how do people react when you tell them you shoot film?

[Sirius Glass]

When this happens, are you wearing pants?

Yes, we will never forget, nor will we will let them forget.

 

[Arklatexian]

ive mostly got the question from people "can i see the the picture" or "can u delete the picture".

Most people, if they react at all, yawn.......

 

[Eric Rose]

Yes, we will never forget, nor will we will let them forget.

Photrio's own little bit of horror lol.

A little bit of levity is quite often needed on Photrio as it seems some take themselves far to seriously.

 

[cooltouch]

Okay, okay, just to make myself a little more clear about my "clueless dweebs" comment, I was specifically referring to those users of digital cameras -- especially the high-end ones with high-end lenses that cost more than I'll spend on a used car -- is their insufferable and snotty air of superiority because they're shooting with an expensive digital camera and I'm not. As if their gear is gonna make them better photographers.

Now don't get me wrong, I've seen some absolutely brilliant photos taken with digital cameras -- photos that are simply not possible to attain with film cameras. And I consider these people to be true masters of their craft. But I'll warrant that none of them behave the way I outline above. These experts are masters at photography, whether it be digital or analog.

The great -- and also humbling -- thing about film cameras is they truly are "just light tight boxes" that you hang a lens off the end of. This same comment can't be used with digitals because of the heavy amount of processing a camera does as part of its image production. Oh, I suppose one could make the same claim about modern film cameras that will take care of exposure (and even focus!) for the photographer, but it isn't really the same because all the film camera is doing for the photographer is deciding on what it "thinks" is correct exposure. And that's all it's doing, really. A digital is doing much more than just deciding on correct exposure. It's determining contrast, sharpness, saturation, ISO (if set to "auto), even white balance as part of the process, and then it records a host of EXIF data on the memory card along with the image itself.. But just because it's doing all this and recording it on some super-dense multi-megapixel sensor that renders the photo immediately available, it should not cause a person to feel superior to those that shoot film. That person needs to walk a mile or two in my shoes before he decides to adopt an attitude of superiority.

And that's all I was getting on about it.

 

[Kawaiithulhu]

4x5 out at a steam show

To add to the confusion, there are people who retrofit old view camera shells with hidden digital cameras inside. Wacky but creative!

 

[Kawaiithulhu]

I got 10 shots, how many did you get?

The only answer is "I got the one I wanted."

 

[faberryman]

Okay, okay, just to make myself a little more clear about my "clueless dweebs" comment, I was specifically referring to those users of digital cameras -- especially the high-end ones with high-end lenses that cost more than I'll spend on a used car -- is their insufferable and snotty air of superiority because they're shooting with an expensive digital camera and I'm not. As if their gear is gonna make them better photographers.

The attitude of superiority you describe is not limited to digital photographers.

 

[Kawaiithulhu]

I don't "shoot" film

Yes, you do. The etymology is clear and if you're going to go against the OED please enjoy your tilting at windmills

 

[Kawaiithulhu]

I started programming in October 1963.

Apple ][ in 1978-79 era and still at it to this day, you got me beat by a few

 

[Eric Rose]

I suspect your impression of people with high end digi cameras is more related to your feelings of self worth. Just my humble opinion. Sure there are pricks wherever you go but to generalize like that says more about you than the people you describe.

 

[oreston]

as i said, not really excitable
but still, thanks for a great comment !



you forgot "get off my lawn! ! "

That'll be because it isn't what I meant. You owe it yourself to check out the dictionary definition of "nuance."

 

[cooltouch]

I suspect your impression of people with high end digi cameras is more related to your feelings of self worth. Just my humble opinion. Sure there are pricks wherever you go but to generalize like that says more about you than the people you describe.

Actually, I thought I was being quite specific and not generalizing at all. It isn't that I can't afford the high-end gear; it's that I choose not to. As an amateur anymore these days, I cannot justify to myself or my family spending that much money on tech that will be obsolete in a few years. I've already done that more times than I can count with computers. Your classic attempt at guilt by roll reversal won't work on me. I couldn't be more comfortable with who I am. And I can feel annoyed if I bloody well choose to.

I did a lot of motorsports photography when I was younger and much more active as a freelancer than I am now. The pros I would meet were generally down-to-earth and fun to be around. I can even recall one shoot I was at where I burned through my rolls of film faster than I anticipated and I ran out. Man, I was bummed. As I began to pack up my gear, the pro standing next to me, whom I'd been chatting with for a while, tossed me a roll of 36-exp Kodachrome, I suppose just because he could relate. I certainly hadn't anticipated his generosity and I was very thankful. Even recently, the few shoots I've been to, this sort of behavior was rarely seen. Most photographers I met in these situations were very nice and cordial people. And they were shooting with thousands of dollars worth of gear too. But they weren't letting it get to their heads; they just had a specific set of tools and they were putting them to good use. You know, now that I think about it, I'd have to say that every time I'd witness this sort of condescending behavior, it was an obvious amateur who was behaving that way. Pros know better. Perhaps because they've been there, done that, have a closetfull of T-shirts, they didn't see the point.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

I am having trouble figuring out whether it is film photographers or digital photographers who are the clueless dweebs. Seems like the phrase could apply to either, depending on who is using it.

Either. Both. Clueless dweebism isn't limited to photography, it afflicts most if not all hobbies pastimes trades etc which require gear and so on.

 

[film_man]

Okay, okay, just to make myself a little more clear about my "clueless dweebs" comment, I was specifically referring to those users of digital cameras -- especially the high-end ones with high-end lenses that cost more than I'll spend on a used car -- is their insufferable and snotty air of superiority because they're shooting with an expensive digital camera and I'm not. As if their gear is gonna make them better photographers.

...

There's a lot of stereotyping in your responses, digital users bad in general, film users more knowledgeable, digital cameras all auto, film users know their craft and so on. In any case have you considered that while a digital camera may apply "heavy processing" in camera yet you have done exactly that yourself when you decided that Ilford HP5 is better than Fuji 400H for a particular shoot or perhaps Portra 160 is better than Fuji 400H for something else.

That person needs to walk a mile or two in my shoes before he decides to adopt an attitude of superiority.

Perhaps walking a mile or two in the shoes of those you stereotype and denigrate would also help with your adoption of an attitude of superiority. Anyway, I'll leave this thread to rest in peace.

 

[Adrian Bacon]

When I’m snapping family pics on my little 135 point and shoot while out and about, if anybody notices it’s usually because they want to see the picture I just took and are surprised to find that it’s a film camera. That usually results in the usual where to buy film, who still develops it, etc.

When I out and have my Fuji GW690, Hassie 500C, or Toyo 4x5 non photogs usually suddenly start acting as if they’re in the presence of a working professional, enthusiasts usually react with excitement, and pros normally either keep some distance or come up to get a closer look, then either tell you why they wouldn’t shoot film, or want to revel in the glory days of film. I’m not exactly an old timer, though I’m not exactly a youngster either, so the old timers don’t usually quite know how to engage in convo.

In the studio, if I’m shooting film, it’s on the monorail and that’s normally being done on purpose because it’s been requested by a paying customer because they want a physical artifact as the outcome. Those are far and few though. Most paid work is digital because the customer wants a fast turn around.

 

[RalphLambrecht]

the think I'm an old fart who lost the plot.

 

[removed account4]

That'll be because it isn't what I meant. You owe it yourself to check out the dictionary definition of "nuance."

LOL no not really sure how your commentary was nuanced. you said people were "unthinking" and "should know better"
and "know the history of the 'craft'" and then complained about lomographers and their aesthetic reeking havoc with real photography...and how film is perceived.

I thought I simply expressed a point of view about contemporary perceptions of film photography.

i have heard and read your POV before, over and over. nothing new, us vs them
gear snobs vs lomographers, creative types vs technical types >> same old same old
not everyone cares about the history of "the craft" or wants to own a hassy/nikon or whatever ...
oh well ...

 

[cooltouch]

There's a lot of stereotyping in your responses,

You're making a lot of unwarranted assumptions. I was quite specific.

 

[Nodda Duma]

“Where do you get film?”

“I’m actually shooting photographic glass plates, which were popular before film was developed, and which I make myself.”

“That’s nice.”



Yup. They never catch the pun.

 

[removed account4]

You're making a lot of unwarranted assumptions. I was quite specific.

you can make all your comments regarding that segment of the digital community and just replace it with some high end film gear
and it is the exact same thing. plenty of flm users who dangle some expensive camera around their neck like it is bling, and over the years
i have posted things about people i have known who bought 11x14 cameras with expensive lenses, or expensive rolleiflex cameras thinking
they would make them better photographers and it just made them look good i suppose, and talk the talk ... as i said your comments are not d=exclusive... its just gear snobbery...
and seeing it is photography, that is mostly what people talk about or can relate to ... gear

 

[CMoore]

This is supposed to be a "Community" of photographers...assembled on The Internet to share experiences and give advice. I only shoot film, but i have been helped MANY Times by photographers who use all types of cameras. They never cared if a liked digital or not. They simply jumped in and helped me out (even the Canadians)

APUG/Photrio was not meant to be a Battlefield.
Can we maybe call a Truce......and agree to not make any Further/Future derogatory remarks...whether they be specific, general, or ambiguous...about which types of Cameras/Sensors a photographer might be using.?

There were always some percentage of Lousy, Egotistical, Untalented photographers long before digital came a long. When Digital DID hit the scene, they were just as admirable and devout in carrying on the aforementioned tradition of photography.

 

[Eric Rose]

This is supposed to be a "Community" of photographers...assembled on The Internet to share experiences and give advice. I only shoot film, but i have been helped MANY Times by photographers who use all types of cameras. They never cared if a liked digital or not. They simply jumped in and helped me out (even the Canadians)

APUG/Photrio was not meant to be a Battlefield.
Can we maybe call a Truce......and agree to not make any Further/Future derogatory remarks...whether they be specific, general, or ambiguous...about which types of Cameras/Sensors a photographer might be using.?

There were always some percentage of Lousy, Egotistical, Untalented photographers long before digital came a long. When Digital DID hit the scene, they were just as admirable and devout in carrying on the aforementioned tradition of photography.

Bravo! I have always hated the "how do people react to you using a ......" and similar drivel.

 

[GRHazelton]

Ya want a digital vs film debate/battle?? Check THIS out: I think you'll find both armaments on both sides. Good fun!

 

[CMoore]

.....and they have a Making Of

 

[oreston]

LOL no not really sure how your commentary was nuanced. you said people were "unthinking" and "should know better"
and "know the history of the 'craft'" and then complained about lomographers and their aesthetic reeking havoc with real photography...and how film is perceived.

i have heard and read your POV before, over and over. nothing new, us vs them
gear snobs vs lomographers, creative types vs technical types >> same old same old
not everyone cares about the history of "the craft" or wants to own a hassy/nikon or whatever ...
oh well ...

Well, I stand by what I wrote. I'm not going to retract it, I'm not ashamed of it and I'm going to apologise for it. If you're so "triggered" by it then that's your problem. If you want to construct an entire position around it that was not in my mind when I wrote it then I can't help that. Clearly you have your prejudices just as you accuse me of having mine. This is my last reply on the subject.