Shooting film in a digital world-a mini documentary

[pdeeh]

the photographers come across as Hipsters as opposed to real photographers

Just this sentence fragment encapsulates an attitude of non-inclusivity - and in many cases frank snobbery - that permeates APUG and makes it very hard to like being here sometimes.

No wonder, as someone posted above, people come here but don't want to stay.

 

[blansky]

My beef is not really with anyone but Blanksy on this thread.

The guy has obviously gone digital awhile ago for his portrait work but for some reason, he hangs out and takes a nice big fly ridden steamer on anything that pits film against digital. For Pete's sake Shawn, I must have double the professional digital experience as him and I just don't get it, the need for him to OD on digital laxatives every time one of these threads pops up.

I think I post these responses more for people like Claire to read when she comes here rather than to convince the ever present squadron of "B-Negatives" overhead....

I guess this is where I'm supposed to respond.

Film is magic. Always has been, always will be.

But the video in question is propaganda and nonsense and that was my gripe. If you think it helps sell film, fine. If you think it helps get new people into film photography, fine.

I think it's tripe and does no favors to anybody except Kodak maybe. As I said 10 posts ago, almost all the reasons they supposedly shot/went back to film, were typical adolescent film vs digital foolishness. And almost none held water.

Personally I don't like BSers or propaganda very much and this video was all that. Just too cool for school to me.

As for dumping on film. Never have. But I have defended digital when someone pushed the idea that, 1. It's not photography. 2. Parrots silly stuff usually found on the film vs digital war sites that have no basis in fact.

Also the reason most women don't come here I've heard is because it's almost all men here. And as someone said, it's tries to be a serious site and not one that typically spouts the usual, "very nice dear" stuff.

Good luck on your venture in Aspen. Sincerely.

The more young people that get into film photography the better for everyone.

 

[dwross]

Can you define for me what a 'real photographer' is? Those people in the film sure seemed like they were making real photos to me but maybe I'm just too dumb to understand.

+1

I think the film is a charming slice of photographic life. Are we (as in: photo geezers) really determined to drive away anyone younger than the personal computer? The attacks on the article written by Mike Johnston (many years ago) on lens chasing was another set of gobsmacking examples, e.g., "I read that stuff back in the 70s. Can't imagine why it needs to be written again." I just don't understand the attitude.

 

[blansky]

+1

I think the film is a charming slice of photographic life. Are we (as in: photo geezers) really determined to drive away anyone younger than the personal computer? The attacks on the article written by Mike Johnston (many years ago) on lens chasing was another set of gobsmacking examples, e.g., "I read that stuff back in the 70s. Can't imagine why it needs to be written again." I just don't understand the attitude.

Perhaps having an adult conversation about a propaganda piece by Kodak is not really going to hurt the children too much.

When you go home from a movie at the theater and discuss it with people do you really think that it stops anyone from ever seeing a movie again.

 

[dwross]

Because you don't understand hobbyist photographers. It is all about attitude problems (I'm not excluding myself either).

But seriously, is any of this nonsense banter in a forum actually going to discourage people from taking up analog photography? Really?

I don't recall Blansky bashing film either. He just points out the dumbassness of the typical anti-digital arguments when they surface here.

Probably a few. I have no doubt it discourages participation on this site.

 

[pdeeh]

But Michael, people do and will just head for a website to ask questions and get information; that is where facts are found and participation and interaction take place nowadays,not in the columns of magazines or at camera clubs.

Accordingly, the prevailing attitude will encourage or discourage them, and the depth and consistency of the "us" (i.e. real analogue photographers who eschew anything digital and make real photographs) vs "them" (stupid young people who like instagram and their stupid smartphones) attitude that so often prevails at APUG is actively discouraging.

It has improved somewhat even over the time I've been here, but it does nevertheless appear deeply ingrained

 

[dwross]

I've been a member here for a long time, and a subscriber for most of that time. I seem to recall that APUG used to think of itself (ourselves) as being the first and last destination for analog information. Sound and trustworthy information. What do you suppose has changed? Could it possibly be a tone and attitude that sorts away the people interested in giving and receiving sound and trustworthy advice?

 

[moose10101]

But seriously, is any of this nonsense banter in a forum actually going to discourage people from taking up analog photography? Really?

I don't recall Blansky bashing film either. He just points out the dumbassness of typical anti-digital arguments when they surface here.

When you consider that a large majority of potential film users will have become interested in photography by using some sort of digital device, yes, I think it will discourage people. Why anyone would find it necessary to bash another person's method of producing images is beyond me, but it happens here in thread after thread.

 

[MDR]

Just this sentence fragment encapsulates an attitude of non-inclusivity - and in many cases frank snobbery - that permeates APUG and makes it very hard to like being here sometimes.

No wonder, as someone posted above, people come here but don't want to stay.

Actually one of the things I hear most often about film photography is that it's only done by Hipsters and wannabees, the problem I saw with this Video is that these photographers might be perceived as such, just compare them to the LOMO guys(age and look) and Lomo users are wrongfully called Hipsters even on this forum, check out the first thread for this Video and you'll see what I mean. On a personal not I would have preferred to see photographers from different age groups from fascinated child to the 101 year photo legend, this video makes it look like analogue photography is something for the tweens to max forties.

Regarding the comment real photographers I should have used "" the same with Hipsters. Sorry

 

[ntenny]

I've been a member here for a long time, and a subscriber for most of that time. I seem to recall that APUG used to think of itself (ourselves) as being the first and last destination for analog information. Sound and trustworthy information. What do you suppose has changed?

You've been here longer than I, I'm pretty sure, but as far as I remember we've had threads that inspired the same question. It seems to me that the user base has always included some people who liked to argue, including some whose tone and behavior could be seen as discouraging, but also including some whose arguments contained content of real value (and sometimes those are the same people).

I don't think anything has changed except for some gradual rollover in the cast of characters. That's not to say I think everything is hunky-dory, or that nobody is put off by excessive argumentation, but 'twas ever thus, IMHO.

-NT

 

[MDR]

Forgot to add I am a Lomo user and fall into the same socio-economic group as the guys in the video.

Denise APUG is still a place for sound and trustworthy information, but it has changed in the way people interact the tone has become much more agressive imo. BTW I joined because of believe it or not Blansky's posts which were always funny and contained often a great deal of wisdom. Some of the greatest and most informative posters aside from Blansky are unfortunately no longer active in the forum haven't read something aside from Workshops from Jason Brunner, Cheryl Jacobs or Nicole Boenig-McGrade in a long time, Sandy King is no longer on the forum as well these people contributed a lot to the attractiveness of APUG at least to me.

 

[pdeeh]

@michael - I think you may underestimate the extent to which people in general have come to regard "the internet" as the place to find information. Using books rather than google as a primary source of information is something one learns to do, and those of us (yes, me too) who were educated in a pre-digital age perhaps have a preference and an inbuilt assumption that books are the place to find information. I am convinced (although I have no evidence beyond my belief, of course) that people whose education has taken place largely in the digital and especially "internet" age have learned different information-gathering skills.

Of course these kinds of silly attitudes are found everywhere, but as I am here and not everywhere else, and as I have learned a lot from APUG and have a love for photography,it's perhaps natural that how they are manifested here matters to me.

And I believe it should matter to all of us whether APUG is seen as a welcoming, interesting place where much can be learned, rather than an ill-tempered haunt of angry middle-aged men who don't want their cosy corner disturbed by noisy kids.

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

And I believe it should matter to all of us whether APUG is seen as a welcoming, interesting place where much can be learned, rather than an ill-tempered haunt of angry middle-aged men who don't want their cosy corner disturbed by noisy kids.

... yet surely it's alright to disagree on the video in question here.

 

[MDR]

I believe that people (young and old) first scour the internet for some basic information and than the group splits in those that get 99% percent of their info from the net (includes Google Books) and those that get a second opinion off the net. The easier and faster people get the information they are looking for the more likely it is that they will return and this is valid for both groups. APUG is very good at providing a good overview of all things analogue photographic but if you want precise information it's not always the best place no forum is. If people start to growl which is often the case if some unsuspecting Person asks about Hybrid processes than it's less likely that the person will return and recommend APUG.

To quote pdeeh:
"I believe it should matter to all of us whether APUG is seen as a welcoming, interesting place where much can be learned, rather than an ill-tempered haunt of angry middle-aged men who don't want their cosy corner disturbed by noisy kids." though I would ad noisy elders as well.

 

[pentaxuser]

I clicked on the link to TMax 400 film underneath the video, thinking I might learn a little more about it and I did! It took me straight to Amazon where the stuff is being sold at prices we can only dream of in the U.K.

Here's a promise to all my fellow U.K. APUGers. If I can get TMax in the U.K. even close to the Amazon U.S. price I promise to wear a hat similar to the first photographer when I am taking pictures.

Is that a rash promise. Well, yes it is. The wife might have me "committed" even if the grand-kids were to enjoy the sight

pentaxuser

 

[PKM-25]

But the video in question is propaganda and nonsense and that was my gripe. If you think it helps sell film, fine. If you think it helps get new people into film photography, fine.

I think it's tripe and does no favors to anybody except Kodak maybe. As I said 10 posts ago, almost all the reasons they supposedly shot/went back to film, were typical adolescent film vs digital foolishness. And almost none held water.

Thanks for responding but I guess you ought to put me in that propaganda, adolescent tripe bucket, I share some of the same feelings as these folks and would have had similar wording. Like I said, I know three of the people in the film personally and they are speaking from their heart, not a script in exchange for a brick of Portra, they want to speak up because they want to use film for years to come.

I just find it really discouraging and sad that after all these years of waiting for some form of promotion from Kodak for film, we get a really cool one with some nice images and background and it gets shot down.

I said it before and I will say it again, it is a start in the right direction, if anyone thinks they can do better, make it happen, we can never have too much promotion for film...

 

[MDR]

+1
we can never have too much promotion for film

Just out of curiosity is the video being promoted outside of Apug

 

[PKM-25]

I've been a member here for a long time, and a subscriber for most of that time. I seem to recall that APUG used to think of itself (ourselves) as being the first and last destination for analog information. Sound and trustworthy information. What do you suppose has changed? Could it possibly be a tone and attitude that sorts away the people interested in giving and receiving sound and trustworthy advice?

I first noticed a drop in morale when we lost a few more films in quick succession. Kodachrome, HIE, TP, some Fuji stocks. Then all Kodak E6, Efke dropped off the roster and it became one big wake.

Kodak bashing became vogue and I found that to be really troubling on a site that should collectively know better, understand things like "Writing on the Wall" and "Supply and Demand". And the trouble is bashing brings out the bashers and it can snowball real quick...as bad as APUG can be, Photo.net is pretty much dead to me, what a horrible arrangement of the same people parroting the same stuff and how ugly it can get.

You can say all you want, defend people's rights to an opinion all you want but the bottom line is that this site more than any other one has the best chance of keeping film in a positive light in terms of a forum community.

I still think we get good info here, I have started some recent topics in the promotion section that had great replies. But it's this kind of "Jerry Springer" thread that builds up tons of posts in a short time and does not put the community's best foot forward.

 

[Shawn Dougherty]

I still think we get good info here, I have started some recent topics in the promotion section that had great replies. But it's this kind of "Jerry Springer" thread that builds up tons of posts in a short time and does not put the community's best foot forward.

I guess I'll bite one more time...

Are you saying that if someone doesn't like the video in question they should not be able to voice their opinion about it? Forgive me if you are not but that's how I've interpreted your words.

 

[pdeeh]

pdeeh: Fair enough. We'll have to disagree on the "internet". .

I don't think we're disagreeing: I'm saying that I believe it is now largely the first port of call for information, but I'm not making any claims that it thereby is a better or superior source.

But it is interesting how the norm for finding out stuff has gone from "go to a library and look it up" to "go to an internet forum and ask someone else to tell me the answer" ... but I think I'm probably just parrotting my very own old-fart attitudes and beliefs now. Sigh. Time for bed.

 

[MDR]

PKM-25 Kodak especially that unamed miscreant at the helm of the company made it easy to bash Kodak after all the miscreant at the top of EK was very good at bashing and badmouthing the film division himself. I also agree with you the tone has changed a lot since the troubles at Kodak started. A lot of peope felt betrayed by Kodak's decision to kill some films despite the fact that without those kills Kodak would have been history.

As a final word long life KODAK EASTMAN (ALARIS) and film

 

[PKM-25]

I guess I'll bite one more time...

Are you saying that if someone doesn't like the video in question they should not be able to voice their opinion about it? Forgive me if you are not but that's how I've interpreted your words.

I'm saying that I get energized by sharing my passion and my images with people in the real world and then get the wind knocked out of me when I come on here and read a thread like this.

The film is not perfect but I feel proud and all good inside when I see it...

 

[MDR]

Dan you feel proud and good inside but as you stated you know some of the guys in the movie, the critics of the movie don't so they see it with different maybe even cynical eyes. Everybody on APUG loves Film the vast majority on this site loves Kodak but we all love it for personal and often very different reasons and those reasons don't necessarily coincide with the reasons stated in the film. I am also sure that people expected something different (that includes me).

Is it good that something is done to promote film sure 100%, can more be done sure 100%, should more be done sure 100%
Is this movie a good beginning sure. So don't feel deflated we're all on the same side

 

[MattKing]

I like the video, but I can see where it might be off-putting for some.

At least some of the reasons cited by the photographers seemed to be a bit of a reach - but I can see why just saying "I like it" wouldn't cut it for the video.

I'll definitely agree with Dan (PKM-25) though - the enthusiasm and passion is important, and the video does communicate it well.

But Dan - you need to calm down about us grumpy curmudgeons here who have a different approach to supporting film!

 

[PKM-25]

But Dan - you need to calm down about us grumpy curmudgeons here who have a different approach to supporting film!

I know, I just take it all personal, the day I don't will be when I am fertilizer.