Analog still best in some conditions

spacer · Jul 7, 2016

..?

I recently read a story about a war photographer in Afghanistan who had some trouble keeping up with his hardware's need for infrastructure: specifically, connectivity and a steady supply of electrons for his batteries and laptop computer. He had to take every opportunity he could to charge his equipment from generators and trucks as he could, and evidently spent a lot of his time doing that.

Sure, even so, he could get a bunch more exposures on digital than he would on film, but if he'd used a good film camera, I think he could have spent more time and concentration on getting good shots, rather than having to chase electrons. I'd still have a digital camera handy, for stuff that needs to be shot and distributed, like, RIGHT NOW... but having an older technology, less reliant on being on-grid, seems like it could be handy.

Sure, they're probably doing just fine, but I'd started writing a story about a guy, and I wanted to make analog photography more relevant and necessary for him. The easiest way to do that was to muck about with infrastructure, make it so he's prevented from having easy access to power, etc. so it becomes a semi-post-apocalyptic story (maybe a solar storm, EMP, official crackdown, etc.) with the main character taking it upon himself to record whatever he can for posterity.
As he can't use his pro digital gear so much anymore, he turns to his dusty old collection of film cameras and a pile of expired b&w film.

Just a pile of thoughts. I'm not trying to start a debate, just lookin' to toss something out for general discussion.

Slixtiesix · Jul 8, 2016

Sounds pretty interesting! Great that he will find the time to document this apocalyptic scenario albeit the urgent need for food and the casual zombie ;-)

rwreich · Jul 8, 2016

I've wondered the same thing. In 2015, I went to Honduras to document a group of people trying to bring sustainable clean water to remote villages. I was making a video, so there was no debate about which format I was taking. The whole time I was there, however, I was constantly aware of the fact that I was relying on battery power with zero chance that I'd be able to charge. I'd worked out a way to charge my batteries from relatively large cells designed to power laptop computers on the go. I also brought one terabyte of memory for the job, which would only hold eleven hours of recorded content. It left me thinking that I had not been able to focus on the subject 100% of the time.

So, in retrospect, if I ever get the chance to go back for stills, I think I'll decide to shoot film. I have plenty of cameras and meters that don't use batteries, anyway.

Jim Jones · Jul 8, 2016

In addition to camera and film, consider the need for a reasonably equipped darkroom. Improvising may be easier for analog than for digital photography, but still intimidating. Pencil and paper may be the best for recording the apocalypse. It may lack the verisimilitude of optical recording, but can capture the emotion better. Consider Francisco Goya's "The Disasters of War."

RalphLambrecht · Jul 8, 2016

spacer said:
..?

I recently read a story about a war photographer in Afghanistan who had some trouble keeping up with his hardware's need for infrastructure: specifically, connectivity and a steady supply of electrons for his batteries and laptop computer. He had to take every opportunity he could to charge his equipment from generators and trucks as he could, and evidently spent a lot of his time doing that.

Sure, even so, he could get a bunch more exposures on digital than he would on film, but if he'd used a good film camera, I think he could have spent more time and concentration on getting good shots, rather than having to chase electrons. I'd still have a digital camera handy, for stuff that needs to be shot and distributed, like, RIGHT NOW... but having an older technology, less reliant on being on-grid, seems like it could be handy.

Sure, they're probably doing just fine, but I'd started writing a story about a guy, and I wanted to make analog photography more relevant and necessary for him. The easiest way to do that was to muck about with infrastructure, make it so he's prevented from having easy access to power, etc. so it becomes a semi-post-apocalyptic story (maybe a solar storm, EMP, official crackdown, etc.) with the main character taking it upon himself to record whatever he can for posterity.
As he can't use his pro digital gear so much anymore, he turns to his dusty old collection of film cameras and a pile of expired b&w film.
We don't need to make up problems to prove that film has its place;his problem would have been easily solved by a solar panel recharger.
Just a pile of thoughts. I'm not trying to start a debate, just lookin' to toss something out for general discussion.

jvo · Jul 8, 2016

a new meme - use film, the disaster recover tool!!!

Bob Carnie · Jul 8, 2016

One of my clients only shoots film when he travels in a remote part of the world , because he cannot recharge as he is in a tent and horseback much of the time, therefore film and mechanical cameras.

I shoot only film because I want to chemically solarize and I cannot reproduce the same effect with Photoshop.

DREW WILEY · Jul 8, 2016

The military had portable tent darkrooms for combat photographers. You can still buy these surplus. Funny how people have forgotten what routinely
worked for well over a century beforehand.

gone · Jul 8, 2016

Yes, during a soon to come semi-post-apocalyptic situation. photographs would be the last thing on my mind. There's always a sketch pad and a pencil.

spacer · Jul 8, 2016

The conditions wouldn't be the core of the story. You can have deteriorating conditions without going full zombie apocalypse. Much like some photographers did a lot of work during the Depression, I would think that some would be driven to create a record for possible future generations.
As far as I've fleshed him out so far, he has a small home, learns to develop film in a tank, though I figure I'd leave working out enlargements to become part of the story, maybe rigging something up to use sunlight channeled into a converted bathroom darkroom.

Sure, he may sketch, too... but the photography is what the story is centered on, so everything else has to work with that.

I've also considered staging a few shots and shooting them with the cameras represented in the story. It could become the product of his work, with photos accompanying his journal.

Thanks for the feedback!

Ko.Fe. · Jul 8, 2016

Afghanistan, Honduras. I'm not a badass, just Ontarian who traveled a lot and shot daily, I mean, photography.
I have tried many cameras with me as every day, everywhere cameras.
First, I stopped to use all digital with batteries. Have to charge, keep spare and it is annoying. Even with iPhone, Apple have programmers in Bangladesh now, where they don't know what minus temperate is. So, if I'm skying and iPhone gets slightly cold it shuts itself with message - it is too ... Hot! Any other camera with batteries won't last long either. And only mechanical film cameras are keep on working in winter.

And still here is no digital camera which could give BW as good as on film. None.

DREW WILEY · Jul 8, 2016

No difference with the serious mountaineering and expedition crowd. I know a number of them who regretted buying anything electronic, whether
digi cameras or auto-whatever film cameras. The more mechanical, the better.

Theo Sulphate · Jul 8, 2016

spacer said:
... a war photographer in Afghanistan who had some trouble keeping up with his hardware's need for infrastructure: specifically, connectivity and a steady supply of electrons for his batteries and laptop computer. He had to take every opportunity he could to charge his equipment from generators and trucks as he could, and evidently spent a lot of his time doing that.
...

You've seen those emergency radios with the hand crank, right?

So that can be next feature and major selling point of new digitl cameras: provision for hand crank to charge battery.

Jim Jones · Jul 8, 2016

DREW WILEY said:
No difference with the serious mountaineering and expedition crowd. I know a number of them who regretted buying anything electronic, whether digi cameras or auto-whatever film cameras. The more mechanical, the better.

Yes, indeed. In Greenland I used Leica M4 and Nikon F kits down to -60 degrees F with no problems, although much care must be taken when advancing and rewinding film and when reentering habitation. The batteries at that time (1970s) worked poorly in low temps.

DREW WILEY · Jul 8, 2016

My nephew was invited on an expedition into a major component of the Chinese Karakorum roughly behind K2 which had never been explored before.
It was a three-month expedition wholly financed by a satellite telecommunications company in order to prove the reliability of their system, and by contract everything had to be digital. Several first ascents were made, but there were also real emergencies when some of the sherpas (flown in from Nepal) got snowblinded and lost on totally unmapped terrain. All the fancy satellite telecommunications gears kept failing, but the sherpas were
found alive. One expedition member did sneak on board a 35mm film camera, and has been subsequently sued by the financier. But guess who got the only legible pictures of that part of the world? Similarly, I don't think it would take much static shock in vicinity of those serious mtn lightning storms I've been in numerous times in the mtns to fry the microcircuits inherent to most of today's basically disposable digital gear. Have a friend who did the first alpine-style ascent of Kanchenjunga lose all this shots that way, or rather, lose the camera's functionality itself forever.

rpavich · Jul 10, 2016

I know this isn't directly related to your question but when you complete your book, what outlet and format are you planning on releasing it in? Kindle? PDF? Paper?
I'd be interested in reading it.

spacer · Jul 10, 2016

I have no idea. When I was younger, I wrote a lot, rarely finishing anything. I don't know that this will turn out any better. Some guys I've known posted fiction in forums, but I have a couple of hosting accounts, could probably just host it on one of those. If I get some good feedback and it starts looking good, maybe hook up with Amazon and offer it for a couple bucks a pop.

TheRook · Jul 12, 2016

Nowadays, photojournalists are expected to upload and share their images a.s.a.p., which forces these photographers to opt for the digital camera as primary tool. Of course, having a film camera ready as emergency backup is a smart choice... better sent with delay than capturing nothing at all.

Terry Breedlove · Jul 12, 2016

I love my film and truthfully don't have much if any desire to shoot digital. However i have to say that my Nikon D2x can shoot thousands and thousands on just one battery. Bring a handful of memory cards a couple batteries and just shoot for days on end.

TheRook · Jul 12, 2016

Terry Breedlove said:
I love my film and truthfully don't have much if any desire to shoot digital. However i have to say that my Nikon D2x can shoot thousands and thousands on just one battery. Bring a handful of memory cards a couple batteries and just shoot for days on end.

Yes, but that's assuming you shoot those thousands of images within a relatively short period of time. Insert a fully charged battery into the digital camera, put the camera aside for two months, and you will find the battery depleted (or nearly depleted) when you turn the camera on. This is the downside with digital photography - the never-ending cycle of battery recharging. In contrast, if I put fresh batteries into my Nikon FE, I know I can pick up the camera a year or two later, and it's ready to go, no need to plan ahead. That's what I call freedom.

Terry Breedlove · Jul 12, 2016

Not true i just picked up my D2x which i literally haven't shot in months and it turned right on. In fact I tried that with my little D3300 which has also sat for at least two months and it fired right up. Do the batteries last for years like in my F3 no but it isn't as bad as some make it seem. The battery is huge on these top end cameras and do last a very long time. I absolutely prefer the work flow of film and making my prints in my dark room thus why my digital cameras are sitting now . I also have zero desire for ink jet prints but the right digital camera out in the field can be a very good work tool.

DREW WILEY · Jul 12, 2016

"Photojournalism" all depends. If someone is assigned to do a news scoop or sports event, and wants to beat his competition to the punch, of course he's going to use digital capture and send the image of video sequence electronically. But there is also a category of photojournalists working on a different premise, either extended personal projects, or under artistic auspices, who still prefer the look of film, or just depend on their long-term spontaneous familiarity with specific gear. But I also know ordinary wedding photographers smart enough to keep a backup manual film Nikon etc
on hand, just in case the batteries or electronics on their digital gear does fail. Anyone who thinks this kind of risk has been engineered out knows
damn little. Up to 30% of brand name batteries are counterfeit. If a counterfeiter is smart, they mix the fakes in with the real deal, to make the
subterfuge harder to detect.

Terry Breedlove · Jul 12, 2016

That is a good point about batteries. I have two dead ones that i bought years ago after market junk. I bought all new Nikon batteries and have had zero problems ever since.

spacer · Jul 30, 2016

He'd be taking these photos for posterity, I suppose. Not looking to rush them to a waiting editor, just a drive to document what's going on around him, and finds himself unable to easily use the modern tech he'd come to rely upon during better times.

Diapositivo · Aug 2, 2016

The person in your book might want to take pictures in countries with a lot of criminality and fear his expensive digital camera to be stolen or robbed. He goes with an old film camera (maybe a compact one) and this gives him peace of mind. He goes into favelas, the worst bars in Caracas, long trekkings lost in the middle of nothing, dusty/rainy places, extremely hot, or extremely cold places, and he never worries about his camera. He's constantly in trouble with recharging his phone, and his GPS watch. He regrets not having brought a good old mechanical watch. He's glad he's got a mechanical camera.
He has a buddy, and his buddy has one of those digital cameras. From time to time, the buddy shows him all the advantages of new technology. But inevitably, in the crucial junctures of the story, his film camera will take pictures while the buddy's won't. His camera will be stolen, or fail to work due to dust, cold, heat, battery problems.

For the unforeseen circumstances, he always has with him a tiny Minox spy-camera. In a couple circumstances, this camera saves his day or, depending on the adventurous character of the novel, his life. He can take a picture of some important element that he's going to need in the future, without the persons around him to be aware he's got the pictures (they, the bad ones, have already taken his phone, and his film camera, but he's got the minox in a pocket inside his boots, you know). Maybe he'll find a treasure later, that he buries somewhere in the desert, using his Minox to save a fundamental pictorial hint to find it again (you'll have to work on what that might be...).

Ultimately, your guy is not a backward person: he'll use his sinthetic clothes without complaining for the bad smell, he'll prefer sintethic boots to leather ones, he'll appreciate assisted driving, he likes computers, automation, e-books etc. When he talks with his buddy, he favours CDs and the buddy likes vinyl better. But when it comes to photography, there is nothing like an image that you can take in your hands, you know...

Analog still best in some conditions

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency