Young people and film

[pop]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yet again, we're at a pivotal point in the history of picture making. Time will tell who will have made the grade and who will not.

 

Consider: At the point in time when photography was invented, quite a few painters had to meet the demand for life like depictions of - everything. Cameras had already been in use for quite some time for the less gifted or less patient painter to obtain a demonstrably exact likeness.

 

Enter the light sensitive medium. Now, reality could be relied upon to produce exact likenesses to any desired degree. That, in turn, freed the painting artist to pursue other avenues such as "mental" instead of "physical" perspectives, showing the physically impossible and so on.

 

It appears that right now the digital photography has reached a level where you some imaging professionals feel they have to justify their use of one over the other medium. That inherently separates photography into two separate but interconnected camps.

 

[/pompous old fool mode]

[twittle]

Does anyone know the workflow of current vinyl releases? Do they use analogue tape recorders in the studio and to create a master tape from which the master disc is cut, or is there a digital stage (in which case listening to a vinyl disk is the equivalent of looking at a wet print made from a digital image)? Or do they bravely and puristically record direct to the wax?

 

The answer is: it depends. There are still a few pure analogue recordings made, but even back in the 80s they were doing digital studio recordings and then pressing to vinyl. Pure analogue is rare now, but it does still exist. There's even the odd direct-to-vinyl recording made now and then, mainly jazz.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[masjah]

The answer is: it depends. There are still a few pure analogue recordings made, but even back in the 80s they were doing digital studio recordings and then pressing to vinyl. Pure analogue is rare now, but it does still exist. There's even the odd direct-to-vinyl recording made now and then, mainly jazz.

 

You might be able to find Sheffield Lab direct cut vinyl discs - I remember buying a couple back in the 70s!

[twittle]

You might be able to find Sheffield Lab direct cut vinyl discs - I remember buying a couple back in the 70s!

 

I think they only do CD now (if they're even still in business). Masterdisk in NY still does some all-analogue, but I don't think they do any direct-to-disk recording.

[stunsworth]

You might be able to find Sheffield Lab direct cut vinyl discs - I remember buying a couple back in the 70s!

 

The main problem with most of the direct cut discs that I heard were the performances - and I bought a few. Sonically they were almost all excellent, but because of the nature of the recording process they tended to play safe with not very demanding MOR arrangements.

[masjah]

The main problem with most of the direct cut discs that I heard were the performances - and I bought a few. Sonically they were almost all excellent, but because of the nature of the recording process they tended to play safe with not very demanding MOR arrangements.

 

Steve, the one I remember was Linton Mayorga playing the Brahms Handel Variations. Obviously a "jazz" pianist's performance, and, OMG, I've never heard the piece taken so fast! This one certainly wasn't playing safe!

[NZDavid]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

"It's no exaggeration to say that vinyl has experienced something of a resurgence in the last decade...." See: Audiophile LP Guide - the best vinyl releases for your high end hifi system

 

But as much as I like the sentiment that young people are enjoying using film, and I am sure a few will always like to experiment with different technologies, they are and are sure to remain a minority. I was chatting to high-school art, design and photography teacher the other night. She told me none of her students was using film. The main reason: cost, but also the risk of losing all their work in the darkroom. I could have mentioned the risk of losing all their work due to a computer snafu, but digital is definitely mainstream now.

[Vicente]

Semantics can determine whether there is a "resurgence" but I can attest to the fact that film definitely has its presence in the younger market whether its through "LOMOGRAPHY" or other vintage cameras... and better yet the Ms.

 

Regards,

Vicente 18

[frc]

FOR SALE: 8-channel TAPE recorder.

REAL VINTAGE

 

Now lets find an idiot that will buy it and is able to do the maintenance.

Here is the BIG difference between Photography and audio recording. An old well built slr or crf usually work for many years. A tape recorder needs constant cleaning and adjusting from the moment the thing starts working. The use of such a device is much more of a barrier in the creative process than a film still camera.

 

Sorry for the digital pic ( Elmar 60 on D200 ).

My MP with Summicron 50 is now in permanent use with my 19 years old son. For him it's film imaging only, digital audio recording only. Turn table enthousiast though. The Nikon dslr and M9 are both not of his liking. His worst con, a heavy smart phone addiction.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Jaybob]

I have MANY LP's , but in reality I've always been more of a tapehead. Not reel to reel though, that takes commitment...I'm talking about Nakamichi, Maxell cassettes, and the 1980's.

 

Unopened metal and chrome cassette tapes are easy to get on the Bay, but they can be pretty expensive. They don't make 'em any more...

 

Blank Tapes items - Get great deals on Blank Tapes CDs, Accessories Cables items on eBay.com!

 

Instantly recognizable to anyone whoever recorded an LP to play in the car, a tape from 1982, like the one pictured, new and still sealed, can go from anywhere from $25 to $50 or more.

 

I'm experiencing a "gotta shoot that 8 rolls of cold Kodachome that I have left" film resurgence as we speak.

 

Jay

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[giordano]

I think the last few points rather prove my point: that it's a false analogy to bracket film with vinyl audio discs and digital imaging with digital audio.

 

If anyone want an audio analogy to film vs digital, it's surely analogue tape vs digital - and if you want better-than-CD quality you can forget about cassettes adn

 

 

It's relevant that people have never been able to cut and press vinyl discs at home (OK, I'm sure there are a handful of eccentrics with the equipment in their sheds, but you know what I mean). The best photographic analogy I can think of to LP vs CD is photogravure (or maybe the best web offset) vs inkjet.

[AlanG]

The main reason: cost, but also the risk of losing all their work in the darkroom. I could have mentioned the risk of losing all their work due to a computer snafu, but digital is definitely mainstream now.

 

About ten years ago, all of the film I shot over about a years time (around 1,000 rolls) was ruined because the "pro" lab did not stabilize it properly. It looked fine at first. What happened is that it turned green and faded somewhat over the subsequent year. The lab had used Kodak E6 chemicals but with a final step from Fuji instead of the Kodak stabilizer. The lab felt this let the film dry cleaner. But Fuji had moved the stabilizer into an earlier stage of its processing. I had called Kodak and described the images and they told me this is what the lab must have done. The lab confirmed it to me.

 

So if it weren't for the fact that I had scanned many of these images, I would have lost a year's worth of work and many personal images including those from a trip to China and Tibet.

[Nick De Marco]

Bill is absolutely right.

 

I was wandering around Covent Garden yesterday and saw a trendy cloths shop full of Lomos and Holgas in the window. Then I went to the art shop and saw piles of Lomos and Holgas selling. Saw the same in Paris in arty/trendy places. These simple and cheap, and good fun cameras, have done a lot to get young creatives back into film. So much so, in fact, that I was slightly annoyed yesterday to get a message from a youth commenting on a self portrait with a beloved Rollei TLR saying, "nice camera, it's a Holga right" (!)

[twittle]

new and still sealed, can go from anywhere from $25 to $50 or more.

 

I hadn't thought about cassettes in ages until I saw your post. It jogged my memory, and I realized I've got 3 unused Sony Metal Masters at home. I googled them to see what they might be going for... I think I paid between $15 and $18 each back in the early '90s. Found some currently in the US for $50, and some in Europe for a whopping 79€! Wow! Who'd have thought tapes would actually appreciate in value so much (or at all)?

[Clearlight]

For a recent birthday, my daughter asked for a Lomo fisheye camera. She said that all her friends were using them

[Xmas]

Hi

 

Many PJ students are only getting an abstract view of film, their colleague does not have a film camera. Some colleagues don't have a single lens with a focus ring and depth of field scale. The see power point slides, and photos with depth of field.

 

If you want to buy a camera as a present for nephew unless you are a film fanatic the shop will only have digital cameras....

 

Plate photography went the same way, yes Sally Mann uses it but who else.

 

Noel

[j. borger]

Hi

Plate photography went the same way, yes Sally Mann uses it but who else.

 

Noel

 

Flickr: Tintypes, ambrotypes, Wet-plate Collodion photographs

[MPJMP]

I play the electric guitar and see many analogies between guitar gear and film gear and how old and new technologies peacefully co-exist.

 

Take the "echo" delay effect. You can hear it applied to the guitar sound on most of those 1950's rock and roll recordings from guys like Elvis and Gene Vincent. They got that effect with a machine that is basically a modified tape recorder with a special kind of cassette tape in it. The tape distorts each repeat, but in a pleasing way that adds a unique character to the guitar's sound: kind of a bright, ethereal warble. Then in the 70's, they figured out they could get the same effect with a solid state chip. It also distorted the repeats, but in a different way: darker and smoother, with each repeat getting fuzzier than the last. In the 80's the effect went digital, and finally the echo repeats were precise, exact reproductions of the original note. But then in the 90's an interesting thing happened. People got sick of digital delay and yearned for the imperfect, gritty sounds of the old analog and tape echo machines. Digital delay was seen as "cold" and "sterile." The older analog and tape delays had "character" and "warmth." The vintage market took off and now that old tape echo box in your grandfather's attic was worth big money. The analog delay you bought for $15 at a pawn shop 10 years ago was now going for a few hundred on eBay. Boutique manufacturers began producing their own updated versions of the old analog and tape delay effects. Major manufacturers started re-issuing their long discontinued analog delay effects. Ironically, digital had to play catch-up with the older technologies and eventually manufacturers released digital delays that were designed to simulate analog and tape delays from the past. Now, in the 2000's, it is not unusual for manufacturers to offer both digital and analog delay products and for guitar players to have both types avaialble to them. They are seen as different tools that produce different artistic results. The same applies to other music gear such as amplifiers, effects, keyboards.

 

I see the same thing happening with film. As the younger generation comes along they will be attracted to film precisely because yields a different look than digital. It was used by all of the classic photographers of the 20th Century. Just like a guitarist wanting to capture the vibe of a 1960's recording will seek out gear from that era (or modern gear that approximates it), photographers in the future will turn to film when they want to emulate the feel of famous photographers like HCB, Winogrand, etc. Digital simulations of film will get better and better, but many will prefer to use the real thing. Discontinued films may be revived, or at least production of current emulsions increased. Prices on classic film cameras will go up and companies that haven't made a digital camera in years will re-issue classic models from their past to meet the demand of a growing "vintage photography" market segment.

 

At least that's what my crystal ball is telling me. Darn thing hasn't worked right in years.

[pico]

I wish that our students were interested in film, but they are entirely and officially discouraged. Our university darkrooms were removed years ago and the Journalism department chair is adamant about disallowing any analog developing equipment. Funny, but she has a PhD in journalism and MFA in photography, but hasn't made a picture in twenty years. Further, the Art department refuses to include photography. What a hostile environment! Go figure.

 

When I retire, probably next year, I might set up a darkroom downtown and include everything up to 8x10" enlrgers (which I have - a Saltzman monster.)

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Bo_Lorentzen]

Sooo. back to the OP.

 

While I don't particularly think digital is entirely dead as yet. it IS encouraging to see a number of younger photographers pick up film, I don't think this means that they are done with digital, though if it does that is fine too.

 

This is probably a much better sign than being done with digital, as it is probably a sign that young and new photographers is experimenting with the medium. That is a great thing as it means they are taking this serious enough to dig into it and explore.

 

Way to go.

 

.