How to deal with photography deniers?

[Ian Grant]

I often go out with a 35mm SLR around my neck. By now I am well accustomed to complete strangers asking all manner of questions...as I'm sure all of you are too...
"Is that a film Camera?"
"Can you still get film for that?"
"Is that a black and white camera?" ---- yes, people really ask me this.
"Why don't you go digital?"

I occasionally get the devout digital imager that, essentially, informs me that they went digital, I should too, I'm dumb if don't ...but this doesn't really seem to happen too much any more.

This past weekend I experienced a new one...I was out in the woods and a digital imager confronted me. He asserted (wasn't asking but telling ) that...
"You cannot get film for that anymore."
"You cannot get it processed anymore."

I was just so blown away, I didn't even know what to say....I just shrugged my shoulders and said, "good to know. Thanks." and walked away.

Surprisingly I've had the opposite, most noticeably in Venice (Italy not US). I've visited Venice maybe 7 times and once a woman pointed to my TLR (yashicamat 124) and told her kids there's a real camera (in Italian), then others have commented along similar lines. Same happened in Chios (Greek island) when I went into a photo-store they asked could I still get film - they had a GAndolfi 10x8 camera in the window with 2 TTH Cooke portrait lenses, but later the same day I met one of the sons who said I used to use a Rolleiflex and he knew film was still available.

I lived abroad for a few years and films (except consumer C41) were hard to find and surprising Kodak was the worst availability by an awfully long way, Ilford and Foma were readily available with the odd roll of Fuji.

Ian

 

[jtk]

FWIW ....I think the most important question for film photogdraphers is "Do you make your own prints?" The second most important question for them/us is "How recently have you made your own prints?"

 

[BrianShaw]

More important than “Do you capture images on film; how recently have you captured images on film?”?

 

[removed account4]

jtk and BrianShaw
While I think both are important questions, I think its more important that someone use a camera, any kind
the other stuff matters but not as much as seeing.

 

[jtk]

jtk and BrianShaw
While I think both are important questions, I think its more important that someone use a camera, any kind
the other stuff matters but not as much as seeing.

Using a camera isnt "photography" and Photrios Media suggests "seeing" is often nearly absent.

 

[removed account4]

Using a camera isnt "photography" and Photrios Media suggests "seeing" is often nearly absent.

And making prints somehow is different ?

 

[BrianShaw]

BrianShaw
While I think both are important questions, I think its more important that someone use a camera, any kind
the other stuff matters but not as much as seeing.

Yes, of course.

 

[Maris]

Photography deniers? I deal with them by saving that I make physical pictures out of light sensitive substances. This is incomparably different to displaying a picture on a telephone...which isn't photography anyway, so there.

 

[jtk]

And making prints somehow is different ?

YES.

 

[removed account4]

YES.

Why is that ?

Can you clarify?
Do the prints have to be made by oneself on an ink or pigment printer?
For years snobs say that people who don't make their own prints aren't "real photographers"
To many people photography is just to share an image the most convenient way possible
and making physical prints isn't convenient. Why aren't non tangible representations viable,
because they seem to be viable for portfolio presentation to big ad agencies, brokers, real estate agents and art galleries,
and final "work" is sometimes on a screen, not really sure why the print is most important..
If it is the score and symphony thing, IDK, I think if Mr, Saint Adams were here he might not be making prints either...
as a matter of fact I spoke to him a few weeks ago through a Medium and she said " Embrace the digits the future is now!"
but now that I am thinking of it, the digits might have been the Medium's fingers, she was also asking for payment.

 

[Ariston]

I could care less how other people prefer their final product. To each his own. But for me, I very nearly lost a decade’s worth of precious family photos, even though they were backed up redundantly. Now I have my prints stored in a box in my closet. They are not the darkroom prints of purists, but they ARE the type of prints that will survive a hard drive failure or two.

 

[BrianShaw]

I talk to St Ansel too. He’s completely down with digital photography and ink jet printing. I can’t get his opinion on iPhone photography, though. He’s playing coy on that topic for some reason.

 

[jtk]

Why is that ?

Can you clarify

Prints don't require alibis (such as labels).....prints do demonstrate one's competence and values, which can be legitimately addressed and evaluated.

 

[faberryman]

I could care less how other people prefer their final product. To each his own. But for me, I very nearly lost a decade’s worth of precious family photos, even though they were backed up redundantly. Now I have my prints stored in a box in my closet. They are not the darkroom prints of purists, but they ARE the type of prints that will survive a hard drive failure or two.

Nobody discovered a treasure trove of memories on a hard drive in Aunt Matilda's attic. You've got to have prints in a box.

 

[MattKing]

Nobody discovered a treasure trove of memories on a hard drive in Aunt Matilda's attic.

At the risk of descending into the morass of US partisan politics, I expect that there are a few US voters who looked on the discovery of Anthony Weiner's laptop hard drive as being a discovery of a "treasure trove".

 

[Luckless]

Nobody discovered a treasure trove of memories on a hard drive in Aunt Matilda's attic. You've got to have prints in a box.

I'm going to go with "you're wrong" on that one, given that I've specifically gone out of my way several times to salvage data off old computers for non-techy friends and family who were about to toss old gear to recover treasure troves of forgotten photos that hadn't been properly migrated into digital collections...

The "Technologically disinclined" will happily toss out an old harddrive without looking at what's inside exactly the same as a "Curiosity disinclined" will toss out an old shoebox without bothering to look at what's inside.

 

[removed account4]

Nobody discovered a treasure trove of memories on a hard drive in Aunt Matilda's attic. You've got to have prints in a box.

I found a treasure trove of photographs on old and discarded Bart Simpson thumb drive >?<

 

[removed account4]

Prints don't require alibis (such as labels).....prints do demonstrate one's competence and values, which can be legitimately addressed and evaluated.

Digital images require alibis / labels to be appreciated them, so one can see someone's competency with a camera???
Sorry, your comment makes absolutely no sense, ( to me at least ).

 

[jvo]

Why is that ?

Can you clarify?
Do the prints have to be made by oneself on an ink or pigment printer?
For years snobs say that people who don't make their own prints aren't "real photographers"...
.

as the bible says " woe be unto those that debase the past for the sake of the new, they will be smitten and struck down!" -James 23

 

[BrianShaw]

as the bible says " woe be unto those that debase the past for the sake of the new, they will be smitten and struck down!" -James 23

John 7:24

 

[David Brown]

Nobody discovered a treasure trove of memories on a hard drive in Aunt Matilda's attic. You've got to have prints in a box.

Generally, I would agree with this, however, a couple of weeks ago I took the first digital camera I ever owned out of its storage box. Inside was an 8 MB (not GB!) compact flash card with 2 dozen photos from the early part of this Century that I did not know about.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

Generally, I would agree with this, however, a couple of weeks ago I took the first digital camera I ever owned out of its storage box. Inside was an 8 MB (not GB!) compact flash card with 2 dozen photos from the early part of this Century that I did not know about.

Just a theory of mine, but low density older technology memory devices are more reliable than high density (over 32 GB) devices produced today under high volume to meet marketing pressure and low cost goals.

 

[Agulliver]

Photography deniers? I deal with them by saving that I make physical pictures out of light sensitive substances. This is incomparably different to displaying a picture on a telephone...which isn't photography anyway, so there.

*makes wet print and blu-taks it to rotary dial telephone*

 

[TonyB65]

I've never had anything but positive comments and interest when I've been out shooting film, including people genuinely pleased to see someone still shooting it, including one guy who was especially pleased I was shooting medium format. The experience that makes me chuckle the most is when people clasp eyes on my Texas Leica, it varies from amazement to complete confusion, it's worth shooting just to gauge reaction's, which is usually "WTF?".

 

[Helios 1984]

Yesterday on a non-photography forum, someone commented on my purchase of a C-41 kit. The guy said “Dear God, is that still a thing... ? “ followed by “That’s an ungodly expensive way of doing photography”. Tsssss... such a Pink.