Big thoughts

[earleygallery]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Blimey, how can a thread about a quite simple question be turned into this?!

 

I'm sure the cost of a flight from Europe to Africa will keep a whole village in food for a generation, clearly no one should ever go there!

 

What is it with the forum these days? Virtually every thread gets hijacked by someone who will argue their misguided point ad infinitum until everyone else gives up and gives them the satisfaction of having the last say. I'd love to see this thread as a conversation down the pub..........

 

Sitting behind a keyboard seems to have the same effect on many people as sitting behind the steering wheel of certain types of car.

[Annibale G.]

Done all the stuff, cntacts, permission, ready to take interview.....

[stunsworth]

Done all the stuff, cntacts, permission, ready to take interview.....

 

Good luck, I hope it all works out - be sure to let us know how you get on.

[250swb]

I have claimed nothing of the sort. Please do not put words in my mouth.

 

And I'm not seeing very much ranting going on. Certainly not from this chair.

 

It is difficult putting words into your mouth Andy so I pat myself on the back for having a go. Neither yourself, Bill, or Steve have contributed anything to this thread so there is a distinct lack of concrete material, its like trying to get a hold of fog.

 

You all rode in guns blazing about what? Lets remember, it was the ironic idea that the cost of a film would feed a family. Lets remember this however, you started on the moral crusade, you will find my comments were pragmatic and that I have never even once used the word moral or moralistic relating to the use of film or digital.

 

So you could flesh out what it is that you are saying, then I wouldn't get into the bind of mis-quoting you. As it stands it seems like the blazing guns of the three amigo's were all filled with blanks because I haven't got a clue what it is that any of you are for or against (besides Bill riding to the rescue of a damsel in distress).

 

Steve

[stunsworth]

You all rode in guns blazing about what? Lets remember, it was the ironic idea that the cost of a film would feed a family.

 

And as several people have pointed out a digital camera would feed them for a year. That's why I'm struggling to see the point you're trying to make - unless it's that Annibale should take a pencil and a sheet of paper and draw them as the cheapest option.

 

If you knew anything about Tina for example you'd know that her photography has helped raise far more money for people in Central America than the cost of the equipment she had used, and had directly helped to put food on people's tables.

[bill]

Done all the stuff, cntacts, permission, ready to take interview.....

 

Good luck Annibale; just ignore the "static" and do let us know how you get on.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[250swb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

And as several people have pointed out a digital camera would feed them for a year. That's why I'm struggling to see the point you're trying to make - unless it's that Annibale should take a pencil and a sheet of paper and draw them as the cheapest option.

 

?

 

No my point was made in post #16 as you well know, or should have known before assuming so much in your cherry picking foray.

 

But I still don't know what you are on about? It seems it must be something to do with the need to exhibit to other photographers artistic credentials (in this case by using film) which take precedence over other considerations? And the 'other considerations' in this case would be cost, ease of travel, ease of dissemination and handling, and ease of getting the pictures to the outside world. I mean I am still struggling here to understand why you and your amigo's jumped in so vociferously.

 

As for Tina and Annibale (and many other photographers) it is fortunate for a lot of people they are the ones 'in the field' doing the hard work.

 

Steve

[Lucklik]

you need to be competitive. Forget 'art' and your own favourite medium.

 

 

You need to be competitive: Yes I agree

 

Forget 'art': Why should you?

Forget your favourite medium is like asking a painter to use another medium

 

I was an early digital adapter but I now shoot much more film digital. Because I feel more comfortable with film. I still shoot digital (DSLR) when I need to deliver the pictures fast but I always have the feeling those pictures are not as good as my film (M) pictures. But I not sure I'm objective. ;-)

 

There's a very interesting article about Salgado in Reponses Photo Hors serie 10 in which he explains why and how he went from Pentax 645 to Canon EOS 1Ds mark III.

He had to take 30kg of film

Sometimes they went to many times through the xray at the airports (120 film is not protected by a metal cannister)

To get the same look with his Canon compared to his Pentax (and Leica's before) was not easy.

After getting the (micro) contrast and all the greys good

Digital Tri-X grain is added and the pictures are transfered to 4x5'' to be able to deliver analogue barryt for the collectors.

 

Annibale I if you feel comfortable with digital and you can afford 2 bodies, digital might be the best way. However I learned that digital is not as cheap as it looks it is not only the cameras, but also new lenses (shift focus etc.) a bigger and faster computer, software .... and after a few years they are al outdated and you have to invest again.

[250swb]

You need to be competitive: Yes I agree

 

Forget 'art': Why should you?

Forget your favourite medium is like asking a painter to use another medium

 

 

Quite so, but thats why I followed it up by suggesting that when he has more experience with picture editors, and can command his own fees and even be sponsored for projects (like Salgado) he could unlock the cupboard to his film camera again.

 

But its a good point about digital having hidden costs, but then so has film if you were starting out fresh. Nowadays at the very least you have lab and scanning costs, which could be hiked with the need for a wet darkroom of your own. And don't forget to take time into the cost structure. Scanning for instance isn't fast, so somebody pays, either in the photographers time, or a technician, but either way its not many newsdesks that are going to cough up for it. The crucial thing at the begining of a career is to be both unsentimental and hard headed enough to decide when the best time is to take the hit in setup costs of a new medium. Once done it would hopefully then be a case of evolution without any further revolution, just like using film is.

 

Steve