Younger film users?

Perhaps classic SLR use hasn't been as blatantly hipsterized as lomography has, but I think there is a funky/retro type of appeal there. Nice cameras with lenses are often available for shockingly low prices, next to nothing really. That makes them more accessible, and might also add a bit of thrift store chic to them. I certainly know people who would commonly classified as hipsters that have gone this route.
 
I've not noticed it either - though I keep an eye out for odd cameras. The oddest so far was probably the black Polaroid SX-70 at St Giles Fair - the lass using it was very nice over me making a prat of myself by not recognising it! In my defence, I'd only ever seen pictures of the silver version, so the black one was completely new to me.

You do see the odd person, though. There was a chap with an FM2 at Cropredy this year, I ran into two Spanish tourists at the Sheldonian sporting an OM10, good conversation starter as I was carrying mine as well, and I chatted with a chap with a Contaflex last week. One half od the spaniards, and the young lady with the SX-70, would definitely count as young, and I saw a lass of about 20 on May morning using a Kiev she'd bought in Oxfam a week or two before. So they are out there! Chat to the next one you see - it might be me, especially if I'm using a box camera. But I'm probably not that young anymore...

Adrian

mcgrattan said:
Sitting by the river late one night a succession of girls -- part of a tour party, or a bunch of friends, maybe -- stopped in front of us to take photos of one of the bridges, and of the five or six who stopped to take photos, more than half were shooting film slrs. These weren't recent EOS or Nikon models. They were classic compact chrome and black 1960s/1970s style things. Olympus OMs, Canon AE, Pentaxes, that sort of thing.

I've not noticed this quite so much in Oxford, but I think I tune the tourists out more here.
Click to expand...
 
I am 32 and started with digital which I still use, but increasingly I shoot film, Now there are many reasons for this. First film equipment is dead cheap and well built. Second, film slrs are a lot more compact than dslrs. As much as I like my D200, it is huge and heavy and I can get same or better quality with an om-10. Third- DOF apart from ultra expensive full frame DSLRs you can get much bette out of focus effects on film and wide angle lenses are a lot more distortion free I feel.
Last I don't think anything beats the colour rendition of Kodak Portra and the portraits I shoot in this film are in my opinion light years ahead on what I get on the D200.
As for film being hip, that doesn't really come into my equation.
 
I'm 25. I like the look. I prefer the generally smaller and less conspicuous cameras and faster lenses. In some situations I prefer them for their simplicity. I use both. Scanning film takes longer than editing RAW files and still doesn't look as good as the prints. If I want prints I usually shoot digital.

Cheers,
-Gautham
 
Being in the unique position of being an Instructor at one Art School (for kids 2-18) and a student at Emily Carr university I see two major reasons for young people liking film. One, the hipsters/scenesters/lomography crowd. Their alternative life style revolves around vintage, so there is a large, and growing, popularity to shoot classic SLRs ect. My students, who range from 9-18, all love the process of the darkroom, and seeing their prints come to life.

For me, I enjoy the work flow of film. I also enjoy film cameras, they're much more enjoyable to use than my DSLR. I also shoot alot of medium and large format, a process that I can't copy digitally, and I dont have 40,000 dollars lying around to drop on a Hd3 or the like.

All that said, digital has its place. When I'm shooting jobs I rarely use film. The process of digital lends it self very nicely to most forms of professional photography.

Oh yeah, I'm 21, been shooting for 7 years.
 
Films a different medium to digital that gives different results. I'm 21, use both. Mainly digital now as I'm a photographer in my own business. Love film though - have had m6/bessa r/heaps of slrs and soon will grab a bessa r2a for it's value with some sweet sweet zeiss m lenses.

People get all flustered up about the whole "film is dead" thing because of digital convenience, but I've found if they have a creative block and decide to put a roll through their fathers old film slr "just for fun" they are shocked and amazed at how good the results are.
 
I'm 36. I started taking an interest in photography about 6 years ago when I picked up an old Lubitel in Oxfam. So, I started on 120film, then got into rangefinders and 35mm, then into SLRs. I've only started shooting digital in the last year or so.

For me the initial interest was partly just the cost versus performance with old film cameras. That's narrowed now as digital comes down in price.

I wouldn't say I'm a hipster at all, but there is a certain aesthetic pleasure in using old/vintage equipment.
 
:eek::eek::eek: You are me!

OK, perhaps that's going a little far, but you're the same age, in the same place, and started on 120 at much the same time - I started with a Coronet box camera I'd had for years when I discovered some out-of-date 120 in a fridge at work. The closest I get to hip is what creaks when I play cricket, but I'll second the pleasure of using something that was old when I was born. The oldest, in fact, dates to about 1911.

Haven't actually gone digital yet, but thinking about it fairly hard now as there are things like document copying and camera dismantling where it really helps to have an instant replay of your photo.

Quality isn't really a factor, as someone gave me a Nikon F3 body, and someone else gave me a 55mm Micro-Nikkor lens to go with it :cool:.

Tell you what, I'll tell you what I'm likeliest to be spotted using and you tell me what you're likeliest to be using and then we can avoid each other - just in case we annhilate, like matter and anti-matter.

Adrian

mcgrattan said:
I'm 36. I started taking an interest in photography about 6 years ago when I picked up an old Lubitel in Oxfam. So, I started on 120film, then got into rangefinders and 35mm, then into SLRs. I've only started shooting digital in the last year or so.

For me the initial interest was partly just the cost versus performance with old film cameras. That's narrowed now as digital comes down in price.

I wouldn't say I'm a hipster at all, but there is a certain aesthetic pleasure in using old/vintage equipment.
Click to expand...
 
I put photography on a much higher level than cars, but first you by any old car that just works, then you decide you want something that is special. That is what film is: special.
 
Muggins,

The things I am mostly likely to be using: Leica IIIc, a Salyut-C and quite often a Pentax P50 [film slr].


I have other things but don't shoot them very often [a flexaret TLR, fuji medium format rangefinder]. I use my [k-mount Samsung] dSLR quite a bit, but more for family stuff.
 
You must have a better cashflow, or more dedication (or both!) than me. I reckon I'm more likely to be spotted with a Werra, a Welta Perle (I'm going to get a decent roll out of it if it kills me!), a Trip 35 or perhaps a box camera. I rarely take the SLRs (F3, OM10, Nikkormat) into town.

Now we can avoid annhilation! :D

Adrian
 
Yeah I am 26 (that is young right?) I started taking pictures with a dslr couple years ago but once my friend let me played with his Hasselblad, I am hooked with film. I just like the look of B&W film and because I am more involved with the processing, I felt a greater sense of ownership and satisfaction with the pictures too.

And I enjoy explaining to kids why there is no screen on the back of the Hassy and why they have to wait for awhile before seeing the pictures.... :)
 
I'm 35. I learned on film cameras in the early 90's, but lacking my own darkroom or the space to set up one, along with the costs of processing/printing and sub-par lab results, drove me to digital a few years back. I was fairly happy with my d70 for a while, but discovering film scanners, photo printers, and $3 film processing, which gives me 100% control over the final print, has brought me back to shooting almost all film. That and the cost difference in Pro level film bodies and pro level digital. I recently paid just $200 for a near mint Nikon F100. A comparable digital body would cost much, much more. I love the feel of my Canonet, or my FE in my hands. The weight and balance. I recently bought a Yashica Electro GS for $25. What digital can you get for that kind of price?

I have been noticing more old film cameras in the hands of younger (teens/20's) people here in L.A. lately. Hipster fad or not, I see it as a good thing. More film users means (hopefully) longer film production. I live near Freestyle Photo. Every time I go in there, it's packed with younger people buying film or photo papers. It's great.
 
Although, I'm not really younger or old either, I belong to a Philippine version of rangefinder forum. Most of the members there are in their early 20's and early 30's.

Personally I shoot exclusively digital with my commercial work and most of my family photos. (they like to see the results right away) But for my personal and fine art work, its range finder cameras and film. I really miss my darkroom which I had to give up for lack of space.
 
I don't know if this is typical,but the young photographers I know shoot both digital and film. In almost all the cases, they use film to give them something they can't get out of digital. Maybe it's large format giving them a quality that they can't get with the limitations their budget puts on buying digital gear. Maybe it's a small, compact camera that still gives them the final print quality of a full 35-mm negative.
 
I'm 24 and began to use film and came into "real" photography about one year ago. At first I used the fully automatic camera of my parents (Cosina built Porst) but not very soon after came across old screw Leicas which were too expensive (that's what I thought back then) and took a Fed-2 instead.

After realizing that bright-lines in the finder would be very nice, I looked around and found a Leica M4 for which I bought several FSU lenses then.

Now I shot about 30 to 50 rolls of film and have a big amount of them on my flickr page (more or less edited, of course) and develope the black&white stuff myself.
An own darkroom would be cool to have, but its a matter of space and time, being in the final stages of my university study (history major, two minor subjects) time is precious and I mostly read and will begin to write my Magister thesis soon.

Well, now you know some facts about me.
Why exactly I use film - I like to develope myself, see the results and the fact that it will most probably last longer than digital files. At least I hope so. :D And the combination of technical stuff, chemistry and vision attracts me somehow.

My two Euro cents.

*edito: And basically what Bill said above. I can not really afford a huge DSLR with cool lenses (above all I can not afford even "real" Leica lenses), but I really like the quality I can get out of 35mm film negatives. *
 
Last edited:
mcgrattan said:
I was in Prague earlier in the summer and noticed that a lot of the younger Japanese tourists were carrying film cameras. Often quite nice stuff -- classic SLRs, Hexar AFs, Contax T3s, that sort of thing. I didn't spot any rangefinders, though.
.

I've not noticed this quite so much in Oxford, but I think I tune the tourists out more here.
Click to expand...

Having spent many summers in Prague, going back to the Socialist money days, I have always been impressed by the local support for film photography. I spent five weeks in a studio near the Charles Bridge, owned by a well known Czech photgraher, and worked with two models, and two locals, one was a photographer, one wanted to be, and today is an excellent photographer in Seattle and wants a Bessa or Leica now, ;-).

People also seem to have fine photography hanging on the walls, and great exhibits there. Lots of places put up shows.

I hope you got your Gold FotoSkoda card. ;-)

Regards, John
 
Same here. I am an avid film user. Yes, there are times when I shoot digital a lot because it is easy... but given the facilties and chance to use film/develop... i love it. I really do.
 
My 16 y/o daughter will be taking photography at school and developing BW film, and is excited to be receiving a new film SLR.

Film lives.
 
Throw me in - 21 years old. I wanted top notch equipment and couldn't afford digital. While I might not exactly deserve the quality of a Leica in terms of my skill level I really do enjoy using it and I guess that's all that really matters to me.
The first day of my photo class at school I got a double take from the professor on my camera and then a "whoa...". It put a smile on my face.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom