MAubrey wrote:
I can't understand others' disinterest in using film.
I can't understand the smaller set's contempt for those who do use film.
Who is the "smaller set?" Is that the people who no longer are interested in using film? By and large, we do not have "contempt" for people who still use it. I have good friends who are highly respected photographers who prefer to use it and they make beautiful photographs, as do our friends and associates who don't use film at this point.
Or perhaps by "smaller set" you actually refer to a very tiny group of people who might actually have "contempt" for those who use film. I haven't met those people, but they sound like them might be unpleasant.
Dan
Edited, following an update to the quoted post by the person to whom I was replying.
MAubrey wrote:
I can't understand others' disinterest in using film.
I can't understand the smaller set's contempt for those who do use film.
Who is the "smaller set?" Is that the people who no longer are interested in using film? By and large, we do not have anything remotely like "contempt" for people who still use it. I have good friends who are highly respected photographers who prefer to use it and they make beautiful photographs, as do our friends and associates who don't use film at this point.
Or perhaps by "smaller set" you actually refer to a very tiny group of people who might actually have "contempt" for those who use film. I haven't met those people.
Dan
Edited, following an update to the quoted post by the person to whom I was replying.
MAubrey wrote:
I can't understand others' disinterest in using film.
I can't understand the smaller set's contempt for those who do use film.
I'm not quite following you here. Many of the reasons that folks like me who were brought up using film are no longer interested have been described in this thread. Or perhaps you literally meant "disinterest," as in its older meaning of unbiased? In that case, I suppose the characterization is correct, in that we don't have a bias for or against the use of film technologies in photography relative to other technologies beyond our own choices in our own work.
Who is the "smaller set?" Is that the people who no longer are interested in using film? By and large, we do not have anything remotely like "contempt" for people who still use it. I have good friends who are highly respected photographers who prefer to use it and they make beautiful photographs, as do our friends and associates who don't use film at this point.
Or perhaps by "smaller set" you actually refer to a very tiny group of people who might actually have "contempt" for those who use film. I haven't met those people.
MAubrey wrote:
I can't understand others' disinterest in using film.
I can't understand the smaller set's contempt for those who do use film.
I'm not quite following you here. Many of the reasons that folks like me who were brought up using film are no longer interested have been described in this thread. Or perhaps you literally meant "disinterest," as in its older meaning of unbiased?
Who is the "smaller set?" Is that the people who no longer are interested in using film? By and large, we do not have anything remotely like "contempt" for people who still use it. I have good friends who are highly respected photographers who prefer to use it and they make beautiful photographs, as do our friends and associates who don't use film at this point.
Or perhaps by "smaller set" you actually refer to a very tiny group of people who might actually have "contempt" for those who use film. I haven't met those people.
Dan
Dec 22, 2016 at 05:01 PM
Previous versions of gdanmitchell's message #13850350 « Could you go back to film? »
