- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
- Messages
- 29,832
- Format
- Hybrid
thnx
yeah ( bad light
im surprised every 5 year old kid in this modern age doesn't become addicted to making photographs.
oh cr@p, maybe that's why the inter webs is full of photography
Great story, just as long as your shots are in decent light.
whats not special about that .. being able to see something and then see what it looks like in photographic form is a powerful thing
even for a 5 year old. i still am nearly breathless sometimes when i see an image made with the sun as a print or a print made in the darkroom.
not everyone feels this way. a lot of people don't give a hoot. they don't care even about snappies they make with their phone.. they're just snappier...
but once in a while a different person will just stare at what they made, and be hooked. f v d is a dead argument at this point its sight and emotion thing.
It depends on if they are sensitive or not. Sensitive children will be able to tell the difference between real and fake. Of course.I'd expect it to be a more powerful experience if they could see the result immediately vs. waiting a week or more. Again, what's special about analog to that 5 year old?
I don't see it but others do. I guess I am just standing in the wrong place. When I go to the Lomography web site, it seems like millions of young people are shooting film.I think it's unlikely that film will have a "comeback" beyond volumes that we are experiencing currently. The market is right-sizing to whatever it must be to satisfy the next generation, and that generation isn't showing all that much interest from what I can see online and on my street. I'm cool with that.
I'd expect it to be a more powerful experience if they could see the result immediately vs. waiting a week or more. Again, what's special about analog to that 5 year old?
Touche!thnx
yeah ( bad light) .. just imagine a 5 year old kid with a modern digital camera ( phone / p-s &c ) that takes great photographs in dim light ..
im surprised every 5 year old kid in this modern age doesn't become addicted to making photographs.
oh cr@p, maybe that's why the inter webs is full of photography
This is awesome but consider this...how would the experience have been different if you had immediate feedback as you shot?IDK
all i could tell you was i saw the pix and i said : this is cool ! my parents didn't really have much to do with it except feeding my camera for me
since i was a little kid with no income .. they paid for processing too, until i was old enough to learn how to do it myself ...
i wasn't emulating them. they never photographed the shrubs or my friends sister hanging upside down off of the swingset .. or ...
What is fake?It depends on if they are sensitive or not. Sensitive children will be able to tell the difference between real and fake. Of course.
i would be doing it endlessly ! ( and it would have been FREE )This is awesome but consider this...how would the experience have been different if you had immediate feedback as you shot?
By age 9 they would be blowing us out of the water.i would be doing it endlessly ! ( and it would have been FREE )
and if i could have made video like that too when i was 5 i'd have done that endlessly as well.
we live in amazing times for anyone involved in these modes of creation ... not to mention
a 5 year old kid ( under the supervision of his parents of course LOL! ) can go online and find a community of
other 5 year old kids who are aspiring photographers and budding videographers on all corners of the globe to share with and learn from ...
yup !By age 9 they would be blowing us out of the water.
This is awesome but consider this...how would the experience have been different if you had immediate feedback as you shot?
Back then real people did not need instant feedback. Today's airheads hold their breathe until they see the image, so they would have just passed out back then. Genes must have changed and people cannot hold an instance in their brains now. Sad.So sad
Well... a two hour feature film is 10,800 feet of film, and that’s just the finished product. I would assume a minimum of 3-5 times that number just for Camera Original. Then there are the Masters (multiples) struck from the Camera Original. Then there are the Work Prints (multiples) struck from the Master. Then there are the Printing Masters (multiples) struck from the Work Prints. Then there are the Theatre Prints struck from the Printing Masters. They don’t make just one of those for the exhibitors either. I think your 54 million feet will be quickly accounted for with a relative handful of finished films.... Back of paper napkin calculations suggest:
30,000,000 rolls at 3 ft/roll= 90,000,000 ft
Assume 60% for Movie to wag the dog:
.6 x 90,000,000ft = 54,000,000 ft.
Divide by 1000 ft/reel and 1500 ft/reel:
54000000ft/1000 ft/reel= 54,000 reels and 54000000ft/1500 ft/reel= 36,000.
So 36,000-54,000 reels of movie film
Can that be possible?
Analogue controls are not intuitive...
My daughter opened her gift at a dinner in her home that was a Fujifilm Instax 6, instant film camera. The people were delighted in watching the film pop out and develop over a two minute period. The five year old there was more interested in his truck and vehicle gift. But the adults were having fun. I took home my wife and my picture and have put it in a small frame on the table. Who would do these things with a cellphone shot? Fun for about a dollar a shot plus the cost of the camera about $125.I'd expect it to be a more powerful experience if they could see the result immediately vs. waiting a week or more. Again, what's special about analog to that 5 year old?
LOL you mean the polaroid image-making wasn't around back then ?
you are really kind of funny
I watched my grandkids play with one last winter. They were at the time 5, 8 & not quite 11. They had fun sharing the prints and posing each other but I suspect that, to them, film photography is just another menu option in the available visual presentation platforms or whatever it would be called in digispeak.My daughter opened her gift at a dinner in her home that was a Fujifilm Instax 6, instant film camera. The people were delighted in watching the film pop out and develop over a two minute period. The five year old there was more interested in his truck and vehicle gift. But the adults were having fun. I took home my wife and my picture and have put it in a small frame on the table. Who would do these things with a cellphone shot? Fun for about a dollar a shot plus the cost of the camera about $125.
Perhaps because in many cases the computer search tools rely more on tags and summations and interpretations as much then they do on the actual content of the items searched.There was a point when reading had not been widespread that people used mnemonic devices to memorize things. They did not "need" reading to learn but, boy-howdy, reading sure improved the learning experience.
Back in my undergrad days we spent countless hours in the stacks doing book-related research for papers. Card catalogues, micro-fiche, scouring aisles and floors for books and references. We didn't need no stinkin' computers. However, their use makes this much less time-consuming. This shortens the feedback loop, and therefore, the learning loop. Why would one not use it?View attachment 212876
I read the Bell v. Lever Bros and do not know how it relates to our discussion. Sometimes I am dense. Can anyone help me see its applicability?
It's just the other way round:
People who invested thousands of dollars in digital gear because they believed in the "film is dead" propaganda, can't stand the fact that film has not dissappeard, and is now gaining interest again.
Their "wishful thinking" it that film has no future, because then they can justify for themselves that they have paid so much for digital gear.
Fact is that the market for digital cameras has collapsed by 85% in the last years. Lots of digital OEM camera manufacturers had to stop production, and even the first big player (Samsung) left the digital camera market.
And instant film is now a huge mass volume market again, being much much bigger than the market for DSLM / MILC cameras. The MILC market was about 4.1 million units in 2017, the market for instant film cameras was more than 7 million cameras (!!!) in 2017.
The "film is dead" prayers only demonstrate their lack of knowledge of the current photography market developments.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?