dmacmillan wrote: MAubrey wrote:
I can't understand the smaller set's contempt for those who do use film.
I wouldn't use the word "contempt", but I have no patience with the holier-than-thou hipsters who think their photography is more "real" and "authentic" because the shoot with a Diana instead of a DSLR.
It is sort of a common disease, thinking that choosing to use specific equipment or technology makes one's work better or, even more confounding, makes one a more ethical and sensitive person.
It isn't just "hipsters" shooting with film. It happens among people using a particular brand of digital camera, or a certain format, or brand and type of lens, or certain subjects.
Among those film-using hipsters there is some real talent, though the pose is easy to make fun of. But the same thing is true of, say, folks photographing birds, people restricting themselves to alt lenses, partisan users of Brand X/Y/Z, and on and on. Heck, I'm sure I fit into a few of those categories. (Bearded, no-longer-young guy with a tripod photographing landscapes. ;-)
As to the whole "film slows me down and that is good" school of thought... you can (and I do) go slow when it helps with the subject I'm photographing. Just because one can work faster in some cases with digital, that doesn't prevent anyone from working as slowly as they wish.
As to the "too much post-processing in digital" school, take a look at some of the classic masters — Adams (huge amounts of manipulation in post), HCB (dodged and burned like nobodies business), Eulsmann (need I say more?), the pictorialists (soft focus, manipulating the print during processing, double exposures), and even early landscape photographers who frequently inserted skies, etc.
The more things change, the more they stay the same. ;-)
dmacmillan wrote: MAubrey wrote:
I can't understand the smaller set's contempt for those who do use film.
I wouldn't use the word "contempt", but I have no patience with the holier-than-thou hipsters who think their photography is more "real" and "authentic" because the shoot with a Diana instead of a DSLR.
It is sort of a common disease, thinking that choosing to use specific equipment or technology makes one's work better or, even more confounding, makes one a more ethical and sensitive person.
It isn't just "hipsters" shooting with film. It happens among people using a particular brand of digital camera, or a certain format, or brand and type of lens, or certain subjects.
Among those film-using hipsters there is some real talent, though the pose is easy to make fun of. But the same thing is true of, say, folks photographing birds, people restricting themselves to alt lenses, partisan users of Brand X/Y/Z, and on and on. Heck, I'm sure I fit into a few of those categories. (Bearded, no-longer-young guy with a tripod photographing landscapes. ;-)
Dan
Dec 22, 2016 at 09:01 PM
Previous versions of gdanmitchell's message #13850634 « Could you go back to film? »
