How to promote film use?

Photo Engineer said:

Umm, where did wetplate come from regarding my post quoted above?

PE

Click to expand...

Sorry for leaving out the thought process

The WP notion came as an extension of home production, being the home made neg' process currently regaining popularity, Sally Mann and a few others - To me it seems too tedious and where do I get gun-cotton to dissolve in ether?

jbaphoto said:

Sorry for leaving out the thought process

The WP notion came as an extension of home production, being the home made neg' process currently regaining popularity, Sally Mann and a few others - To me it seems too tedious and where do I get gun-cotton to dissolve in ether?

Click to expand...

Well, what I practice uses no guncotton nor does it use wet plates. These are dry and keep for months without change. They have an ISO rating of about 40 and can be made ortho sensitive. I've gotten panchromatic emulsions but they are too hard to work with in the dark unless you have IR goggles.

But, regarding guncotton (or cellulose nitrate), it comes ready to use from a number of alternative photo supply distributors.

PE

Today I did some promotion by bringing my videocamera to the darkroom and posted the video on youtube. Not much, but better than nothing.

http://www.sveino.no/blog/2012/01/08/video-printing-i-morkerom/

Hand out good prints that people will brag about.

i feel like i do 1, 4, and 5 personally

i teach a month long photography course twice a year and take the time to really explain the impact of film as a medium even today. most of the people in my class dont even know that film is even relevant anymore which is pretty sad. But when I show them the quality film is capable of, they are amazed. i really wonder how the idea of film becoming irrelevant and obsolete even came about (other than digital being so convenient). i dont mean to start a film vs digital war with that last statement haha.

i buy my film at a local drug store (usually Kodak BW400CN since its C41 process) and ive had the photo tech there mention how im one of a handful of people she sees buying film from there. i hope kodak finds a way to somehow avoid bankruptcy because i really like me some BW400CN and how readily available it is for me.

I guess in the final analysis, when I hear that film may vanish, I pull out a stack of prints and say...."I made the film that this picture was taken with, and I made the paper it was printed on"! Therefore, as long as I live and as long as any student of mine lives, there will be film and paper for use in analog photography.

That is the best I can do. If people don't want to learn, then what I do is for naught!

PE

MDR said:

... how [can we] promote film use and how [could] Apug help in promoting film and analogue photography.

Click to expand...

By shifting the emphasis to output that most clearly demonstrates what film, most uniquely, can do. Here are a few suggestions, trying to avoid any obvious artistic judgements and rather just adhering to process alone:

*make prints on highly textured, unique papers. I am a big fan of matte fiber and would love to do more handcoating of unique papers like kozo;
*make print on irregular surfaces e.g. wood, glass, etc.;
*shoot pinhole, holga, whatever, cross process, go nuts- emphasize features that distinguish individual prints, even flaws;
*note to self: collaborate with people like Ron to make IR sensitized glass plates;
*use that fantastically inexpensive gear on the market to produce great new images;
*produce print with materials like Au/Pt/Pd that have material value;
*make photographs with materials soon to vanish e.g. instant prints and transfers, e6 materials etc.;
*make photographs with real intimacy and value that you can sense in the hands. Some would say print as large as possible to demonstrate film's superiority in terms of lp/mm and so forth, but I think that is precisely the wrong approach... I see contact prints as the way to go;

....and far above all else.....

*Learn from others, and freely share insight and gear with others in our little community so that everyone can do their very best to make great images completed to high artistic and archival standards. Rest assured that the value of high-quality traditional images will go up... and soon.

APUG could help by putting out our photobook (TBA soon!), perhaps making gear exchanges a bit easier, and by putting the best imagery, innovative gear, and most interesting experiments front and center... in high-end magazine and book form. If the NY Times isn't interviewing us here on APUG by year's end then we've failed in this regard.

P.S. Should it interest anyone, I just posted a (there was a url link here which no longer exists) more or less on this topic; the gist is to put up or shut up. Comments are always welcome.

This is my first post, I kinda turned it into an intro/ soap box. Hope that flies.

I have been reading this thread with great interest. I started making images on film in 1988, after college (photojournalism) I started to work and spent time with wire services and newspapers. I got very good at doing c-41 out of the trunk of my car and finding a phone line to use the Leaf 3D to make deadlines.

In Atlanta in 96 we got our first digital, it was crap but very easy. I kept my film bodies and took out a loan to pick up digital bodies. As I used them, Shooters would lean over to check them out. The next game would have another guy with a digital body.

Now days, I think it is working the same way. I was shooting a wedding last week and I had countless people come by and ask about my Leica's. I told them why I was using film and those cameras. My client just sent me an email that he dug out his old AE1 program and shot a role of film and loved it.

The more people see it used, the more people will want to use it. Make sure people know the images were made with silver exposed to light and not 1's and 0's. Make real prints and be generous with them. Even the most uptight person can see and feel the difference in a fiber wet print vs. an inkjet on mediocre paper.

This forum gives me hope that film will never disappear completely.

I've let a few friends (who went pixels years ago) reintroduce themselves to darkroom work, in my darkroom. They found they missed it, and are slowly shooting more film.
I let as many people under the darkcloth as possible. We take it for granted, but it's magic for others.
I give film, and processing equipment to friends kids, who are taking HS or College photo courses. I'll even process, and print, their first attempts.

Most importantly, I think we need to share our passion for our choice. Answer questions... show prints... show how little a film camera can cost...

For me, simply putting an 8x10 print from a 6x7 neg into someone's hands can clinch it. So few 4x6 and 5x7 prints are made now, much less 8x10s or larger, by digital p&s shooters. B&W prints, especially portraits, even OK quality commercial prints, cast a spell of their own. Some know it's "the film" that accounts for the look or realize, after being told, that there's indeed something different about the image of themselves, friends or family. Explaining that is what I try to do and it seems to work.

One of the options available to those of us in areas that have local film resources available is to help promote them.

I don't hesitate to mention to others the several local labs that still process film and the several local stores that still sell film or film and darkroom supplies.

CGW said:

For me, simply putting an 8x10 print from a 6x7 neg into someone's hands can clinch it. So few 4x6 and 5x7 prints are made now, much less 8x10s or larger, by digital p&s shooters. B&W prints, especially portraits, even OK quality commercial prints, cast a spell of their own. Some know it's "the film" that accounts for the look or realize, after being told, that there's indeed something different about the image of themselves, friends or family. Explaining that is what I try to do and it seems to work.

Click to expand...

Ken

Easy to promote!
Carry a portfolio of prints-from-slides with you during your travels. I do. This January I have encountered 16 people who have literally salivated over my workds, all thinking it was produced form a Nikon or Canon digital (Oh Lord, spare me what a camera has to do with it, save from holding film). Invariably, people pull me up when they see me working one or more cameras. The discussion then moves to film (but I halt immediately at comparisons between digital and film!). If they want to see my work to date, I present the best of my portfolio prints, reinforcing that they came from film and are (sorry, were) produced in traditional analog wet darkrooms. Until Ilford's grand-daddy Ilfochrome went belly-up... Still, some negs and trannies are also carried.

...ask, "is this a Photograph, or a still video image?" Call only Photographs, photographs.

I reapir everyone's old RB67s cheap so I can keep as many photographers on the road as I can..

also push film photography prints as photographs, an art; not run off the press digitised computerised posters.


.:munch:

I have shown some neighbours kids how to do basic black and white darkroom work, alas only one has set up a darkroom. I gave him an old Soviet briefcase enlarger. A few shoot colour print and prefer to use old SLR's with out all this AF and P mode nonsense, they feel its cleverer and cooler than mobile phone pictures, also they like the feeling of having a skill. When I worked for a large computer retailer I would persuade a lot of people that they would be better off buying a reasonable scanner and to carry on using their film cameras due to the low amount of photographs they took and telling them that film is tried and tested and its keeping properties are well established. I had to speak to a person from head office as to how I sold more scanners then the rest of the region combined as there was a better profit margin on scanners. When people see my mono prints and ask me how it was done I tell them on film in a darkroom and that digital mono is S*** no matter how much is wasted on useless plug ins etc.

Shoot it, print it, sell it and show it. Buy expired film cheap on ebay then give it away for free to people who might be interested in trying it. But keep trying...

In the past few weeks, I have bought over 400 shares of Kodak stock, the good kind that holds it's shareholder value and comes in little yellow boxes. We are the only shareholders that matter now, the rest is where it was destined to go under the drunken guidance of a printer junkie...

Good luck and good bye APUG!

We Are All "Living Publicity" for Analog

Ken Nadvornick said:

Every time I set up my 8x10 in public and then patiently answer dozens of curious questions* I'm promoting film use. Camera setup is always the beginning of an improptu free public seminar.
Ken * And also let anyone who asks go under the darkcloth to see just what the mystery is all about. Heck, I even carry a small step stool in the back of my truck just to accomodate the kids who invariably want to look.

Click to expand...

Ken has really hit on something here. We APs have an opportunity (a duty?) to promote analog photography any time a curious person inquires as to what the heck we're doing. It's the perfect moment that the most expensive ad agencies in the world beat their heads against the wall to create.

It's gotten to the point that a photographer who carries around just about any traditional camera (even a 70s era SLR ... which I regularly do carry around) can attract a question or a comment from passersby who just can resist knowing, "is film still made for that?" Or, "can you still get pictures developed for that?" WHAT an opportunity... although, in all honesty, I used to hate it.

The larger the format, the worse (better?). Nowadays, whenever I venture out into the streets of Paris with a Rolleiflex, I've got to keep the thing covered to avoid stares (it has really started to bother me .."I am not an animal!") I was getting used to it, however when I pop the hood open to focus on something and people begin to photograph me photographing ...now I'll just stop and ask them to come over and take a look into the camera. I explain how it works —which, as Ken pointed out, helps to promote our cause— and then hope they'll go away sooner than they ordinarily would so I can shoot without constraints! (exceptions: when the subject or light is about to disappear or when the tourist just giggles and runs away). I usually end my "demo" by planting a seed of curiousity (thanks to the fact that they can't see the photo right away): "You should see the difference between a good film-based image compared with a digital image". A couple of these contacts have stayed in touch with me, particularly one young lady who eventually bought an old Yashica-mat and now develops her own film. As well, I've held "Café Photo" sessions, inviting young film shooters to come, meet, speak with, see work of— French photojournalists who also shoot film.

Back to the question of curious onlookers: given the fact that many or most of the questions from them are roughly the same, I've even thought of printing-out some FAQ sheets to keep on me. Anyone else have this idea? Perhaps we could even make up a list of questions & answers right here in this thread from which we could create a little "brochure" for the promotion of film use (HEY! BTW...Why hasn't the likes of Ilford already done this??) Anyway, in it we could staple one of our own, "real" silver-based photographs, to show the difference create a keepsake that'd linger around the house and perhaps incite the questioner to try analog for themselves. As well, we could leave our contac info and the invitation to "feel free to ask me further questions" ... Any thoughts?

Best,

Christopher

:

The best way to promote film is to use it, print it, do it well, and show it.

Most intelligent people understand that it's the results that matter, and not the tools. So, impress the hell out of those around you with your film use. Be nice about it too, without promoting film as a sort of superior method, but as an alternative that we like and explain why.

My own wording, when people ask me why I haven't started using digital tools, is that I don't like to edit pictures on a computer, and that I prefer a physical tangible process where my hands are involved. Using film is a choice that can be made for many reasons, but the overwhelming one has to be that we simply like it better. Why else would we do it? I know it isn't because I particularly like smelling selenium or sepia toner...

Sometimes, people see me with my Canon AE-1, just out on the street, taking pictures of old buildings or foliage. Next, they want me to take their picture. Of course they want to see what they looked like! Then they see the back of my camera has nothing but a film tab reminder. They are most disappointed. I end up laughing as a result. Such people are usually between 12-24 years old, and some (looking on the lower end of the range) have never even known what film is/was. I usually promote film by pointing out its proven archival properties (B&W, anyone?), and the fact that it would be better to see 20-36 really good shots on Ektachrome, than 1000+ shots taken on a digital P&S, which can be dizzying, to say the least.

-R

Currently shooting Ektachrome 100HC, exp. 1988/1990. No drastic colour shifts, just a slight magenta shift+loss of max density. I do use hybrid processes only because that is the only practical way of getting prints from slides short of buying Ilfochrome.

Thomas Bertilsson said:

The best way to promote film is to use it, print it, do it well, and show it.

Most intelligent people understand that it's the results that matter, and not the tools. So, impress the hell out of those around you with your film use. Be nice about it too, without promoting film as a sort of superior method, but as an alternative that we like and explain why.

My own wording, when people ask me why I haven't started using digital tools, is that I don't like to edit pictures on a computer, and that I prefer a physical tangible process where my hands are involved. Using film is a choice that can be made for many reasons, but the overwhelming one has to be that we simply like it better. Why else would we do it? I know it isn't because I particularly like smelling selenium or sepia toner...

Click to expand...

...or Caffenol. But as the good Doctor said, "I love the smell of fixer in the morning..."

Well put, Thomas.

PKM-25 said:

The digital and more specifically, the Internet age has either made people stupid or at least prone to saying stupid things. For example, whenever a person asks me why I am using film, they almost always think I have not tried digital yet when in fact, I went digital far before 99% of the world some 18 years ago.

The only thing more sad than seeing Kodak in the position they are in is that photography has truly turned into a junk show in terms of the digital venom. It's so bad that if there comes a time that there is no more film for me to shoot, I will be done with photography and never look back.

We need to change the way we do things as analog shooters, it can no longer just be about us. Otherwise, there will be no us...

Click to expand...

People always join "teams" on "sides" of shifts like this. A certain type of analog tribalist is no less guilty. See this thread itself for the usual examples of silly assertions about how all digital images are going to evaporate in a few decades and only film (which, for the record, is a lot more sensitive to every common environmental factor than solid-state digital storage media, and a lot more difficult to effectively back-up) is an "archival" media. That sort of raving doesn't help with either the mainstream audience or the rational segment of film lovers.

zumbido said:

People always join "teams" on "sides" of shifts like this. A certain type of analog tribalist is no less guilty. See this thread itself for the usual examples of silly assertions about how all digital images are going to evaporate in a few decades and only film (which, for the record, is a lot more sensitive to every common environmental factor than solid-state digital storage media, and a lot more difficult to effectively back-up) is an "archival" media. That sort of raving doesn't help with either the mainstream audience or the rational segment of film lovers.

Click to expand...

+1

Coming out with "fim is superior to digifail" makes all film users out to be reactionary Luddite cranks.

Saying that all photography is good, but "yoo may want to try this hand-crafted, old school photography" is a winning sales pitch.

The vast majority of film users acquired through evangelizing will not be in the darkroom anyways because most people haven't the time, money, or space for one. They'll get a mail-order lab to do it, and it will inevitably be scanned. So discrediting digital when scanning will be a key component of promoting film is inherently counter-productive.

Aristophanes said:

+1

Coming out with "fim is superior to digifail" makes all film users out to be reactionary Luddite cranks.

Saying that all photography is good, but "yoo may want to try this hand-crafted, old school photography" is a winning sales pitch.

Click to expand...

Absolutely. This approach is why I can at the drop of a hat get large groups to go out on (film) photo walks with me or join me for a basic intro to processing and printing. I'm still a rank amateur in the darkroom myself (only been at it for a couple years, part-time, in the bathtub), so they're getting exactly what they pay for.

A few years ago, when I first joined the forum, there was a gentleman whose name escapes me, who proclaimed that as far as he was concerned (and for everyone else, in his opinion) there was no further point to photography because his favourite paper had been discontinued. I don't know what became of him, but I do know that photography as a relevant art does and will continue. Many of us may fall by the wayside if and when materials become difficult to obtain or make for ourselves. The traditional photographer will be considered an artisan, and the finer practitioners, artists. We may be considered curious or quaint. There are already fluff news "features" about photographers who work with traditional materials. Are we becoming the "water-skiing squirrels" of our time?

I am ok with this.
(except for the squirrel part)