Spreading the flame

This may turn into a philosophical rant, but please read because it's important (to me, at least ).
[see down below where I say: "I guess I want you all to know where I'm coming from, and why I feel it's so necessary to spread this love of classic photography that I have."]

I am 18 years old, 19 on the 6th. Which puts me in the younger end of the age spectrum here, I assume. I also assume that more than half the people here are over 30, although the results of the above poll may prove me wrong. Anyway, I'm probably one of the youngest members here.

I got into film photography gradually. Having grown up in the digital world, I had to seek it out purposely. When I was about 8 or 9 I found a box of old cameras in storage, and my dad let me play with them. I would learn how to work the shutters and pull all the little levers, just wishing for a roll or a pack of film to load in there, and actually make some images... I read in old books around the house about how film actually worked, investigated camera and film-making history, realized that there's more to film than 35mm (who knew?), discovered Kodacolor prints and Kodachrome slides and admired the soft, glowing colors.

I was enamored with the idea that the whole process was chemical, that from start to finish not one digital byte or pixel was used. That whole idea made digital feel like an cold, dead, artificial thing in comparison. What is more, this was the same process that my great-great-grandparents would have used, and, in fact, did use a hundred years ago! I could follow in the footsteps of history and tradition instead of settling for the easy path of automatically produced and superfluously proliferated bits and bytes.

Somehow I got my hands on a few rolls of standard color 35mm, and convinced my dad to let me use his Pentax SLR to shoot them (this was back when you could still develop the stuff at the local store) and even though my photographing skills were horrible back then and the film and developing quality was less than optimal, it was magical! Getting the prints back from the grocery store felt like Christmas Day. I felt like I had produced something, like here was something that I made with my own hands. No processor chip or sensor array had a hand in this! Here was pure, organic creation.

Then I discovered the Polaroid Land 100 camera, the same one my grandfather bought in 1963 when it first came out. I found some 30-year-old Polaroid film and tried to shoot it, with predictable results. Somehow I convinced my dad to splurge on some of the last packfilm Polaroid ever made. I had 20 pictures to shoot: 10 B&W and 10 color. I shot them all on the Oregon coast on vacation, and felt like a king. I needed no inkjet printer and glossy photo paper to make my prints. All I had to do was pull the tab and peel the final product off the mysterious sandwich after 60 seconds. This was absolute sorcery, and I had to know how it worked. I did as much research as I could, but there's only so much an 11-year-old mind can comprehend. I even figured out how they sandwiched the negatives and prints in there and replicated it with printer paper!

After this I began to appreciate just how amazing the old cameras I was using really were. Here was this chunk of metal, Made in the USA, proudly displaying the logo POLAROID, which after fifty years worked like the day it was made. Here was a quality device. Would I really rather use the 100% plastic, rubber, and PC board digital point-and-shoot? That's just no fun. Now look at the Regula Cita: nothing short of a wonder of German engineering. Every gear, lever, and chain in the device fits together perfectly to work as a clockwork masterpiece that does exactly what it was intended to do even after sixty years.

I started collecting old cameras. I found a Kodak Brownie 2A in an antique store - with film still in it! Here was something new. For 12 dollars I couldn't resist, and after sending in the film to be developed was rewarded with wonderful photographs that someone took in 1953, and forgot all about it. I found more Brownies, folding cameras, and rangefinders and soon I had enough cameras to fill a whole shelf!

I wanted to take pictures with these things, in the closest manner to how they were originally used. My first roll of 120 B&W I was hooked. I was amazed at how great the pictures from that Brownie No. 2 from 1910 looked! I felt like I was an excited little kid who got his first camera for Christmas 1910, and took his first photographs feeling like National Geographic, or Frank Hurley on an Antarctic expedition with Sir Ernest Shackleton, bravely enduring the hardest conditions for that perfect shot on his preciously limited supply of film.

I loved the simplicity of the Brownie box cameras - set the aperture (you have 3 choices - easy to choose!), frame the shot, push the lever, and turn the knob to advance the film. No complicated shutter, exposure, or flash options here! It's just me and the box, the film and I.

I even got my sister interested in film - she who takes - no kidding - thousands of digital pictures, of nature and birds mostly, every week. She is an excellent photographer who usually sticks to digital, but she found a Zeiss SLR from the 60's and loves taking pictures once in a while with it - and those are usually gems that she puts real effort into, instead of rapid-firing her Olympus on automatic, and picking the one good photo out of the couple dozen she took.




So I'm writing this extended tale because I see my generation, the digital generation, never even realizing the value of a photograph. In the digital universe, pictures proliferate like insects. Pick any friend of mine and I can visit their Instagram or Facebook page and find, without exaggeration, hundreds if not thousands of pictures of them. With great quantity, quality is often lost.

I guess I want you all to know where I'm coming from, and why I feel it's so necessary to spread this love of classic photography that I have.

I want to take it upon myself in some small way to make more young people like me aware of the magic of analog photography. I have a lot of ideas floating around in my head; here are some of them:

---The Analog Instagram---
*Sigh* Yes, I know, D*G*T*L S*ANS. But at least this sort of thing would raise awareness in the 18-30 demographic about how cool film is.

---The Vintage Photography Magazine---
I really REALLY like this idea. Like National Geographic except 100% film, and heavier on the photographs.

---The Bare-Bones Film & Camera Starter Kit---
So I'm guessing one of the main impediments to young people getting interested in film is COST. Film is danged expensive; you pay five bucks for eight shots on a 120 roll, not to mention developing and prints! That's just too much for many people my age; I myself only buy the cheapest Arista-EDU stuff for B&W since I'm not exactly rolling in the dough. What's more, to get into this hobby you have to have a camera, and it's not always easy to find a cheap starter camera.

So I propose here an idea: Produce a simple box camera much like the early Brownies. Sell this thing for twenty bucks. The film can be the easiest-to-make stuff possible: orthochromatic, low-speed, B&W, high-grain, you name it - it just has to be cheap, because all we care about here is that it produces an image of some kind. If you did this and really cut costs you could probably sell the stuff for 2-3 dollars a roll. Include in the "starter pack" one camera, a couple rolls of film, and some all-paid mail-in developing envelopes, addressed to a partner company. The whole thing could probably sell for less than forty dollars. The perfect way to start out on a budget shooting film, and also an awesome gift for a child.

And you'd style the whole thing as "retro" to attract Millennials.

Given the popularity of systems like "Fuji Instax", I think this could work.



Anyway, this thread is for further discussion on ways to "spread the flame" of film to the next generation, because it is unacceptable for this medium to die out.

keenmaster486 said:

So I propose here an idea: Produce a simple box camera much like the early Brownies. Sell this thing for twenty bucks. The film can be the easiest-to-make stuff possible: orthochromatic, low-speed, B&W, high-grain, you name it - it just has to be cheap, because all we care about here is that it produces an image of some kind. If you did this and really cut costs you could probably sell the stuff for 2-3 dollars a roll. Include in the "starter pack" one camera, a couple rolls of film, and some all-paid mail-in developing envelopes, addressed to a partner company. The whole thing could probably sell for less than forty dollars. The perfect way to start out on a budget shooting film, and also an awesome gift for a child.

Click to expand...

well you've got the idea (although it's not the first time I've heard similar)
so, next, assuming you've done all your market research and costings behind this idea, all you need to do now is run a Kickstarter or the like
(It's no good waiting for someone else to do it for you)
Good luck.

Thank you for sharing your insights - it was good to read that. You've had quite an adventure leading to where you are now in photography.

Perhaps Lomography is generating some interest - but there are already plenty of perfectly good film cameras ranging from box cameras, folders, all the way to very sophisticated cameras selling for a fraction of their original price.

I think the spark of interest has to come from within the person, much as it did for you.

Here are older polls:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)


on the gender:

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

keenmaster486 said:

... this thread is for further discussion on ways to "spread the flame" of film to the next generation, because it is unacceptable for this medium to die out.

Click to expand...

Excuse me keenmaster486

I like this kind of philosophical threads, and love it much more when it comes from young people. It's was very fine to hear your story. As for the ideas, no offense but 1.) An Analog Instagram, whose final objetive is a screen instead of a print (?) 2.) The magazine, will it be on paper or electronic (?) 3.) The kit, everyone can make a box camera at home cheaper that twenty bucks (besides, No camera - or lens - is required or indispensable to take a photograph ...) I do not want to be a heartbreaking!

But ... in my opinion, the important flame to be spread is that the value is "Photography" in capital letters, not "a Photography" nor the tools! (and that includes d.g.t.l generation) and also there should be spread the word that this film medium is not expensive at all, and also spread loud and clear that it is not dying, and never will! (and this is not only an exclamation of a passionate person, it's a proven fact) those last kind of thoughts are what make me sad to hear from an 18/19 year-old!

I beg you to continue with your idea of course, and you count on me to help you carrying the white flag with those last printed in black ideas writen on it!

Best of luck!

Film IS expensive. In the past few years I've distributed thousands of photographs of school sports on CDs free of any charge to the schools and individuals. This would have been prohibitively expensive if attempted on film, and the results would have been less useful to the recipients.

If one must shoot film, consider pinhole photography. It usually involves the photographer in the design and construction of the camera in addition to the image making. However, pinhole photography favors larger film sizes with proportional costs.

they already make cheap plastic cameras that do a great job of introducing folks to photography -- problem is, they're sold by the lomo folks who seem to think a cheap plastic camera should cost $50 or even $100, which is just silly. Sadly, the Holga folk gave up the ghost a while ago.

I wish folks would quit moaning that film is expensive -- 35mm film in 100 foot rolls costs about 10 cents a shot, which when you factor for inflation is less than it cost me in college in 1970. Same thing for 120 film -- a buck a roll was cheap back them, the same "cheap" film would cost $5 or more a roll now factored for inflation, and you can get very nice ilford for less than that -- $4 at Adorama.

And when you factor in the full cost of the newer methods -- cameras that go obsolete in 3 years, computers and programs and digital printers -- well, there you are.

This kid has the right idea. I give cameras to the local university to help folks just like him, and so should you.

Jim Jones said:

Film IS expensive.

Click to expand...

No offense intended Jim, comparisions is what makes things expensive

summicron1 said:

I wish folks would quit moaning that film is expensive

Click to expand...

I wish people who live in the US would quit assuming that the price of everything they buy in the US is the same all over the world.

35mm film is cheap. But compare to digital it's not.

I'd like some of that good cheap Chinese 120 again, it did me good learning MF on cheap film. Now I am far far more selective about my shots on 120.

One major benefit of film you did not mention was the amount of different styles of cameras. TLR, SLR, Rangefinder, Box Cameras, Pinhole, and many more. And they all take the same kind of film! Another major benefit is being able to make a darkroom print. With B&W it's pretty simple and not all that expensive. It's what will keep film alive for the next while. C-41 will die in a decade or two but B&W will march on.

summicron1 said:

. . . 35mm film in 100 foot rolls costs about 10 cents a shot, . . .

Click to expand...

At that rate, the 50,000 shots captured to date on my D3100 would have cost $5,000 US. Of course I wouldn't have been so trigger happy with a film camera. OTOH, image quality for many subjects is higher than I was getting with Leica RF and Nikon SLR cameras.

I suspect that one of the difficulties getting young people involved with film is the paucity of new affordable cameras. Most likely, with the plethora of affordable high quality used equipment, there is little market for such a camera. As a result someone looking to try film is faced with a daunting list of possibilities for a camera. As a result, there would likely not be much of a market for a new film camera (and yes, the Holga was very expensive to a poor quality piece of plastic.

More significant, is that many young people (and increasingly their parents) live in a digital age. Snail mail is dying. Text messages allow instantaneous communication. Most people in the developed world have a smart phone, each of which has a built in camera ready to post a photograph of your lunch for the entire world to briefly enjoy. Pictures are plentiful since the marginal cost of taking a digital image is close to zero (and you "need" the phone anyway). Film can be expensive. Outside of larger cities, B&W and slide film is not available in stores. C-41 may be plentiful, but primarily as FujiColor and Kodak Gold. Film can be purchased mail-order much cheaper, however. Local labs, if available, frequently cater to pros, and charge appropriately. Most new photographers will need to mail off their film, paying postage both ways which is not an insignificant expense.

There are young people, like the OP, who tire of throw-away photography and embrace film. These people should be encouraged. I doubt a film can be sold much cheaper than Arista EDU (Foma), and the only recent film cameras I have bought are single-use cameras for special purposes (and I sometimes pick on up as a "guilty pleasure" - sometimes it is fun to not worry about focusing, aperture and shutter speed and concentrate solely on framing the image).

As individuals, and I am in the >50 category, the best we can hope to accomplish is to introduce our children, grandchildren, nieces and nephews to film. Possibly, unused cameras can be given to them, also. Retirees may volunteer their assistance at schools, boy scouts, etc.

As a community, possibly we could create a young photographers (on "new to film") subforum where young photographers can congregate free from the cynicism that comes with age.

keenmaster486, I am not clear why information about our ages helps you. I read your very full post which tells me a lot but I cannot tie it in with our age categories e.g does knowledge of our age groups help determine your future actions in achieving your aims i.e if the median group is for instance 30-40 yrs old will your actions be different compared to what you will do if it is say 50-60 yrs old?

Thanks

pentaxuser

CN and CR film is available in each town in Germany as is the respective processing.
Used cameras are available throughout the country.

But still I only know one young person that actually got interested in analogue photography. And that includes the whole art, off-art, and art-academy scene.

Hey keenmaster486,

Your enthusiasm is really positive and exciting, though of course the devil is always in the details when it comes to that kind of business idea. Still, nothing should hold you back from running with it!

I do question the way you have broken down your age poll, and the use you want to put that data? It seems to be in increments of ... questionable value, i.e. teeny little high-resolution increments close to your age, and then big, detail-obscuring buckets as you get further away. I'd suggest that there's as big (bigger?) attitudinal and dispositional difference between Baby Boomers and GenX (who you lump together) as there is between GenX and Millennials (who you divide into 4 segments).

Anyway good luck and have fun.

keenmaster486 said:

...
When I was about 8 or 9 I found a box of old cameras in storage, and my dad let me play with them. I would learn how to work the shutters and pull all the little levers...

Click to expand...

keenmaster486 said:

...
I was enamored with the idea that the whole process was chemical ... What is more, this was the same process that my great-great-grandparents would have used, and, in fact, did use a hundred years ago! I could follow in the footsteps of history and tradition instead of settling for the easy path of automatically produced and superfluously proliferated bits and bytes.
...

Click to expand...

The thrill of discovery that you experienced is an individual thing; often other people don't have that curiosity or inquisitiveness. However, sometimes it can be imparted on others through a teacher or friend.

Welcome to APUG

I see that you are in Atroxus. I am in West Atroxus!

Halford said:

It seems to be in increments of ... questionable value, i.e. teeny little high-resolution increments close to your age, and then big, detail-obscuring buckets as you get further away. I'd suggest that there's as big (bigger?) attitudinal and dispositional difference between Baby Boomers and GenX (who you lump together) as there is between GenX and Millennials (who you divide into 4 segments

Click to expand...

Speaking as a 46-year-old GenXer, I have to agree. We early-middle-age folks have a tough time being lumped together with our parents! Add a few more brackets at the top end. 40-49, 50-59, etc. But, know this: there are plenty of us film evangelists trying to encourage film use in your generation. So good luck with whatever you decide to do.

One more thing, I'm on Instagram and there seems to be a large and active community of film shooters of all ages there. Look for hashtags like #believeinfilm or #35mmforever!

The age distribution is not surprising. For me, the "Golden Age" of photographic equipment was in the early 1970's - I was 18 and had a little bit of money to buy one camera and one lens. The photo magazines (Popular Photography and Modern Photography) hyped the latest equipment and features.

I think many people who are attracted to a film website such as this are those who probably became interested in photography between 1965-1985 (while they were in their 20's). Consequently, their ages now are mostly 50-70.

Where are two simple boxes. Phone and Instax camera. They say it is popular.
Film cost is nothing comparing how many of 18-30 spent on coffee, fast food and must have clothes, shoes and else what is popular and must have. Stopping factor is not the cost, but fact what film needs to be processed, lomography is too complicated now for 18-30. It is not simple single step task as going to eat, shop and coffee. Phone is two clicks and it is on Instagram, instax - one click and it is here and now. Single step task and cool is to get LP and drop it on TT plate. This morning on the radio it was interview with local vinyl manufacturer. They sell in millions. Most buyers are young ones. It was hard to believe, but according to some statistic vinyl numbers came above downloads numbers. Here is not so many stores, but ordering online. It is one step - open site, order. Film is more complicated for current 18-30. Downloads are phone, vinyl is exactly the same as instax. One, no waiting step. Step into starbuck - get coffee, step into mall - get clothes. Film is not one step. Take exposure and ... nothing happen. 18-30 are not into this in masses. They rather get tattoos all over body, it is one step.

Film has attracted a following amongst the hipsters. Can't tell you how often I've been out somewhere and some college-aged kid goes "cool, film!" or I hear from a group "see he's shooting film too".

The local high school has an active darkroom and I'm working on equipping students with darkroom gear (see the thread I started on this).

I'm convinced film will persist as an art form niche among future generations...much like people still do oil painting even though photography made that recording media obsolete in the 1800s..

Guys, thanks so much for all the input and advice!

I agree that the poll was ill-executed and the data doesn't really tell me anything; I was originally trying to determine the number of people my age here though.

I'll post more later when it's not midnight!

pdeeh said:

I wish people who live in the US would quit assuming that the price of everything they buy in the US is the same all over the world.

Click to expand...

Arh Come on, you can get film pretty cheap in Europe too.
https://www.google.dk/url?sa=t&sour...EnTjCq4OQEWLx-Nzg&sig2=8mJySg-dmTC4V6eutaKtBA
And you are taking that remark out of context leaving out the remark on costs of newer technologies. film costs thats a fast and offcource for most of us that will affect the way we shoot but the slowing down and more thoughtfull way of shooting opposed to running and gunning is one of the god things about film.

Nodda Duma said:

I'm convinced film will persist as an art ... oil painting ... recording media obsolete ...

Click to expand...

Wow!

keenmaster486 said:

I was originally trying to determine the number of people my age here though.

Click to expand...

I cannot speak for the rest, but for me when it comes to film, my age is the same as the very first day I started with this passion. I did not cast my vote, but being said so ... Um, that means 12 years younger than 18.

Again, I wish good luck!

Soeren said:

Arh Come on, you can get film pretty cheap in Europe too.

And you are taking that remark out of context leaving out the remark on costs of newer technologies. film costs thats a fast and offcource for most of us that will affect the way we shoot but the slowing down and more thoughtfull way of shooting opposed to running and gunning is one of the god things about film.

Click to expand...

I didn't say that film could not be bought relatively inexpensively in Europe.

As for "taking a remark out of context", you bizarrely relate that context to digital technology, which does not form any part of what summicron1 was saying.

And I can't begin to tell you how wrong-headed this whole "film slows you down and is therefore better" line is ... if someone has a problem with taking too many pictures (and how many is too many by the way?), then the problem is in the individual and not the medium. Let's not forget motor drives and 250-frame backs, eh?

really, I don't mind people disagreeing with me, but if you're going to do so, at least make an attempt at addressing what I actually said rather than making wildly off target interpretations.

As for the OP, it occurred to me that when people call for a "new box brownie" they seem to forget that Ilford have a range of disposable cameras as I think Fuji may still do.