We're so lucky today. Do we really appreciate it?

[Archiver]

My first camera was a 110 film cassette camera in the very early 80s. but I learned photography with Dad's Pentax ME. As a kid, I was sort of caught between Mum telling me to 'just take pictures' and Dad telling me, 'film costs money to develop!' So while I got some pictures from the past, and halfway decent ones with the Kodak disc camera I had as a teenager, I didn't get anywhere near what I would have liked, in hindsight.

Digital has changed all of that. Even with a phone, I can take pictures of anything, anywhere, and not think of cost. I went from small sensor digicams in the early 2000s to DSLR's, mirrorless and digital rangefinder in the space of ten years. I shot film in the middle, but software and good cameras give me the ability to create almost any look, in almost any conditions I might come across.

I have terabytes and terabytes of photos, video and audio from the last 17 years, and I shoot professionally, something I would never have thought possible in the days of film. Everything is time stamped and organized, backed up in multiple drives and places. In the 80s, I would have had to use a film camera, a VHS-c camcorder and an audio cassette recorder to do what I do now, and while I have a deep nostalgia for those times, I very much appreciate what I have now.

 

[Pál_K]

My one wish is that old photos had names, locations, dates written on the back. I'm doing a lot of ancestral research and not having people's names or locations is often frustrating. I have prints from Hungary going back to the 1890's - they are in excellent condition.

When I first started in 35mm, 1971, I used to keep a little pocket notebook where I wrote the date, subject, and exposure information. I did that until about 1977. The exposure info was useful in case I screwed up a photo and wanted to know why.

These days, both with film and digital, I just write down basic info after I'm done with a roll or if I download images. We have access to great equipment today, both old and new, but I don't think there's a quick and convenient way to make notes.

I'd love to get a pair of working MF-23 backs for my F4s's to record exposure info between the frames.

 

[Archiver]

An anecdote: in the late 80s and 90s, I had friends who were quite interested in camcorders, and to a lesser extent, cameras. Some recorded themselves doing comedy skits, others recorded their rock band performances and rehearsals. Our family had a camcorder as well, but didn't use it much, as it was large and cumbersome. Today's tech lets us shoot 4K video with something the size of a wallet.

 

[Archiver]

My one wish is that old photos had names, locations, dates written on the back. I'm doing a lot of ancestral research and not having people's names or locations is often frustrating. I have prints from Hungary going back to the 1890's - they are in excellent condition.

When I first started in 35mm, 1971, I used to keep a little pocket notebook where I wrote the date, subject, and exposure information. I did that until about 1977. The exposure info was useful in case I screwed up a photo and wanted to know why.

My family has quite a collection of prints and a few slides from decades past. We have no idea as to the exact dates they were taken, apart from gauging things based on how old the subjects are. My images are all organized in folders based on date and subject, so it's easy to see what is where. Although GPS data would also be helpful! It's only a matter of time before it all comes together.

 

[zuiko85]

Digital is ok, but the cameras they build to use it are not so nice. And disposable.
You dig out your old all metal, mechanical, manual 35mm odd are it can be put back into use. The average wizz-bang digital wunder camera that is 5 years old, if the electronics go out, it’s a paper weight. Cheaper to replace than to repair, if it even can be repaired.

 

[ColSebastianMoran]

My comment: with digital post-processing I am now getting better prints and larger good prints than I ever did back in the film era from 35mm. This is both from film/slides and from digital captures.

 

[Corran]

IMO, 2019 is the best time to forego all the "niceties" and get back to actual photography. Sure the whiz-bang stuff is fine for quick photos, but so is your phone, so why even own a DSLR outside of commercial work where you need that kind of tool?

Instead, the best films made by the big companies are readily available, an amazing assortment of cameras are easily purchased used for pennies on the dollar, and real archival prints can be made with enlargers found for give-away prices / free.

Many of us work on computers for our day job. Why do you want to spend more time on the computer? Why do you need ISO 52789 and to shoot 1000 images an hour?

I forget to charge my DSLR batteries on the off chance I use them because I'm so used to just grabbing a mechanical camera and a roll or two of film. So much nicer to shoot, no nonsense menu diving to change some setting I forgot about, no futzing around on the computer with RAW files later, just photography.

Don't get me started on the e-waste issues with modern tech.

 

[Deleted member 65559]

I'm all in for appreciation. That I can get fiber-based baryta paper & film delivered to my door. Thanks B&H...from Canada. That Deardorff, Leica, Rolleiflex, Nikon et al engineered and built elegant cameras that still function & can be tuned up by folks like Don Goldberg and the short list. That my Durst 138 was offered to me for a song. Those things I much appreciate.

 

[peterm1]

I can see this is just going to quickly degenerate into yet another film v digital "debate". Complete with heat but little light and not a single person's mind changed at the end of it.

My attitude is simple. If you like film use it. If you like digital use that. In either case be grateful that we live in an era when most of us have these choices available to us.

 

[Keith]

I can see this is just going to quickly degenerate into yet another film v digital "debate". Complete with heat but little light and not a single person's mind changed at the end of it.

My attitude is simple. If you like film use it. If you like digital use that. In either case be grateful that we live in an era when most of us have these choices available to us.

It reminds of the threads we used to have some time ago ... 😕

 

[Deleted member 65559]

Peter M, The discussion only degenerates if one denigrates the opposite side of the discussion. The OP is right in that we're lucky today and have much to be thankful for...whatever one's point of view.

 

[DownUnder]

Enjoy what you have today, and make the best of it - whether film or digital.

As any good Buddhist will tell you, stuff happens.

At well past 70, I no longer care much about what will happen to my stocks of film and digital images when I've shuffled off to the great shopping mall in cloud land. Maybe my architectural shots of old colonial buildings in Australia and Asia will survive me in terms of who will be interested in them, but my hundreds (= thousands) of cat portraits won't. The subjects themselves are long gone, not that they cared much about which cameras or film I used when I was stalking them over the decades.

My partner has been after me for some time to sort out and cull the feline shots, keep the best, maybe do a book or two for family to enjoy in the future, and destroy the non-keepers. Very sensible indeed.

Yes, we are truly fortunate to be living in the time we are now. Film is still available and digital image technology has moved forward in leaps and bounds. I have photos and text documents saved electronically since the '80s and '90s which can still be accessed, as I've updated my equipment and systematically recopied to the new technology every few years. Easily done, and nowadays cheaper than ever.

Take reasonable steps to care for and protect your images - beyond this, don't stress. Nothing is permanent. Ask my late cats...

 

[kshapero]

Every once in a while I'll dig out the M3 that I inherited from my grandmother and compare it to my latest digital A7iii.
We've come a long ways.
And yes, I appreciate that, a lot.

We have but there is still some magic in an M3 that nothing today can compare to. Just saying.

 

[peterm1]

Peter M, The discussion only degenerates if one denigrates the opposite side of the discussion. The OP is right in that we're lucky today and have much to be thankful for...whatever one's point of view.

Dear Deardorff38 I was not denigrating anyone and certainly not you (if that is your impression). I am simply making the point that we have been here many times always with the same outcome - a film is best camp v a digital is best camp. My point is these debates go nowhere. I do not think this is what the OP intended. I think he was saying "aren't we lucky to have so much choice and the ability to make images we could never make before" And as I read it that is pretty much what you were saying from your point of view, too.

So bottom line - just enjoy what you enjoy. I have made the switch from film to digital and do not wish to go back. Others have a different point of view and I accept that. Why would I not.

 

[CharlesDAMorgan]

We do, the equipment available to us is exquisite, reasonable (in most cases) and taking a good photo is as easy as it's ever been. I am so delighted that I can pick up the cameras I lusted after as a boy for seemingly very little and that I can indulge my new found love of film still.

 

[RichC]

I agree with Dogman - the choice and quality of camera equipment today allows us to pretty much photograph what we want, whatever the situation.

As for the old chestnut of ephemeral digital images, it's now about two decades since digital camera started to become commonplace, and many people I know still have all their digital photos, even from then - if they've made a point of saving them (and I don't mean with a fancy back-up system but something basic like copying data from their old machine to a new one).

Yes, files are deleted, or lost when a computer dies. But how many negatives and slides have been ruined by being kept in attics or cellars, assuming they're not thrown out at some stage?

What I'm saying is that all photos - film and digital - can disappear forever, but can also be kept and stored to see the light again decades later.

I do have a fancy back-up system, but I ignored that. For this photo I rummaged in an old drawer and found a CD labelled "France - Brittany 2000". (This was from my very first digital camera - a 2 MP Fuji that used AA batteries!) Despite stories of rotting CDs, this was fine despite being untouched for 19 years almost to the day. My friends are in their 20s in it, but are now close to turning 50...

As an aside, generation Z born in the 90s and grew up using laptops, phones and digital cameras know all about how to keep their files safe, and use cloud services working automatically in the background as a given.

 

[Archiver]

The funny thing is, at every point in history, people look at advancements and improvements and think how lucky they are. People in the days of the M3 would certainly have sung its praises. Olympus OM users would love their tiny SLR's vs the chunky Minolta SR-T cameras. I was thrilled when I got my first digital camera, a 4 megapixel Canon with a 35mm equivalent zoom lens. Tech has plateaued a bit, and cameras from the last ten years are still eminently usable and comparable to those of today. We are fortunate at every stage of the way.

 

[Archiver]

I do have a fancy back-up system, but I ignored that. For this photo I rummaged in an old drawer and found a CD labelled "France - Brittany 2000". (This was from my very first digital camera - a 2 MP Fuji that used AA batteries!) Despite stories of rotting CDs, this was fine despite being untouched for 19 years almost to the day. My friends are in their 20s in it, but are now close to turning 50...

As an aside, generation Z born in the 90s and grew up using laptops, phones and digital cameras know all about how to keep their files safe, and use cloud services working automatically in the background as a given.

That's incredibly cool about those images from 2000. Unfortunately, I've lost a batch or two or images from CD's that have died, not to mention a heap of files. This made me migrate everything to harddrives which get updated every couple of years.


Mum and Dad gave me my first camera in the 80s, but they now back up everything on harddrives. Dad's collection is even on a RAID server with remote access, so we can see his images anywhere in the world! Dad's always been at the edge of tech, haha.

 

[Archiver]

We do, the equipment available to us is exquisite, reasonable (in most cases) and taking a good photo is as easy as it's ever been. I am so delighted that I can pick up the cameras I lusted after as a boy for seemingly very little and that I can indulge my new found love of film still.

The advance of tech means that old gear is becoming affordable much faster. The original 5D sells for about $550 AUD and the Mark II for a few hundred more. They take images which still hold up now; I still use my 5D II for photos when clients want them. Mattias Burling on YouTube has many videos about the great bargains to be found in digital cameras. And yet film Leicas in good condition still cost thousands.

 

[Michael Markey]

I agree with Dogman .
Great bargains to be had on cameras which we could only dream about a few years ago.
The technology makes it easy to store and share .
I shot Kodachrome exclusively for thirty years .
They`re all loaded up on the Leica trays but its much more convenient and sociable to view and share them now that they`ve been scanned and are stored on a hard drive.

Oh , and don`t dismiss hard drives as a means of long term storage.
I recently heard of a photographer who lost all his negs in a house fire.
The hard drives survived.