Sally Mann switches to digital from 8x10.

Getting old isn't fun.

Alan Edward Klein said:

Getting old isn't fun.

Click to expand...

I don't think that's why she has adopted digital. It sounds like she is enjoying it more.

$12/sheet + development. Not for the faint of heart.

And color is $20+/sheet

I don't think it is going to get any cheaper with the price of silver climbing to the moon. I am down to my last couple of boxes of 8x10. When they are finished I may set up my Beseler enlarger again and go back to 4x5 instead of contact printing 8x10.

I think it might have to do with being 74 years old possibly. But never ask a man his salary and a woman her age.

I don't think the cost of film and development bothers a successful artist all that much.

Cholentpot said:

I don't think the cost of film and development bothers a successful artist all that much.

Click to expand...

It is actually, considerably.
Cost and processing of film is very significantly higher than it was e.g. 5 years ago ($4.00 to process E6 120 film; now $18). Wages don't keep in line with increases in all other expenses, quite beside film etc.! Expenses across the board in analogue practice are giving rise to a migration away from film; not unforeseen by many of us in the industry, and the exodus is picking up each year.

Cholentpot said:

I think it might have to do with being 74 years old possibly. But never ask a man his salary and a woman her age.

I don't think the cost of film and development bothers a successful artist all that much.

Click to expand...

If you read her latest book, Art Work, you realize how much film she burns through. So the expense is a consideration when compared to digital. I wonder if she is using a digital tech camera to still have some access to movements.

Honestly, these days if you're not shooting film for the love of the process, it's hard to justify not shooting digital. I've made the comment before a number of times: the reason I shoot film is for what happens after the shot. I love the chemistry, I love the zen, and I love working in the darkroom.

If I lived in a world where I couldn't process and print my photos at home, I'd 100% be shooting a digital workflow.

At 76 I can relate to how age impact how someone understands his or her work. From little is reported seems that the cost of 8X10 married with something new, old lens with a digital body provides a new perceptive.

Cholentpot said:

But never ask a man his salary and a woman her age.

Click to expand...

More likely to be meaningful to people of Sally Mann's age then what I understand your age to be @Cholentpot .

Cholentpot said:

I think it might have to do with being 74 years old possibly. But never ask a man his salary and a woman her age.

I don't think the cost of film and development bothers a successful artist all that much.

Click to expand...

actually I met Sally recently and gave her some of my homemade POP paper
here's what she said
"do you need to tone with gold?"
I.E. she likes getting things done on the cheap!!!

Pieter12 said:

If you read her latest book, Art Work, you realize how much film she burns through. So the expense is a consideration when compared to digital. I wonder if she is using a digital tech camera to still have some access to movements.

Click to expand...

read the article..she uses a small D camera with an old lens

Taylor K Nankervis said:

It is actually, considerably.
Cost and processing of film is very significantly higher than it was e.g. 5 years ago ($4.00 to process E6 120 film; now $18). Wages don't keep in line with increases in all other expenses, quite beside film etc.! Expenses across the board in analogue practice are giving rise to a migration away from film; not unforeseen by many of us in the industry, and the exodus is picking up each year.

Click to expand...

You can move from 8x10 to 4x5 or even roll film. Ditching film entirely seems like it was more a bother than a cost issue.

Pieter12 said:

If you read her latest book, Art Work, you realize how much film she burns through. So the expense is a consideration when compared to digital. I wonder if she is using a digital tech camera to still have some access to movements.

Click to expand...

If film was integral to her art it wouldn't matter. Artists find a way. Find a more affordable format. Have a client pay for the film when commissioning work. It's just odd to me that someone who shot film all their life would go from the largest common format to kicking the whole thing to the curb because 'teehee it's suddenly expensive lol' Us poors figure out a way to make our art with film. Would I love to shoot everything on 8x10? Sure. Do I compromise so I can still shoot film? Of course.

Peter Schrager said:

actually I met Sally recently and gave her some of my homemade POP paper
here's what she said
"do you need to tone with gold?"
I.E. she likes getting things done on the cheap!!!

Click to expand...

Then why shoot 8x10 all these years? Shooting on the cheap is rolling your own 120 from unknown dated 70mm stock, developing and scanning at home. Printing on who knows from where paper. Eventually you nail the right combo.

I can and do shoot 4x5 on the cheap. Xray film cut down from 8x10 sheets. It works and looks nice. Does sally process her own film or it's shoot a few boxes and send off to a lab for develop and scans? I mean that is the old school way of doing it for a pro.

It just seems an odd jump to me going from 8x10 to a digital camera. I mean good for her for embracing the tech 20 years in.

Peter Schrager said:

read the article..she uses a small D camera with an old lens

Click to expand...

It only says a digital camera, that covers a lot of types and formats.