Young people turning to film

[softshock]

Wait, film is cheaper than digital?! It hasn't been for me! =P

KM-25, any chance you'd want to sell some of the HIE at a more reasonable price than the eBay crowd?

 

[Haigh]

One of our universities here teaches both digital and darkroom printing and the professor there said the youngsters just love the darkroom.

 

[Haigh]

I know from my trips to Tokyo that Yodabishi in Shinjuku is a dangerous place for a photographer as a short spell in there with all those goodies, and you might not have anything left in your wallet.

 

[xwhatsit]

piddle away on my mechanical keyboard

Hah, now there's a poll idea! Correlation between mechanical keyboards and film users.

Buckling springs all the way. Brand new, 122 keys, courtesy of Unicomp. Feels exactly like a 1980s IBM Model M, though!

Had to buy it to save my wrists and fingers. I'm a software developer and although I haven't been doing it long (I'm still in my 20s -- is that "Young people" enough for this thread?) I was starting to feel it.

I never owned a digital camera, although obviously I grew up with them. I bought a film rangefinder simply because I loved the mechanical side of the camera. Didn't take many rolls before I loved the look and feel of what I was getting. So I thought I should give photography some respect and time and now work hard to try and capture some nice photographs too. I also fell in love with the process of analogue photography, and started printing too.

I think the real appeal to me (and those I know who choose analogue photography) is the fun. "Young people" get bored. Analogue photography is just that much more fun, to an amateur. All those emulsions; dozens of different B&W "looks", there's colour negative, slides even! (Gosh, girlfriend bought a projector recently, what fun that was!). Then there's medium format -- folding cameras -- TLRs! It never ends.

And the delayed gratification gives you such a kick when the slides arrive in the post, or you pull the negs out of the tank. Not being a professional or a serious photographer, a hobby must be fun for it to last more than a year or so.

 

[Pikapig]

I uses a 400D and while waiting for the right timing(as well as saving up money) to move into a 5DMKII...i strayed....i got tempted to start one of those so called lomography camera and that was when i know that films still exist!

N from plastic cameras to SLR and then to old school rangefinder and finally embarking on the journey of rangefinders....i couldnt afford a leica and so i got myself a R2A. I do not understand why if there is a better and cheaper option to Leica why are there still lots of people waiting to own one so badly. haha

And i hope i will never know why..PLEASE!

Oh along the way i strayed to some TLR, medium format...i just love the view in the viewfinder of a TLR..

Till today, i still didnt save enough to get a 5DMKII...but i have gotten these!

 

[jonmanjiro]

I uses a 400D and while waiting for the right timing(as well as saving up money) to move into a 5DMKII...i strayed....i got tempted to start one of those so called lomography camera and that was when i know that films still exist!

N from plastic cameras to SLR and then to old school rangefinder and finally embarking on the journey of rangefinders....i couldnt afford a leica and so i got myself a R2A. I do not understand why if there is a better and cheaper option to Leica why are there still lots of people waiting to own one so badly. haha

And i hope i will never know why..PLEASE!

Oh along the way i strayed to some TLR, medium format...i just love the view in the viewfinder of a TLR..

Till today, i still didnt save enough to get a 5DMKII...but i have gotten these!

Hi Jackson, welcome to RFF. Your photographic journey is quite similar to mine. As much as I hate to admit it, the camera that started me on serious film photography was a Lomo LC-A 😱 I quickly outgrew it and upgraded to a Nikon FM3A. Then I bought lots of MF glass and took lots of photos. Then a few years later I saw a Nikon SP 2005, and it was love at first sight :bang:😀

 

[Pikapig]

Hi Jackson, welcome to RFF. Your photographic journey is quite similar to mine. As much as I hate to admit it, the camera that started me on serious film photography was a Lomo LC-A 😱 I quickly outgrew it and upgraded to a Nikon FM3A. Then I bought lots of MF glass and took lots of photos. Then a few years later I saw a Nikon SP 2005, and it was love at first sight :bang:😀

Hi Jon

Thanks for the welcome...looking forward to learn more from the hobbyist here more!

N great to have known u.😛

 

[user237428934]

I'm sorry to say, but I really don't get what's the big deal about people "turning back to film." Most people who use digital are awful photographers. Most people who use film are also awful photographers. These days, I see a lot of people talking about the superior "look" of film and yet, their composition and choice of subject matter is utter cr*p.

I used to shoot film. Now I shoot digital. To me, my digital work is much better than my film stuff, not because the mediums are so different, but because I feel that I have, with time and effort, grown as a photographer. I am now adding a medium format film camera to complement my existing setup. Will that in itself make me a better photographer? No, probably not. But experience and dedication hopefully will.

I don't really care when I see young people turn to film
I don't despair when I see old people turn to digital 😀
But I'm happy when I see that people make great photographs.

What a refreshing post in that dogmatic discussion.

 

[Yoricko]

I have boxes and boxes of bulk Tri-X.
I shoot 2.5 rolls a day on average.
Student budget not working well.

Anyways, I do think that more young people are shooting film because.. it is slightly unpredictable and a little more interesting than digital. Plus, a film camera is like a fashion accessory; I've seen people who just sling some random antique camera but never use it.

 

[MC JC86]

I'm sorry to say, but I really don't get what's the big deal about people "turning back to film." Most people who use digital are awful photographers. Most people who use film are also awful photographers. These days, I see a lot of people talking about the superior "look" of film and yet, their composition and choice of subject matter is utter cr*p.

I used to shoot film. Now I shoot digital. To me, my digital work is much better than my film stuff, not because the mediums are so different, but because I feel that I have, with time and effort, grown as a photographer. I am now adding a medium format film camera to complement my existing setup. Will that in itself make me a better photographer? No, probably not. But experience and dedication hopefully will.

I don't really care when I see young people turn to film
I don't despair when I see old people turn to digital 😀
But I'm happy when I see that people make great photographs.

I count myself amongst the ranks of those whose work is "utter crap". I enjoy the process and just about everything involved with analog photography and analog photography equipment. I also get excited when I see people my age turning to film, it gives a little assurance that the medium I want to work in will stick around in it's present state for a bit longer.

 

[dave lackey]

I have boxes and boxes of bulk Tri-X.
I shoot 2.5 rolls a day on average.
Student budget not working well.

Anyways, I do think that more young people are shooting film because.. it is slightly unpredictable and a little more interesting than digital. Plus, a film camera is like a fashion accessory; I've seen people who just sling some random antique camera but never use it.

Love it!🙂🙂🙂

 

[berlincontemporary]

I've seen people who just sling some random antique camera but never use it.

Hard to believe...

 

[dave lackey]

I have boxes and boxes of bulk Tri-X.
I shoot 2.5 rolls a day on average.
Student budget not working well.

Anyways, I do think that more young people are shooting film because.. it is slightly unpredictable and a little more interesting than digital. Plus, a film camera is like a fashion accessory; I've seen people who just sling some random antique camera but never use it.

Actually, this is no different than people who own antique/collector cars and never drive them. Besides, a camera can function quite well as jewelry.😀

 

[Field]

Well this "trend" has made it pretty much impossible for me to get an M body. I wonder if I will ever get an eye-level standard black prism for my F body (for less than $1,3k).

I think it is much like vintage clothing. People wanted it because they could afford it originally, now everyone wants to charge them as much as they can because they buy it.

Digital is better for most of "work" since you can carry one camera that does it all instead of a bag of lenses and cameras that only take 36 shots. The ability in low light situations to push ISO into outer-space has got film's ass kicked. It has its place.

 

[Neare]

Digital is better for most of "work" since you can carry one camera that does it all instead of a bag of lenses and cameras that only take 36 shots. The ability in low light situations to push ISO into outer-space has got film's ass kicked. It has its place.

'Better' and 'Convenience' need to be separated. What is 'better' is simply subjective.
Saying one or the other is 'better' is how silly arguments start. :angel:

 

[Field]

Right I am looking at it objectively. Most jobs benefit from time efficiency except for people lucky enough to have photo jobs based on quality. Anyways I want to say cool-beans about young people (not that I am old yet) being interested but... The world is almost to the brim with mediocre media in all art forms already. I am not interested in everyone pretending to be more of a photographer than just enjoying being amateurish. Most of them would be better off with a P&S. We all know we could lie and tell people our P&S photos came from a $8,000 setup, and most would believe us. Besides even a lot of them that like to own old gear often just use digital anyways.

 

[segedi]

cameras that only take 36 shots

I prefer cameras that take only 10 or 12 shots...
My 35mm rangefinders hold onto 36 frames for days!

 

[dave lackey]

I prefer cameras that take only 10 or 12 shots...
My 35mm rangefinders hold onto 36 frames for days!

Heh, heh...yep. Takes me awhile to get 30 or so keepers on a single roll. Takes me a lot longer to get 30 from the digital spray and pray machine.😛 Plus the editing and archiving...

 

[meanstreetshooter]

Anyways, I do think that more young people are shooting film because.. it is slightly unpredictable and a little more interesting than digital. Plus, a film camera is like a fashion accessory; I've seen people who just sling some random antique camera but never use it.

I have never observed this. I usually see young people with their small digital cameras. Their version of our old "Instamatic" snapshot cameras. I still have mine, sitting inside the original hinged box, resting on a wooden camera center my Dad built. Also there is his Speed Graphic (ca. 1948).

Some young people never give me a second glance when I am using a Sunset Unittic (model 65) hand meter (ca. 1972) with my Leica M4 and Mamiya C330f (ca. 1972).

Am I at the wrong place at the wrong time?

 

[MC JC86]

I have never observed this. I usually see young people with their small digital cameras. Their version of our old "Instamatic" snapshot cameras.

Some young people never give me a second glance when I am using a Unittic Sunset hand meter (ca. 1972) with my Leica M4 and Mamiya C330f (ca. 1972).

Am I at the wrong place at the wrong time?

I think the number of "young people" who use film rather than digital and wouldn't list "photography" or some visual art as a hobby is close to 0.

The number of "young people" who use both film and digital, people who are dedicated to photography, seems to be growing.

Every 20-30 year old amateur photographer I know personally uses at least some film some of the time, even if their first camera was a DSLR.