Oh, no. Not another analog & digital thread!

[Kino]

Isn't it the Red Green cel phone camera?
You probably can guess how the lens is attached to it.

The Handyman's favorite tool?

 

[Vaughn]

I use film and print with alt. processes. I use my iPhone for snapshots with various shade of intent, usually for display on computer and phone screens.

My reasons for not using digital for self-expression:

After 30+ years working with camera negatives and hand-made processes, I think I might be getting a little better. Why give it up now?

Only having 10 years left in me (optimist!), I don't want to learn and constantly relearn a process I am not interested in (digital negatives) along with very expensive equipment, software, and materials that need constant up-grading. It would take too much time away from what I love...at least 2 years and 1000s of dollars to learn how to make prints with a digital negative that might equal what I can now do with a camera negative. Or I can spend my limited time and years improving my present method of making prints and seeing the world...and enjoying it!

 

[Taylor Nankervis]

[...]

BTW, I have tripped the shutter inadvertently on a number of film cameras. It is not reserved for the digital world.

That is a very, very common, irritating thing! I've done it with pinhole cameras. An Olympus XA...my phone...
Everybody has tripped the shutter by accident, even me, the most recent being in June (winter here Downunder)!
I fumbled in minus 3°c temperatures in a redwood forest; instead of carefully inserting the cable release, I inadvertently pressed the shutter — twice! So two botched frames at the start. The shutter on Pentax 67 cameras is lockable; fogged and misted over, I failed to check its status on that occasion. To add insult to injury, the grand old Pentax 67 does not perform well in very cold conditions, with a lazy wind-on lever return and very stiff advance. After four frames, I was outta there and seeking a cosy log fire, yummo donuts and a croissant at the Store 43km away...

The grist of my gripes is spending minutes, hours chimping at the LCD as the scene before you is constantly changing — deleting, changing myriad settings (don't forget eye control focus...) reshooting, etc., that makes no sense to me. In that regard, settings, composition, lighting, exposure etc should be nutted out in your head, and transferred to the camera. Digi cams have dulled our intelligence.. Just as Ai is making inroads into doing.

Spend as much time in the darkroom as you wish. As an asthmatic, I hate the places. As a matter of policy, I don't spend hours at the computer in post; automating brightness to match the loss of brightness at the scan-step is all that is usually required, additional to screen and print profiling; it is very quick.

 

[Taylor Nankervis]

Only having 10 years left in me (optimist!)

Who gave you that information??
Your accountant??

 

[Taylor Nankervis]

Absolutely true for me too.



Well, I'm not sure about that. I've seen some pretty shocking digital edits published as 'the real deal'.

PetaPixel might just take the crown for enthusiastically passing off just about anything looking like a photograph, but which isn't a photograph!

 

[Kino]

Me, I am a hypocrite.

I use digital like a notepad; typically in a relatively loose and fast way. I don't expect a masterpiece, but will claim full authorship when the happy accident occurs.

Film? I don't pretend to be an artist, but again, will take full authorship for any random success that should come my way.

Unprincipled? Perhaps, but consistently so...

 

[Vaughn]

Who gave you that information??
Your accountant??

It's years of active photographic activity.

Family history, recent medical history and such say that after 80, it's time to relax.

 

[Vaughn]

...

Film? I don't pretend to be an artist, but again, will take full authorship for any random success that should come my way.

...

Ah, then who do you pretend to be?