique and detail when taking each individual image.
lorriman
Established
It's also a philosophy of photography discussion, IMHO.
RFF has evolved over the last 8 years, along with the rest of the photographic world. This is not a film forum, and is not a digital forum. It is a Photography forum, with the main focus around rangefinder cameras. As RFF has grown, we've added more forums for different formats.
Film vs digital discussions will take place on this particular forum. Those started on other forums, such as the Philosophy of Photography forum, will be moved here by the Moderators as the emphasis of the thread shifts to digital vs film. The discussion may continue, and the participants may post their individual Philosophies.
Film vs digital discussions will take place on this particular forum. Those started on other forums, such as the Philosophy of Photography forum, will be moved here by the Moderators as the emphasis of the thread shifts to digital vs film. The discussion may continue, and the participants may post their individual Philosophies.
- Status
- Not open for further replies.