The world of photography has changed, but why should we?

[Paul_C]

I also don't see where this commercial banter is coming from.

It's coming from haters and trolls.

 

[jovo]

APUG does function (seem) somewhat isolationist ... though perhaps more would consider it an oasis. There will always be those for whom the tools mean more than the images, and the means provide the path to the end ... but maybe not a valid justification.
Gordon Moat Photography

Runner's World magazine discusses shoes, material for shorts and singlets, cold weather gear, gloves and so forth. It also discusses training techniques, and race results. To the road race spectator, the results are paramount, and the average onlooker could care less what brand of running shoe the winner wore. But, among the runners, gear is something to pay attention to.

APUG attends to every aspect of photography listed in the forums from aesthetics to ziatypes....tools and images....just not digital, since it's so ubiquitous everywhere else.

 

[Chuck_P]

Sean,

Keep up the good work here at APUG----like you said, APUG is well established and is standing on its own. There is nothing your original post referred to that has me worried about anything regarding digital and the 'health' of APUG and I'm sure many others feel that way as well. I think that those folks, like me, that work 5 days a week only wish that somehow what they do in their own little world with film, camera, and a darkroom in their spare time is all that they can do to keep the analog spirit alive and well.

~Chuck

 

[kjsphoto]

Either you don't understand the original post, or, you didn't read it throughly, or, I simply don't understand where you're coming from. What is it that you think is changing here that would cause you to go elsewhere? Maybe I'm missing something here.

NO, I read it and I understand completely the big picture. You will see in time what I am talking about. This place is not what it used to be unfortunately...

 

[Chuck_P]

This place is not what it used to be unfortunately...

Kevin,
It's a free country and we all have that right to "speak our mind", but that in no way implies that we deserve to be listened to. So, I think if you say something like that then you should back it up and give us all a chance to agree or disagree. Perhaps it is a theme for a different thread, IDK.

Chuck

 

[kjsphoto]

Do some research and look around, it is not hard to see what I am talking about. This place has changed like it or not and it is not what it used to be.

No Chuck, unfortunately you are incorrect. On this forum you only have the right to speak your mind if you agree with the masses. You can search the forum for that also...

 

[Sean]

Do some research and look around, it is not hard to see what I am talking about. This place has changed like it or not and it is not what it used to be.

No Chuck, unfortunately you are incorrect. On this forum you only have the right to speak your mind if you agree with the masses. You can search the forum for that also...

Maybe the masses don't agree with a lot of what you say = sour grapes? I can't see any other reason for such hostility. The majority of your posts lately have nearly a violent nature to them. I hope you find what you are looking for but it doesn't seem you are happy here..

 

[j4425]

I discovered this site a week ago. I can truly say I've never been this excited to be a member of any online community. Traditional film photography has been a passion for years and whatever direction it's creator decides to take it is fine with me. I'm just happy there's a place I can go where people around the world share the same devotion to their medium of choice.

 

[MurrayMinchin]

I discovered this site a week ago. I can truly say I've never been this excited to be a member of any online community. Traditional film photography has been a passion for years and whatever direction it's creator decides to take it is fine with me. I'm just happy there's a place I can go where people around the world share the same devotion to their medium of choice.

Thanks for the fresh outlook. It appears there are some here who are carrying quite a bit of baggage, for whatever reasons...

Murray

 

[Chuck_P]

No Chuck, unfortunately you are incorrect. On this forum you only have the right to speak your mind if you agree with the masses. You can search the forum for that also...

No, I'm not searching the forums for anything as I don't need to because I am not making such a claim-----I have nothing to prove or disprove. I'm sure it has changed since its inception, but that is a relative assertion, IMO. Surely, you don't think I or even the newest members should simply take your word for it or even spend useless time searching through words and phrases in thousands of threads. You made the assertion so you make it stick.

I'm listening.

 

[jovo]

I discovered this site a week ago. I can truly say I've never been this excited to be a member of any online community. .

Welcome! Glad you're pleased with what you've encountered so far. I'll look forward to your future posts.

 

[bill schwab]

Have to agree with you here. I think it is time to find a new forum...

Too commercial? Find a new forum???

I'm confused. Are you not one of the advertisers? Have you not used this site to your financial gain? Didn't many kind members of this site donate financially to you and your family in a time of need? I really don't understand the hostility Kevin. It seems people have been very kind to you here.

???

Bill

 

[jd callow]

I discovered this site a week ago...

Welcome to Apug. Did you post an introduction? Go (there was a url link here which no longer exists)if you wish to see what i'm talking about

 

[Ted Harris]

Hey folks,

This is a great place. Like any internet community it sometimes drives me nuts but that doesn't diminish its usefulness. I wish I had time to post more but I just don't between editing View Camera, moderating the LF Forum and running a photography business.

What's important to me and why I felt compelled to post in this thread is that I find right now, 2007, to be the most exciting time to be a photographer since I started 50+ years ago. The variety of materials and technology available to me toay, both traditional and digital, are exhilarating, they give me more choices and more freedom to express myself than I have ever had before. I love it. I can do more, I can work faster, i can make better prints.

Yes, I shoot film, thousands of sheets of it every year. OTOH, aside from processing that film I haven't produced a traditional print in several years, don't miss it. My prints, both black and white and color are better than ever. Again, this is an exciting time for photography and photographers.

 

[sun of sand]

How friggin thick are some persons? How many times does Sean and others have to say after the OP that APUG isn't changing?

It's an invitation, and a challenge, you nit wits, to come out of the closet and participate in the newer areas.

Who the hell felt a need to be invited to that party?
THOSE people are the nit-wits! The stupids are those who haven't been doing this for the last 100 years well enough.
I started out in digital and now do film
So what the hell happened? Where was everybody? You guys could have been converting people before they needed to be converted from something.
You old guys blew it. The problem isn't with the newer generation as many people seem to think
It's the older generation that made the new generation what it is

It's a bit late to start challenging people. Film is dying a long death and all we can really do is keep shooting what we got till it's all gone
Good news is that it will be around for a couple more generations, at least.
This is as good as film gets now. Well, there may be a brief spike coming but after that it's plateau or downhill


I think everyone here understands that APUG.org ain't going digital
I don't understand the "thick" comment, at all. I think it's thick of a person to actually believe that some people here think APUG IS going digital.

It's the fact that APUG is off-shooting that isn't making sense to some, I think.
The comment about the OP sounding more like a commercial I think is pretty much right on
Obviously digital has the world ..no great need for digital sites at the moment. So why? Business. That's cool -but trying to pass it off as the "merging of two" just doesn't ring true, for me. If one truly wanted to merge the two one would bring digital into Apug ..not shelter them in slave quarters away from the film elite.


If one wants a REAL challenge THAT is what they do.
People don't fight nearly hard enough. People came here to get away from the digital noise and people want it to remain that way still
DigiQuiet
Great ..but ya ain't fightin for nothing in having this site. It's just a boys club ..No DigiGirlz Allowe3d!


"The best way for us to positively support the mission of this site is to act as constructive evangelists - get out there, show your wet-darkroom work, engage people (especially young people), and most of all, make meaningful work!"

That's it! No need for websites. :confused:
Sh*t, websites will probably kill film even faster. What you need is phsyical activity ..not a bunch of sloth nerds talking about it
Announce your club meets and workshops and get the hell out of here.

 

[sun of sand]

BTW I like Apug. I don't want it to change. I don't think it will change. If it has changed
I don't know
I like it for what it is right now

BUT
I also know I ain't changing the world by being here. It seems that some people believe APUG will rescue film by grouping together tiny little armies of analog photogs
Being the only guy on the block using film is an honor in a way? Only for the ego trip you get knowing only you have the knowledge
1000 dumb men will defeat 50 brilliant ones almost all of the time

Apug is here because you retreated. Challenge? LOL.

 

[JBrunner]

Wow.

 

[johnnywalker]

I like APUG as it is, and I understand it will stay as it is (with the usual incremental improvements).
I leave the advertising on - it's not intrusive, and once in a while something interesting catches my eye.
I read the OP as Sean waxing philosphical about film's place in the grand scheme, and where he is going with some other ventures. He's trying to plot a course for his company that he will enjoy and can make a decent living at. More power to him.

 

[mabman]

This fall I joined my local camera club, where I discovered the digital/analog split is about 90%/10% (some not exclusively either, a fair number are).

The people there are pretty accepting, and from the people I've talked to the majority think it's great that I'm using film. I entered a pic in the last monthly photo critique contest, and it was liked enough that I took 3rd place in my category. However, no one noticed that it was shot on Tri-X - I think it had a reasonably characteristic Tri-X "look", and just a hint of grain, but even when I pointed it out to a couple of people, they didn't care - they just liked the image. (And the negative was scanned and then sent to Costco, who printed it on Crystal Archive paper.)

So, point being, it seems for some of us being exclusively "film only" shooters (even if we don't print traditionally) in our local communities and looking for some like-minded socialization is a fairly lonely proposition - for even remotely similar interests we need to associate with people who are into "imaging" of various sorts. To be honest, in just the few sessions with the club I have learned a fair bit - lots of people there with good ideas and tips on composition and lighting and so on. So, getting "out there" isn't a bad idea at all in my opinion.

(Film aside, it also seems people here in general have a very good grasp on basic photographic concepts - I was surprised to find several people in the local camera club who had no idea what the relationship was between aperture and shutter speed, and got blank looks when I mentioned "depth-of-field". Apparently it seems a good number of them are shooting exclusively in some sort of "program" mode on their cameras, which isn't necessarily exclusive to digital, but those types of things are something I generally don't have to explain when posting here, which is quite refreshing )

 

[mmcclellan]

My two cents worth . . . .

I use film because I like the way it records my images. I like the atmosphere in the image that film gives, I like the edge definition it gives, I like the smoothness of the tones and the shades of gray, and so on which is visually different from digital. I also enjoy getting my hands wet in the darkroom and doing all the "stuff" that goes with analog photography.

But if digital evolves to the point that it gives the SAME or BETTER image as film, will I continue to stick with film? Probably not, because in the end, photography is all about the image and I will use whatever it takes to give me the best image I can that I find the most aesthetically pleasing. I would really hate to see analog photography go by the wayside at this time because digital imagery is simply not "there" yet; it still has a ways to go before it will give me what film images give.

I will continue to use my 4x5 field camera and Tri-X for the forseeable future because to my mind's eye, it gives the ultimate image quality and "look" that I want in my work. Same with my Leica R6. But I also have a Canon 5d and I'm exploring how to use that to produce 8x10 negs for POP printing because I think there are possibilities it can give me that my film cameras cannot.

In the end, it's all about getting the image. I'm not slavishly devoted to film and digital be damned, I just like the results that film gives me. I will always use whatever tools are available to give me, the photographer, the image I want.

Sean, APUG is a great service to all of us and I cannot thank you enough for doing it. I check APUG several times a day and read its threads more than I do the news media. I am passionate about analog photography, but most of all, I am passionate about photography and the wide range of tools it offers to the committed image-maker. In the end, it's only the printed image that will survive and that people will judge; not the tools we used or the methods we followed or our commitment to a particular technology.

Don't change what you're doing -- the amount of information available to photographers today is staggering and anyone can go to different fora to get what they need. Personally, I would prefer that the fora stay specialized and in-depth rather than broaden and be shallow (as will inevitably happen).

FWIW.

 

[George Papantoniou]

My two cents worth . . . .

...if digital evolves to the point that it gives the SAME or BETTER image as film, will I continue to stick with film? Probably not, because in the end, photography is all about the image and I will use whatever it takes to give me the best image I can that I find the most aesthetically pleasing...

THIS is the kind of attitude that IMHO will destroy photography. The opinion of ignorant people who think that only the final result is what counts, so they would be ready to switch to digital as soon as it gives the result they are expecting. Why don't painters say similar things about digital imaging and the possibility to create images with the help of programs like Adobe Illustrator ? Because they are too smart and they DONT WANT to degrade the value of their work by accepting that it could be done in an easier, faster way by a less skilled person... not like photoraphers, sadly...

IT'S THE PROCESS THAT COUNTS, NOT (ONLY) THE FINAL RESULT... THIS IS ABOUT ARTISTIC EXPRESSION, NOT COMMERCIAL WORK...

 

[Bob F.]

Can a few people please not shift this into a digital V analogue thread? There is no little irony in the fact that it seems to be heading that way given the OP's observations...

On the adverts: I leave them on - and I speak as someone who uses Adblock with wild abandon to the extent that most sites show me little or no adverts at all (I have APUG whitelisted). The ads on APUG are targeted at the users, not the advertisers, to an extent unheard of on other sites.


Cheers, Bob.

 

[Bruce Osgood]

THIS is the kind of attitude that IMHO will destroy photography. The opinion of ignorant people who think that only the final result is what counts, so they would be ready to switch to digital as soon as it gives the result they are expecting. Why don't painters say similar things about digital imaging and the possibility to create images with the help of programs like Adobe Illustrator ? Because they are too smart and they DONT WANT to degrade the value of their work by accepting that it could be done in an easier, faster way by a less skilled person... not like photoraphers, sadly...

IT'S THE PROCESS THAT COUNTS, NOT (ONLY) THE FINAL RESULT... THIS IS ABOUT ARTISTIC EXPRESSION, NOT COMMERCIAL WORK...

Thank you George.... very well said.

 

[David H. Bebbington]

THIS is the kind of attitude that IMHO will destroy photography. The opinion of ignorant people who think that only the final result is what counts, so they would be ready to switch to digital as soon as it gives the result they are expecting. Why don't painters say similar things about digital imaging and the possibility to create images with the help of programs like Adobe Illustrator ? Because they are too smart and they DONT WANT to degrade the value of their work by accepting that it could be done in an easier, faster way by a less skilled person... not like photoraphers, sadly...

IT'S THE PROCESS THAT COUNTS, NOT (ONLY) THE FINAL RESULT... THIS IS ABOUT ARTISTIC EXPRESSION, NOT COMMERCIAL WORK...

Believe what you will, but please recognize that you are speaking only for yourself and based (apparently) on knowledge of only a very small part of the spectrum of possible photographic activity. It is you that is ignorant, ignorant of current professional practice and current trends in contemporary photography. Analogue photography does not need, and does not benefit from, intemperate outbursts like yours.

 

[Jedidiah Smith]

At this point, to discourage bashing on both sides...

I think you all should read the article "Is Photography Dead?" in the December 10, 2007 edition of NEWSWEEK. You can go to a local Barnes & Noble or Borders, etc book store and stand there and read it for free if you don't like/don't want to buy the magazine. The article is on page 94.

For the record, I hardly ever read this magazine, but one of my employees brought the article to my attention, because she knows I love photography. A good read. It discusses how "photography" as we know it, and respect it, ie at least something in that picture was real enough to be in front of a lens at some time and presence in space; that part of photography is gone with the rise of digital manipulation. Sure, there was always darkroom "magic" and it talks about that - but Photo Shop is/can be a whole different level with modern computing power.

Very interesting. While I am quite into computers for work/etc, reading this actually made me re-affirm my commitment to the color darkroom I am in the process of building, and tell people my prints are a "real" moment in time and space...I mainly shoot landscapes with no filters and very little manipulation from the slide/neg to the final print. I think in the near future that will mean something to people.
Just thoughts...
Jed