Nice little 10-minute documentary. If you're not involved in the Instagram and Youtube film communities you may find this especially interesting. Gives a nice glimpse into the people who are driving the recent growth in film use.
Like Slow Food, it's Slow Pictures.
I would like JUST ONE TIME for those who object to the "environmental impacts" of film to reach into their pocket and pull out their phone and acknowledge THE ENTIRE impact on the environment that device has and will have over time.
Somehow, that always gets a pass...
I would like JUST ONE TIME for those who object to the "environmental impacts" of film to reach into their pocket and pull out their phone and acknowledge THE ENTIRE impact on the environment that device has and will have over time.
Somehow, that always gets a pass...
Yes, smart phones are or will be, by far the most environmentally damaging commodity there is. Film pales in insignificance in comparison.I would like JUST ONE TIME for those who object to the "environmental impacts" of film to reach into their pocket and pull out their phone and acknowledge THE ENTIRE impact on the environment that device has and will have over time.
Somehow, that always gets a pass...
No mention of analogue darkroom printing or even much about home developing. There was even one contributor stating that film is a hipster "blip" that has only a few years left. I take it that the middle-aged person was a senior Kodak exec who is bound to say what he did, I'd have thought, irrespective of what he believes or what doubts he may harbour about film's long term future.
Quite a "feel good" video whose overall aim is to give a " green shoots of recovery " view and encourage a warm feeling to its viewers. That's OK but don't we need videos that take a more analytical look at the market today with predictions based on facts
Perhaps I had better explain "green shoots" In the U.K. political scene we have politicians who are seen in the midst of a crisis in front of the TV cameras talking about the green shoots of recovery as soon as there is even a particle of growth in the economy - no matter if the current evidence about the crisis suggests such particles do not amount to more than the so-called "dead cat bounce" that tends to be referred to in a stock market crash.
I'd like more evidence than is presented in such videos as this one. I often feel like the passenger on the Titanic who five minutes after it had stopped and first class passengers were hacking off ice from the berg's sides to add to their gin and tonic, was saying that he feared the situation was more serious than senior members of the crew had either realised or were wiling to admit to.
pentaxuser
Yes, smart phones are or will be, by far the most environmentally damaging commodity there is. Film pales in insignificance in comparison.
Estimated to be 7 billion smart phones in use https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_mobile_phones_in_usenot so sure about that but its an interesting thing to think about. the photographic industry since the 1830s has not been as un-problematic as one might want to think...
I agree that film slows me down, allows me to think and compose better. But there's a lot of post shooting work as with digital. You can spend enormous amounts of time in the darkroom or scanning and editing at the computer if that's your thing. I don;t have a darkroom, but i'm sure many people find that just a laborious as sitting by a computer. Also, computer editing can be just as creative as darkroom work. Scanning, editing, and presenting photos on the web or part of a slide show presented on a 75" UHDTV are just as creative.I live in Maine and I see a lot of tourists in the Summer. Almost every time I go to a popular spot at LEAST one person has a 35mm camera. They do skew younger I suppose though I don't think I'm that old (35). Rarely do I see anyone but pros shooting portrait sessions using a DSLR. Everyone else, smart phones.
It was a mistake to think photography is a zero sum game in which the easiest route to the sharpest image wins. The craft now belongs to a class of activities in which the 'journey' so to speak is a big part of it. Horseback riding, sailing, listening to vinyl records, making bread from scratch, it's all the same feeling. Sitting with your laptop or desktop computer editing photos is not a fun or engaging experience, IMO. I'm glad more people are coming into the fold!
Some of these camera companies might want to do some production runs of film backs or film bodies.
maybe? IDK im not a scientist and don't claim to have all the information. i would imagine seeing Eastman Kodak was the largest polluter on the planet for decades using all sorts of nasty chemicals to produce film and papers, and the arsenic and cyanide ( or whatever it is ) used to extract and refine silver to be used for film and paper and that's just EK.Estimated to be 7 billion smart phones in use https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_mobile_phones_in_use
Not to mention how many billion old cell phones are on land fill. Parts are sourced from countries that dont have a great record for being environmentally friendly.
Even if you went back and added up all toxic chemicals that were used last 2 centuries in film, still wouldn't compare with the smart phone industry in the last 10 years, not even close.
I didn't bring up the point to make it contest; just to wish that those who live in the fantasy world of Film = bad polluter and digital = clean non-polluting would wake-up and acknowledge that they are part of the problem too.
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?