digital Detox

It's kind of like analog(ue) audio. LP's: wow, flutter, hiss, rumble, surface noise, pinched high's as you approach the center. The list goes on. I think this analog stuff is just romantic fantasy. If only for convenience's sake digital is a winner.

There are those who enjoy darkrooms, chemicals, a dwindling film supply and so on. I know a few folks who are not only into that but platinum prints and other exotic print formats. It's their time to spend.
 
What's the point of living if one couldn't indulge in 'Romantic Foolishness'. Currently I very seldom need to 'get the job done' so I can just focus on pure enjoyment which is the process of shooting film. There is basically nothing that draws me to digital. Even the convenience arguments I view as a negative one. But everyone is different.
 
wlewisiii said:
Meh. Romantic foolishness. I have film and digital and use both as appropriate. Use the correct tool for the correct job but don't pretend any of this silliness is the be all end all of it.
Click to expand...

Let us not forget economic foolishness. Many of us are OAPs - old age pensioners, mostly on incomes that are somewhat reduced from what we earned during our working lives - and the reality today is film, printing paper and all other darkroom supplies, in sad fact anything and everything to do with the old-time photography we did until that damn digital moved in and ruined it for us, are now so expensive as to make even buying a five-pack of film more an investment than an indulgence.

Granted, film has its devotees - and long may they go on being devoted - but since I retired 12 years ago, digital has brought my photo costs down to a level I can still afford, which is great. I nowadays could no longer rebuild a darkroom, let alone keep my ten film cameras supplied with appropriate emulsions. I sold about half my darkroom during the Covid lockdown in 2020, for a surprisingly good price, but given the downturn in everything analog these days, I doubt I would now get even half the money I made from that sale. Sad, but there it is.

I am now at a point where I have some stocks of film (refrigerated but ageing, like its owner), a small fortune in good quality FB paper (I disposed of all my RC stocks with the aforementioned sale four years ago) and basic chemicals left, moldering away in secure storage at home. When its all gone, that will be it for me, done with film for this lifetime. I'll miss it, but there are other consolations in my life, my home, family, friends, travel, good food, coffee, wine - and my Nikon DSLRs.

There is also the factor that I can easily make 100 good images of a favorite subject, whereas a few decades ago when I traveled I was always counting how many exposures I could afford to make on my stock of precious Kodachrome or Ektachrome. Now I take as many images of anything I like as I want to. Given my analog background, I try to discipline myself in my picture-makin. I do my best to not machine-gun my way to 'spray and pray' results, but with digital the temptation is always there. The delete button on my laptop is one of my best friends.

Cynicism aside, and bearing in mind the high costs of what seems to have now become 'niche' pastimes, I heartily agree with everything wiewisiii has written in his post.

And as for that YouTube production, again quoting wlewisiii, meh! indeed. If the guy in that clip was a real man, he would be holding a Leica or a Rolleiflex. As I see it - Polaroid was for pussies!!

PS No offense to real cats is in any way intended.
 
Last edited:
Why use a Polaroid 450? No one makes film for it. I have a couple of packs left in the Fridge, but use the SLR680 and SLR690 much more because film is available.

I have a Polaroid 450, used it for a long time until I ran out of Hi-Power Flashcubes. Focused-Flash, perfect exposure everytime.

And now- time for writing some code.
 
DownUnder said:
Let us not forget economic foolishness. Many of us are OAPs - old age pensioners, mostly on incomes that are somewhat reduced from what we earned during our working lives - and the reality today is film, printing paper and all other darkroom supplies, in sad fact anything and everything to do with the old-time photography we did until that damn digital moved in and ruined it for us, are now so expensive as to make even buying a five-pack of film more an investment than an indulgence.

Granted, film has its devotees - and long may they go on being devoted - but since I retired 12 years ago, digital has brought my photo costs down to a level so low, I nowadays could no longer afford to rebuild a darkroom, let alone keep my ten film cameras supplied with appropriate emulsions. In fact I sold about half my darkroom during the Covid lockdown in 2020, for a surprisingly good price, but given the downturn in everything analog these days, I doubt I would now get even half the money I made from that sale. Sad, but there it is.

I am now at a point where I have some stocks of film (refrigerated but ageing, like its owner), a small fortune in good quality FB paper (I disposed of all my RC stocks with the aforementioned sale four years ago) and basic chemicals left, moldering away in secure storage at home. When its all gone, that will be it for me, done with film for this lifetime. I'll miss it, but there are other consolations in my life, my home, family, friends, travel, good food, coffee, wine - and my Nikon DSLRs.

There is also the factor that I can easily make 100 good images of a favorite subject, whereas a few decades ago when I traveled I was always counting how many exposures I could afford to make on my stock of precious Kodachrome or Ektachrome. Now I take as many images of anything I like as I want to. Given my analog background, I try to discipline myself in my picture-makin. I do my best to not machine-gun my way to 'spray and pray' results, but with digital the temptation is always there. The delete button on my laptop is one of my best friends.

Cynicism aside, and bearing in mind the high costs of what seems to have now become 'niche' pastimes, I heartily agree with everything wiewisiii has written in his post.

And as for that YouTube production, again quoting wlewisiii, meh! indeed. If the guy in that clip was a real man, he would be holding a Leica or a Rolleiflex. As I see it - Polaroid was for pussies!!

PS No offense to real cats is in any way intended.
Click to expand...
Very well said. Thank you
 
I definitively think there is a place for digital cameras. And keeping cost down could be one. It depends on how you photograph as well as the gear you choose.
Last time I went for a vacation I brought a Nikon FM2, one lens and 2 rolls of kodak portra. It was a most relaxing 2 weeks. No viewing of images on screen, no delete buttons. Just one press, the shutter and move on. And after receiving the images from the lab I spent 0 minutes editing in front of the computer.
Cost per film including development and scanning was about 30. And of course it adds up. Usually though I shoot black and white and develop myself. (which I do enjoy) This keeps the cost down to 8-12 depending on film.

If I went back to digital I could pick up a point and shoot at a flea market for like 10.
But I probably would want a camera with some manual controls and good glass. How much would that set me back? I have no clue, but I quickly googled digital cameras. And saw that Fuji has produced some kind of rangefinder looking camera. I probably would want something like that. Not cheap that one.
Like 100 rolls of film expensive :)
 
I had it, got last film stock from B&H. Used one pack and sold everything.

Polaroid... it looks as something invented without ergonomics been involved.
Yet. have seen people putting Polaroid camera as tatoo image.


It is nice to have instant image, soo tiny you can't see it is never in focus, actually. Won't cut on digital, indeed.

So, it is relief for those who struggles to get it in-focus on digital.
 
Last edited:
Rikard said:
I definitively think there is a place for digital cameras. And keeping cost down could be one. It depends on how you photograph as well as the gear you choose.
Last time I went for a vacation I brought a Nikon FM2, one lens and 2 rolls of kodak portra. It was a most relaxing 2 weeks. No viewing of images on screen, no delete buttons. Just one press, the shutter and move on. And after receiving the images from the lab I spent 0 minutes editing in front of the computer.
Cost per film including development and scanning was about 30. And of course it adds up. Usually though I shoot black and white and develop myself. (which I do enjoy) This keeps the cost down to 8-12 depending on film.

If I went back to digital I could pick up a point and shoot at a flea market for like 10.
But I probably would want a camera with some manual controls and good glass. How much would that set me back? I have no clue, but I quickly googled digital cameras. And saw that Fuji has produced some kind of rangefinder looking camera. I probably would want something like that. Not cheap that one.
Like 100 rolls of film expensive :)
Click to expand...
It is hard to get nice looking digital for pennies. Just as it is hard now to get working, non trashed FM2 for cheap. For less where are Canon 5D series cameras, original and MK2. One EF lens is cheap as well.
Those are highly regarded among neo-hipsta. Nor I want to sell it.
Build to lasts and battery lasts for more than two weeks :)
 
Ko.Fe. said:
It is hard to get nice looking digital for pennies. Just as it is hard now to get working, non trashed FM2 for cheap. For less where are Canon 5D series cameras, original and MK2. One EF lens is cheap as well.
Those are highly regarded among neo-hipsta. Nor I want to sell it.
Build to lasts and battery lasts for more than two weeks :)
Click to expand...
Yes I've seen that prices have been creeping up for the good analog gear. 10 years ago I sold my digital gear and got a FM2 for 100, Leica M6 for 700 and a Mamyia 7ii for 1100. I remember that I thought it was quite expensive, when I compared to what my friends got their stuff for a couple of years earlier. Now it looks to be about 2 times as expensive. I should really sell my Mamiya since I don't use it much.
Actually I think i still have a digital Nikon 700 somewhere. So I'll always have that option I guess :)
 
nice to see how there are different points of view. like many of you i got into digital photography several years ago and for certain types of photos i have to say that digital is unsurpassed: i am thinking for example of nature photography and the possibility to shoot on APS sensors without having to spend so much to buy a 500mm, the possibility to change iso at any time and not having to change the film so frequently. For all other types of photography, digital has never appealed to me. Only one photo, of all those hanging in the house was taken with a Nikon D2h and Nikkor 80-200 2.8, the others are all prints from film (Rolleicord, Mamiya RB67, Hasselblad, nikon FE, ....). It is not my intention to set up a discussion about what is best, I think everyone knows what is better for hisself. Just the title of the post alone made me think about the fact that certainly, at least as far as I am concerned, I would need a digital detox, which is only partly about photography.
 
Last edited:
Sonnar Brian said:
Why use a Polaroid 450? No one makes film for it. I have a couple of packs left in the Fridge, but use the SLR680 and SLR690 much more because film is available.

I have a Polaroid 450, used it for a long time until I ran out of Hi-Power Flashcubes. Focused-Flash, perfect exposure everytime.

And now- time for writing some code.
Click to expand...

Correction: Supersense in Austria makes Type 100 films for these cameras.

One Instant
 
caila77 said:
Just the title of the post alone made me think about the fact that certainly, at least as far as I am concerned, I would need a digital detox, which is only partly about photography.
Click to expand...
I hear you. My dream is to rent a house by a lake. Drive there with the car filled with good food, wine, books, one camera, one lens and one woman. Leave the phone at home and just eat, read, shoot and **** until I become fully detoxed.
 
Last edited:
Rikard said:
I hear you. My dream is to rent a house by a lake. Drive there with the car filled with good food, wine, books, one camera, one lens and one woman. Leave the phone at home and just eat, read, shoot and **** until I’m fully detoxed.
Click to expand...
I went camping recently in a field next to a river and around the corner from a brewery and a heritage railway.

Turned my phone off, left it in the tent, and just wandered around with a pair of Leicas for three days. It was absolute bliss.

For someone who works at a computer all day every day, there is a lot to be said for actively not being near one (including a modern mobile phone) for days at a time; I felt better than I have in ages.

I suspect this might be why "younger generations" are talking about digital detoxes while the retirees amongst us - who aren't forced to sit in front of a computer for 8+ hours a day - don't really get it.
 
Rikard said:
I hear you. My dream is to rent a house by a lake. Drive there with the car filled with good food, wine, books, one camera, one lens and one woman. Leave the phone at home and just eat, read, shoot and **** until I become fully detoxed.
Click to expand...
I wouldbe prefer to be parachuted… without a woman… since I’m married from many years🤣🤣🤣🤣
 
Last edited:
In about 20 years, when cutting-edge pros and wanna-be amateurs have all shifted to "photography" created with AI, there will be articles about doing AI detox and returning to that quaint, retro, old-school digital. You know, where the photographer actually had to go out and point his or her camera at actual subject matter!
I call BS on all these film vs. digital arguments. Shoot whichever you like, make no apologies, and don't feel that there's the need to justify your position. Celebrate all of your fellow photographers, whatever their choice of tools, and appreciate all the wonderful work being done by both film and digital shooters. Go out and make images and stop squabbling.
 
Kai-san said:
Correction: Supersense in Austria makes Type 100 films for these cameras.

One Instant
Click to expand...
That is great news. I bought a model 350 when I was a Teenager- when they were new. Lots of mowing lawns.
I adapted a Model 100 to 'AAA' batteries, and put a Zeiss finder on it. But- sold my Model 180 for >$700 before Fuji stopped making film. I have two sets of lenses for the Model 195, the 114/3.8 Tominons.
 
Last edited:
Rikard said:
What's the point of living if one couldn't indulge in 'Romantic Foolishness'. Currently I very seldom need to 'get the job done' so I can just focus on pure enjoyment which is the process of shooting film. There is basically nothing that draws me to digital. Even the convenience arguments I view as a negative one. But everyone is different.
Click to expand...

I would not discourage you at all from pursuing your romantic photographic fantasies in any manner. Whatever floats your boat. And I have listened to folks limning the merits of film and exotic printing techniques. Some are adept at this. And their presented work is very nice. But, alas, in too many cases it is putting lipstick on a pig. But not always.

I can get the same enjoyment with digital without the delay, chemicals and fuss. I started playing with cameras when it meant I would spend all of Saturday in a large dark room lighted with a single bare red lightbulb. Bulk loaders with Plus-X were the thing. Tri-X came later. Color meant waiting weeks for Kodak to receive, process and return what had been shot. So "I have been there, done that, got the T-shirt, joined the fan club, etc., etc.,etc."

So we can both pursue our pleasures with cameras and do it in different ways.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top