26 January, 2009: Rant-athlon by Anja Lieder

Anja Lieder | all galleries >> The Fun Scrap Book >> PWICBB - Picture when I can be bothered > 26 January, 2009: Rant-athlon

previous | next

26 January, 2009: Rant-athlon

Met for a relaxed drink with Huw on Monday night after a weekend of being on-call. We talked about how crap digital photography is (except for these spur-of-the-moment shots and for speed and convenience), how it has no soul, how digital is pushing analogue away and how so many people think that macros of bees legs, oversaturated seascapes with water rising like fog are considered artful etc. etc. etc.

I shall be giving up digital photography for lent. Only film AND black and white shots allowed. I want to learn more about black and white, so this suits me well. So I will give up otehr thing,s but more about that later.

other sizes: small medium large original auto

previous | next

Anja Lieder		28-Jan-2009 18:56
Cheers! Gee, this provoked some opinion! Thank you! With digital, cost depends on your starting point. Having to buy a PC and a DSLR is costly. And what is the average life span of those? 4,5 years... then you buy a new one. With analogue, the processing may appear costlier, but you get cheap labs. And the hardware lasts nearly forever. And vinyl sounds much, much better than CD. And does Huw have a split personality? Hah! Interesting one, Ann! Maybe, sometimes, he does! Usually there is a lot of digital snobbery - and you are smiled at with an analogue camera. As Ann says, there is room for everyone and everything, but I digital has taken over many photo magazines and books. I just hope, like vinyl, analogue stays alive. This picture was taken with a Fujifilm S5 - it's not lent yet! A matter of convenience. J., right about the digital photo-sharing platform! Beats the album, yet I stubbornly insist you can recognise a good film scan on a screen ... much higher resolution, and lovely fat globules instead of noise... Inga is right! This would eba good discussion over a beer (or many!)

Ted Parkins		28-Jan-2009 06:13
When your eyes and back make it near impossible to get a sharp image in the enlarger and the fumes from the chemistry get to your chest then digital imaging has great attraction.While you are able, continue with 'silver/chemical' photography.

Jola Dziubinska		28-Jan-2009 01:15
Nicely captured, I like the warm tones.

carol j. phipps		28-Jan-2009 00:33
COOL\HOT composition.

carol j. phipps		28-Jan-2009 00:33
Digital is such a cost savor! Your thoughts are appro-poe . . . God speed!

Inga Morozoff		28-Jan-2009 00:28
Although I didn't come on board with photography until the digital age, yet find it interesting how many "photographers" only produce and post snap-shots. I suppose it's really to each his own. Interesting discussion for over a beer.

Gail Davison		27-Jan-2009 20:42
I think Lent might be getting to you. have a bar of chocolate.

Richard Chapman		27-Jan-2009 20:16
My theory is that the images I once took with film are better than the ones I take now with digital mainly because I have lost them all, so they exist only in my memory where they are of course all perfect...

J. Scott Coile		27-Jan-2009 18:36
...and yet you will resort to the digital platform to share the art... Love the moody color here.

Phillip Normanton		27-Jan-2009 18:30
Sounds like analogue snobbery to me. If there is any 'soul', it's in the photograph, not in the equipment used to make it?

Stewart Mitchell		27-Jan-2009 18:29
Ahhh....the analogue vs digital debate, very little gray area here..it's very black and white (Ooooooh sorry!!) whether it's LPs vs CDs, cine vs video, film vs digital the argument seems to be the same - body or soul, roundness or blandness. I've considered shooting film again...but then I'd scan the negs or slides anyway and end up processing digital renditions. I guess I'm comfortable with the trade off between speed (immediate feedback) and image atmosphere (grain, colour rendition) and I'd still shoot the foggy water seascapes on film 'cos I like 'em! Good luck on your challenge... I'll let your results persuade me on what I'm missing!! Oh..and that's a very fine portrait of Huw above, regardless of the source medium.

Michael Shpuntov		27-Jan-2009 18:20
Well, well, well. Didn't I here it 40 years ago that transistor amplifiers will never compare to tube ones, and 20 years ago that CD will never sound like vinyl. Sorry for the cliche, it's not the camera takes the shot..... So I can't agree with your nostalgia here. Good shot BTW, guess made with digital?

Ann...		27-Jan-2009 17:10
It's a wide world .... there's room for all, whatever floats your boat!! Great image, does he really have a split personality? :)

Barbara Heide		27-Jan-2009 16:28
that's a thought! digital is good for learning... going analog then is a sort of artistic accomplishment! good luck and enjoy!

Cindi Smith		27-Jan-2009 15:37
I couldn't afford the processing myself and having someone else do it would cost me too much money so I'll have to stick with digital. Good luck on your endeavor!

Guest		27-Jan-2009 15:01
Hmmm, I'll have to contradict my predecessor here - shooting film is a lot cheaper than digital photography, trust me - I know what I'm talking about. It's even cheaper when you do your own processing (which I have never done, sadly). Good on you, pumpkin, for giving up digital photography for Lent. I'm still trying to come up with something original, otherwise it'll be the rather uninspired Sex & (non-prescription) Drugs & Dairy Products ;o)

Nancy Good		27-Jan-2009 14:23
Nice shot, fun candid portrait... so sorry to hear you feel limited by digital photography. Not all of us have the funds to spend on film photography. Looking forward to seeing what your inspirations are during lent. :-)

Maaike Huizer		27-Jan-2009 13:20
You are probably right. But I keep on with digital for now. This is a great shot!

Ray :)		27-Jan-2009 13:13
It's the macros of the bee's knees that are really good.

Commenting on this page requires a PBase account.
Please login or register.