Why shoot analogue colour photos?

[dcy]

I understand the "it's the process" or the "it's the journey not the destination" aspects, but are we just fooling ourselves a little bit here?

What's wrong with "it's the process" or "it's the journey not the destination"?

A while ago I made a wooden spatula. The raw materials cost me more than an actual spatula from Walmart would've cost and it took me days to make it because I insisted on making it purely with hand tools despite my complete lack of talent.

So?

It was a fun activity and I enjoyed it. Now I smile every time I notice my wife using it.

Isn't this how hobbies are supposed to work?

 

[koraks]

So?

Indeed. I might add:

are we just fooling ourselves a little bit here?

Fooling ourselves seems to be part of who we are as humans. We go to movies, read books, tell stories, form social structures and do all manner of other things that if you get down to it boils down to an intricate fantasy held up so we can feel things we otherwise wouldn't. I pity those who don't fool themselves a lot of the time.

 

[dcy]

Why are they desirable? Not sure. A different thread. The randomness? The nostalgia? Maybe both and then some.

The first step in my journey to rediscovering analog happened when I ordered prints from some photos I took. Holding prints in my hand, the physicality of it, made me realize that our society lost something when it went digital. Humans are analog, and physical things are more "real".

-Light leaks hitting the frame at random -> very much noticeable even from a scan

Last year Fujifilm introduced the Instax Mini 99. An analog camera that specifically has a "light leak" special effect, created in a strictly analog process (they installed LEDs inside the camera to apply random flashes onto the film). It appears to be a huge hit.

'Yes but I can rEPRoDuCe ALL of that in Photoshop and Lightroom!!!"

The users I've described up here won't own Photoshop or Lightroom. They'll probably get a Macbook pro at uni in some years. Now all they have is a Steam Deck, a phone and an ipad to do 'homework'.

Those who are slightly older, and probably own a LR subscription, and probably own a DSLR of sorts, probably can't be arsed to try and simulate the above sitting at the computer. Why, if you can achieve the real thing with a small, interesting, old object and some film?

There's a young YouTuber, Yvonne Hanson. She loves wonky films like redscale, or those expensive pre-flashed films. In one of her videos, she basically said what you said. --- Something along the lines of "Could you reproduce this in Photoshop? Yes. Do I want to? No! It's a huge ton of work, and it's boring, when I can get the same thing easily with actual film".

 

[dcy]

One can learn immensely by just operating any camera in full manual mode. No film needed. It seems to me that a certain segment of the photo-taking population treats film like an effects filter. That teaches nothing.

It's a hobby. Nobody is required to meet your standards of how they ought to approach it. Nobody is required to "learn". The only thing they're supposed to do is enjoy it.

I don't understand the impulse to judge people by how they choose to enjoy their hobby. I don't use film as an effect filter, but what would it matter if I did? It doesn't harm you in any way.

 

[brbo]

I think you are taking things a bit too personal.

Remember, a lot of us use Photrio as a therapy. Some also as a punching bag.

 

[dcy]

I think you are taking things a bit too personal.

Remember, a lot of us use Photrio as a therapy. Some also as a punching bag.

Was this directed at me? I honestly did not take it personally. Sorry if my response came across that way. Looking back, I can see how what I wrote could come across more negatively than I'd intended it depending on the tone of voice one reads it in. When I wrote it, the tone of voice in my head was casual.

 

[Don_ih]

Always write in a tone of voice based on Donald Sutherland.

 

[Prest_400]

Was this directed at me? I honestly did not take it personally. Sorry if my response came across that way. Looking back, I can see how what I wrote could come across more negatively than I'd intended it depending on the tone of voice one reads it in. When I wrote it, the tone of voice in my head was casual.

I'd say more to the discussion a couple pages ago, that lingers a bit around and Matt rose the moderator hat on. But as Koraks also wrote then, it's abit the thread's points that touches some personal ways.

It's a hobby. Nobody is required to meet your standards of how they ought to approach it. Nobody is required to "learn". The only thing they're supposed to do is enjoy it.

One of the things I say to the twenty-somethings that I know who are into film, and who come to me for advice....is that their way of doing things may very well not match mine. And that is OK.

A while ago I ran into some article about hobbies need not be so professionalised, and people do not need to be good at it nor monetise it; but there is a contemporary grind and hustle culture that prevails that.
Ironically, am with Agulliver's point that take photography seriously and could pass reasonably as a professional. If anything, a rant I have by being active in a local photo community is that one ends up sharing knowledge and the people do not have much involvement.

Personally, despite my age of young millenial, am in a bridge generation that still picked up film before the "vibes and tones" era, so use it in parallel to digital as a viable and high quality medium. B&W, E6 and C41. Color as hybrid.

 

[Oldwino]

What's wrong with "it's the process" or "it's the journey not the destination"?


Isn't this how hobbies are supposed to work?

1. Nothing!
2. I think so.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

A motorcycle, SUV, bicycle, or pickup truck will get you from point A to point B. But the experience is different and each has its own unique pleasures. There is no right or wrong. Viva la difference.

 

[albireo]

Always write in a tone of voice based on Donald Sutherland.

I'd go for Christopher Walken, personally!

 

[Agulliver]

What's wrong with "it's the process" or "it's the journey not the destination"?

A while ago I made a wooden spatula. The raw materials cost me more than an actual spatula from Walmart would've cost and it took me days to make it because I insisted on making it purely with hand tools despite my complete lack of talent.

So?

It was a fun activity and I enjoyed it. Now I smile every time I notice my wife using it.

Isn't this how hobbies are supposed to work?

Wasn't it Mr. Rogers who said, "I'm not very good at it, but it doesn't matter".

A short while ago I had a go at pottery for the first time in 38 years. I made a functional but not very pretty beer stein. I then painted it before it was glazed and fired by the instructor, and it looks more pretty but is still quite wonky. However, it's functional as a beer stein and I made it. From a slab of clay. I'm quite happy about that. The cost of the stein making session, followed by the painting session and then the glaze and fire was way more than a decent stein. And I already own two Bavarian steins. But I can forever look at that vessel and think, "I made that. From a slab of clay and some paint".

How many millions of amateur photographers enjoy shooting film even though on a technical level "they're not very good at it"? The majority of people never were. In the 80s, owning the latest camera with computerised everything didn't turn anyone into a great photographer but maybe they had a lot of fun.

Of the younger film photographers that I know today, only one is interested in learning to take technically good photos with an aperture priority SLR. She also has an interest in the funky "special effects" films. Those films don't interest me but hey, if she has fun with them and produces something she is proud of and enjoys the process.....who am I to say she's wrong?

I did a bit of experimenting with Harman Phoenix I and II and shall probably do some more with the latter. I found that fun, and honestly working with a brand new (and British made) colour film was something I never thought I'd be doing.

Will I do any more pottery? Maybe. If the right class is offered.

Sometimes a fear of imperfection prevents us form having fun. I was a child prodigy on the violin....was told I could be the next Nigel Kennedy. That was an impetus for me to stop at a point where I was playing for audiences of hundreds, backed by professional musicians while still in my teens. I didn't want that. Nearly 40 years on I occasionally pick up the instrument and I can still play a bit. With practise I could probably play well, but that pressure to be "perfect" still to this day spoils my enjoyment of it. I'd hate for to be a part of making anyone feel that way about film photography.

 

[MattKing]

Always write in a tone of voice based on Donald Sutherland.

And if you feel like singing, sing like Leonard Cohen.

 

[MattKing]

You look like your Dad!

And my brother looks like my Mom .

 

[Don_ih]

And if you feel like singing, sing like Leonard Cohen.

Just don't sing like Donald Sutherland....

 

[Pieter12]

One of the things I say to the twenty-somethings that I know who are into film, and who come to me for advice....is that their way of doing things may very well not match mine. And that is OK. While I'm happy to explain my methods and preferred techniques, they are not The One True Way and if someone wants to experiment with Lomography Purple in a Holga they should damned well go and do so. Then let's look at the results, see if we can figure out what the photographer likes and dislikes and use my experience and knowledge to help *them* get the results *they* want. That may be hella-halation. It may be light leaks. It may involve funky film. It may involve photographs that, from a pure Ansel Adams style technical point of view are "bad". But they are the creative brainchild of an individual who wants to do something different. A bit like rock musicians discovering distortion.

30+ years ago I inherited an original Diana (under the Sinomax name). I never did anything with it because it's not my thing. But 10 years ago I gave it to someone who *likes* toy cameras with plastic lenses and light leaks. And they've had a blast with it. That means an unloved camera is getting some use, and some Ektar is getting sold that otherwise wouldn't. And someone is very happy shooting film. That's a win in my book.

There are myriad reasons to shoot CN film. Is any of them objectively "wrong"? I have my doubts.

So if I follow the points made here, one of the main reasons to shoot analog film rather than digital is the hope of recording abnormalities and defects in the name of creativity.

 

[MattKing]

Just don't sing like Donald Sutherland....

Totally irrelevant aside....
When Donald Sutherland started doing voice-over work for commercials and other similar uses, apparently his son, Kieffer Sutherland jokingly went too his agent and told the agent that he could do a perfect imitation of his father, and that the agent should sell Kieffer's services as just as good as Donald's, but slightly cheaper.

 

[Don_ih]

So if I follow the points made here, one of the main reasons to shoot analog film rather than digital is the hope of recording abnormalities and defects in the name of creativity.

Is this the first time you've heard of that? That's been part of the Lomography mantra for about 30 years.

 

[dcy]

Sometimes a fear of imperfection prevents us form having fun. I was a child prodigy on the violin....was told I could be the next Nigel Kennedy. That was an impetus for me to stop at a point where I was playing for audiences of hundreds, backed by professional musicians while still in my teens. I didn't want that. Nearly 40 years on I occasionally pick up the instrument and I can still play a bit. With practise I could probably play well, but that pressure to be "perfect" still to this day spoils my enjoyment of it. I'd hate for to be a part of making anyone feel that way about film photography.

I wish more people had your attitude. I often see the opposite, not just in photography, but any hobby.

• "If you're serious about photography, you need to learn the Zone system."
• "If you're serious about developing good negatives, shoot only one film for the first 2 years."
• "If you're serious about woodworking, you need to learn how to make dovetail joints."
• "If you're serious about your music, you must practice daily."

I don't understand why anyone even thinks to invent standards that others are supposed to meet with their hobby.

 

[Don_ih]

If you're serious

That's the key phrase, though. You need to keep in mind that this forum has a lot of people who are serious about photography and tend to see certain methods and practices as frivolous and somewhat pointless. It's bound up with what they view photography to be. So, while you don't appreciate their scoffing or condemnation or unequivocal demands, you're doing the same thing by saying their attitude is bad. Who cares what anyone else thinks you should be doing == you shouldn't care what anyone else says you should do.

This is a place where people ask questions and question tend to drum up answers - some that you won't like.

The fact is, your little section in quotes is, from the point of view of a lot of skilled practitioners, totally true. You should learn the zone system, you should understand one film completely, you should be able to do dovetails (by hand, actually ), and you should practice your instrument daily. For the people who hold those opinions, they are absolutely true.

 

[dcy]

That's the key phrase, though.

When I hear "if you're serious about ..." to me it sounds judgmental.

I feel like I'm being judged on whether or not I am serious, and I feel like someone else is trying to dictate what criteria I have to meet to earn the badge of being serious.

Perhaps I am serious about using film photography as an avenue to improve my mental health.

So, while you don't appreciate their scoffing or condemnation or unequivocal demands, you're doing the same thing by saying their attitude is bad.

Wait. I am being judgmental if I say that people should not be judgmental? Do we really need to have a discussion about whether or not "condemnation or unequivocal demands" (your words) are a good way to address other people interested in a hobby?

 

[MattKing]

Moderator hat on:
Disagreeing with a suggestion or an approach is fine.
It is not the same as being critical or judgmental about a person or their point of view - which isn't acceptable.
It is important though to understand that if a point you make isn't agreed to because of its substance, that is not the same as rendering judgment about the person who made the point!
Debate and discourse and suggestions and constructive criticism please!

 

[gbroadbridge]

So if I follow the points made here, one of the main reasons to shoot analog film rather than digital is the hope of recording abnormalities and defects in the name of creativity.

That's about the only thing film has going for it..

 

[Oldwino]

Here’s a really nice essay I read the other day. Many good points to think over.

Does Anything You're Doing Matter?

And does it matter if it doesn't?

open.substack.com

 

[Agulliver]

I believe it is possible to be perfectly serious about photography and yet ignore all the traditional "rules". You're just serious about it in a different way. Some painters wanted to accurately capture landscape scenes and portraits of kings. Others wanted to create moods and were far less interested in accuracy reflecting the real world. Both are "right".

I know people who take their funky films and light leaks very seriously - to the point of documenting the light leaks in each imperfect camera so as to better get the effects they want each time. They probably have barely heard of the zone system and certainly haven't learned it.

I come back to my time as a violin prodigy....being pushed towards classical/orchestral music. Now I love many such pieces, but I wanted to try jazz and rock...and my teacher was utterly horrified. I purchased the sheet music to Scott Joplin's rags arranged for violin and piano and she refused to help me learn them. The truth is, there's no One True Way and much later I learned of violinists like Eddie Jobson who has done a lot of work with rock bands. It was possible. Maybe it still is, but I have great trouble from a mental/emotional point of view enjoying playing at all.

So I look upon people who shoot film very differently to the way I do with curiosity and I strive to understand what they want to get out of the medium. And if I think I can help, because I do know a lot about cameras and film, we'll go down that road together. I don't think that enforcing anything more than the "sunny 16" rule and a bit of advice on what happens with under/over exposure would be helpful to someone who isn't looking to create anything like 'accurate' photos of scenes or people. Would Van Gogh have found it helpful if someone had advised him that his colours and brush strokes weren't "realistic"?