AlanG Posted November 12, 2010 Share #81 Posted November 12, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying... Thoughtfulness is important in all activities. The best way to maintain one's faculties through life is to exercise the mind. Mindless activity leads to decay. We live in an increasingly mindless world; people need to think more, not less, and if that means shaving with a straight razor or engaging in thoughtful photography (film or digital), so be it. Not that I'm a lover of politicians. I had a psychology class where the professor said that having mindless routines was an important stress reliever in life. If you have to think about and decide everything you do every time you will be overwhelmed by choices and decisions. Try making a change to each and every thing you normally do every day and see how stressful all that thinking can be. Your shaving is just substituting a simple routine with a more complex one. People do things like this all the time - grind the coffee beans, filter the water, etc. Japanese tea rituals also come to mind. The point of these has nothing to do with thinking. And of course it can be beneficial to the mind to break with routines periodically. So shave electric once in a while too. That way you'll appreciate the smooth shave of the razor even more. As long as you aren't washing your hands a hundred times a day, you're OK. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 12, 2010 Posted November 12, 2010 Hi AlanG, Take a look here Young people and film. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
twittle Posted November 12, 2010 Share #82 Posted November 12, 2010 I had a psychology class where the professor said that having mindless routines was an important stress reliever in life. Come now... Do you really think I was implying the mind requires constant activity...? It seems you post purely to be contrary... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted November 12, 2010 Share #83 Posted November 12, 2010 Why do you jump into every "film" thread with your digital viewpoint Alan? Just wondering. Mostly its for the sense of love I feel from everyone here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted November 12, 2010 Share #84 Posted November 12, 2010 Come now... Do you really think I was implying the mind requires constant activity...? It seems you post purely to be contrary... Sorry, I didn't mean it that way. But the example you gave of shaving is not really what you were talking about either it seems. Each of us has little things we do that others don't necessarily do. I agree we need more thoughtfulness. But I get by with instant coffee and a 5 blade safety razor. When it comes to photography, some people put out maximum effort all the time whether they shoot film or digitally. And most do not. I have my ups and downs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted November 12, 2010 Share #85 Posted November 12, 2010 I doubt you actually respect me; after all, I don't think I've done anything on this message board that demands or even timidly requests respect... Well, most of the time you make as much sense as anyone else here, including me - whether I agree with every detail or not. I consider that worthy of some respect. My only regret is having to address you as "twittle" - which somehow sounds as if I were berating the butler. But such is the anonymity of the Web. Besides which, you said "Thanks" for my long post #62 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archiver Posted November 12, 2010 Share #86 Posted November 12, 2010 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... In the 80's I bought dozens of Sony chrome cassette tapes. I still have many of them, along with a mid-80's Nakamichi tape deck which I must get repaired at some stage. I need to be able to play this stuff! For some time I used Minidisc and later Hi-MD, but now everything I record is in high bitrate mp3, wma or flac, depending on the device/program. I recorded a few concerts on MD and Hi-MD, but they do not compare to the ease of an Olympus or Sony digital wav recorder, much like how digital cameras are far easier to manage, output-wise, than film. I started with digital and only went to film after (gasp) looking at Lomo images. I went for a year of shooting about 3-4 rolls of film a month, and now only shoot about one roll over a number of months, and the rest is with the M9 and various other digital cameras. Last week I was walking around a street market in Brisbane, and I saw a young guy with a Canon AE-1. Not sure if he had just bought it or was taking photos with it. A few years ago I saw a girl in her early twenties taking photos with a Minolta SLR in a museum exhibition. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
twittle Posted November 12, 2010 Share #87 Posted November 12, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) the example you gave of shaving It wasn't my example, it was chrism's. I agree we need more thoughtfulness. That's probably the only victory I'll get, so I'll take it. Well, most of the time you make as much sense as anyone else here, including me - whether I agree with every detail or not. I consider that worthy of some respect. Well at least I'm not on the back end of the curve. And thank you. My only regret is having to address you as "twittle" - which somehow sounds as if I were berating the butler. But such is the anonymity of the Web. Maybe I shouldn't be so paranoid... By the way, we've met. Very briefly at the original M9 event in SLC with Linda. Besides which, you said "Thanks" for my long post #62 It was a good post. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Heather Posted November 12, 2010 Share #88 Posted November 12, 2010 I am not super young(mid 30's gasp!) but have gone back to film. I have waffle a bit about digital and will probably get another digital camera someday, but had too many problems which you are all likely familiar with. I would say with lomo and all old things being cool again the kids will want to try it out. Plus, digital photography has made more people interested in photography because the hassles of film are no more. My husband's daughter is 16 and is already taking great photos and is using semi pro digital slrs. All her friends have digital slrs and it seems par for the course for teenagers to have dslr's that they really aren't old enough or responsible enough to have. They got dropped, broken, lost, forgotten and many don't know how to use them. However, many of them are taking awesome pictures. When I was younger I wasn't even allowed to use my mom's cameras! She also had a dark room and I wanted to learn. I never got an slr for my birthdays although I asked every year. So I just shot with random point and shoot cameras. One issue that comes up for younger photographers especially is environmental footprint. Digital cameras are obsolete quickly, the companies are always coming out with the next latest thing, newest pixels, latest tricks...all which lead to a massive waste stream. digital cameras also require alot of bits and elements. Then they are tossed aside. Film and development requires chemicals etc but a well made film camera could last a lifetime or more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archiver Posted November 12, 2010 Share #89 Posted November 12, 2010 One issue that comes up for younger photographers especially is environmental footprint. Digital cameras are obsolete quickly, the companies are always coming out with the next latest thing, newest pixels, latest tricks...all which lead to a massive waste stream. digital cameras also require alot of bits and elements. Then they are tossed aside. Film and development requires chemicals etc but a well made film camera could last a lifetime or more. Many times I have seen the opinion that a well made film camera can conceivably last a lifetime, and the aspect of longevity is what made me buy a M7. While it has electronics, Leica claim that they will continue to keep parts for any given camera for 30 years after its discontinuation. Whether that will actually happen remains to be seen, but a film camera contains far less bits and pieces that can get fried over time, compared with a digital camera. I baby the heck out of my M9 but am more confident with my M7. I can imagine continuing with photography for the rest of my life, which is at least another 50-60 years. In that time I will own many more cameras, but as long as 35mm film is produced, I'll always have a nice selection of film cameras to shoot with. In time I may get a MP, as its totally mechanical nature makes it virtually future-proof. Long live film! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clearlight Posted November 12, 2010 Share #90 Posted November 12, 2010 Long before digital, I didn't consider people who casually shot film and took it to a one hour lab to be "real" photographers. Sorry. And with digital photography, there is much more of this same attitude because it requires even less commitment. Just shooting film today may say something about you, but what do you want that to be? I'd rather see a few really good film photographers than a bunch of mediocre ones. There's plenty of mediocrity to go around. Give everyone a Holga and there will instantly be a lot more "artists" I'm sure. Alan, you are being elitist! Many people on this forum shoot film for fun and fulfilment. They do not intend to produce works of art (though some may well be doing so). "Mediocre" photographers are still enjoying their hobby and really should not be excluded from photography as you seem willing to advocate. Photography is an unusual area. Often the difference between professional and amateur is one of money - contrast this with other fields of endeavour (such as medicine). Amateur photographers are often every bit as able as their professional brethren; the method they use to get their results, and the joy obtained in doing so, are their reasons to continue. It is a craft to the amateur, it is work to the professional. If the amateur's results are "mediocre" then so be it; it is their business how they spend their time. Incidentally, what hobbies do you have? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill Posted November 12, 2010 Share #91 Posted November 12, 2010 Photography is an unusual area. Often the difference between professional and amateur is one of money - contrast this with other fields of endeavour (such as medicine). Amateur photographers are often every bit as able as their professional brethren; the method they use to get their results, and the joy obtained in doing so, are their reasons to continue. It is a craft to the amateur, it is work to the professional. If the amateur's results are "mediocre" then so be it; it is their business how they spend their time. I would endorse this wholeheartedly. The point I would take the time to add is that there are many who call themselves "professional" whose work is sub-par compared to that of many amateurs. The only true difference is whether or not (you choose) to make a living at it. A small anecdote; a friend of a friend of mine "turned professional" a few years ago, offering his services as a wedding photographer. In what was his first year of operation, I shot more weddings - as favours or as "wedding presents" - than he did. He is in all likelihood a better photographer than I am, but he had no presence, no "patter" and no marketing skills. I attended one wedding he shot and it was a disaster - nobody listened to him, the photos took forever, he came across as not in control and in the end he didn't even achieve his agreed shoot list because people got impatient and left for the reception. Each wedding I attended resulted in a request or a suggestion to do another; I made money from prints and albums to friends and relatives - but I really couldn't be arsed to turn it into my day job. It's worth pointing out here that that is the whole point of my "Gentleman Amateur" subscript; like the cricketers of the Edwardian era, I do not make my living from my pastime; I am therefore a "Gentleman Amateur" as opposed to a "Professional Player". The most famous of this ilk was of course WG Grace, who it is said made more money as an "amateur" than many of those who were waged "professionals". As in cricket, so in life. The MCC defined the difference thus: "A gentleman ought not to make any profit from playing cricket." I am happy to make a few bob along the way each year from print and book sales, but it would bore me rigid and leech the fun from it to have to get up on a Monday morning and treat my photography as a profession. Anyway, HCB didn't print his own, so why should we? Apologies - I realise that I have contributed to taking this thread off-topic. Getting back on track, I was in town yesterday for the Armistice Day service. There were a number of people wandering around with cameras. I counted nearly a dozen "serious" cameras - by which I mean an advanced compact up to something with an interchangeable lens. The split between digital and film was 60-40 in favour of digital, but all bar one of the film users was below 30. Regards, Bill Regards, Bill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmas Posted November 12, 2010 Share #92 Posted November 12, 2010 Incidentally, what hobbies do you have? Hi Sticking a smily in a pointed question does not alter the edge on the blade of the sword... Noel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanG Posted November 12, 2010 Share #93 Posted November 12, 2010 Alan, you are being elitist! Many people on this forum shoot film for fun and fulfilment. They do not intend to produce works of art (though some may well be doing so). "Mediocre" photographers are still enjoying their hobby and really should not be excluded from photography as you seem willing to advocate. Photography is an unusual area. Often the difference between professional and amateur is one of money - contrast this with other fields of endeavour (such as medicine). Amateur photographers are often every bit as able as their professional brethren; the method they use to get their results, and the joy obtained in doing so, are their reasons to continue. It is a craft to the amateur, it is work to the professional. If the amateur's results are "mediocre" then so be it; it is their business how they spend their time. Incidentally, what hobbies do you have? You took my statement entirely the wrong way. If you get fun out of it for any reason, that is good. But to think that the simple act of shooting film instead of digital will raise mediocrity (including mine) to a higher level is not likely, unfortunately. And there is nothing wrong with simply liking to use a specific "favorite" film camera either. I am elitist in the view that if you really want to take pride in your work, you have to put out a major effort. So if someone is going to say that film is more satisfying than digital that will probably require more than casual photography to be appreciated by others as a valid point. Good film photography requires a dedication to the craft that hopefully is not lacking by its strongest proponents. Otherwise, since digital is generally easier and cheaper, what is there about film photography besides the craftsmanship and personal expression to promote? As for the pro vs amateur thing. This has nothing to do with appreciating film or digital. Professional photographers simply have a whole host of issues that don't come up in amateur photography. These issues generally drive what they do whereas amateurs are liberated to do whatever they want. Which is precisely why you should print your own pictures to keep the tradition alive. You'll find a lot of satisfaction there too. I can play the piano rather terribly and nobody will call me a pianist. (I do it because I have to and get absolutely no enjoyment from it.) Brain surgery is still just a hobby for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clearlight Posted November 12, 2010 Share #94 Posted November 12, 2010 Alan, Brain surgery is easy compared to other aspects of medicine Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmas Posted November 12, 2010 Share #95 Posted November 12, 2010 Otherwise, since digital is generally easier and cheaper, what is there about film photography besides the craftsmanship and personal expression to promote? The answers the need for less propaganda i) Film photography is cheaper, you would expect that as 2nd hand kit is bound to be cheaper, some is free, but people believe the propaganda of the retail industry... Cine short ends or contents of some ones fridge, cheap to free. A SLR from 60-70 cheap or free, my Exakta IIa 25 GBP, from a shop. Processing equipment free. If you consider real cameras a M2 is 400-500 GBP in shops a M9 new 4999 ish, it will increase with VAT in new year. The lenses are similar but you are unlikely to detect focus shift with a M2, and need to send lenses back to Solms. Frequently my M2 gets left out in rain... have to wipe it with sleeve while changing film, try that or indeed any repair with an M9, or DSLR. My running costs are filing envelopes and RODINAL @ 1:100, plastic containers of hypo, printing paper (RC), etc. The M2 I bought ex a photo college for 75 GBP in '72, needed serviced for 75 GBP in '77, is sale-able for 1000+ today, any of your dcams holding their price? ii) To use digital I'd need to read a manual like this web book has, never bothered to read the M2 user manual. I'd need to learn photoshop? Digital is more immediate, instant gratification or indication of failure. You don't need to load film into camera, just a card. but the film is less likely to burn highlights. Noel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted November 12, 2010 Share #96 Posted November 12, 2010 You won't sell an M2 for £1,000+ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clearlight Posted November 12, 2010 Share #97 Posted November 12, 2010 You won't sell an M2 for £1,000+ Noel has his ways Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmas Posted November 12, 2010 Share #98 Posted November 12, 2010 Hi Andy '58 original Black Paint, brassing, dinks, some non original parts How much you think then?. Noel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clearlight Posted November 12, 2010 Share #99 Posted November 12, 2010 Hi Andy '58 original Black Paint, brassing, dinks, some non original parts How much you think then?. Noel One on ebay at the moment for £908 with a day to go. If only ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmas Posted November 12, 2010 Share #100 Posted November 12, 2010 Hi Very few of them will have all original parts, some will be counterfeits... Noel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.