film v. digital

[Gary R. Smith]

I imagine that 99% of us have arrived here via 35mmc (which is 99% film I'd imagine).

Is there an implicit understanding that this site is also 99% film?

I know there are a few who post digital (I'm among them, although my posts are as likely to be either) but I'm wondering if the digital posts are having an impact on the regular film poster?

It seems as if what was always minimal traffic has gotten slower (or maybe it's my imagination).

 

[Gianluca Drago]

I imagine that 99% of us have arrived here via 35mmc (which is 99% film I'd imagine).

Is there an implicit understanding that this site is also 99% film?

I know there are a few who post digital (I'm among them, although my posts are as likely to be either) but I'm wondering if the digital posts are having an impact on the regular film poster?

It seems as if what was always minimal traffic has gotten slower (or maybe it's my imagination).

I am 100% digital and, no, I did not get here via 35mmc. I like this forum because it is very open, vigilant but not censoring. The comments are never offensive, but always interesting. I learn a lot and have never felt left out because I don't develop my photos in a darkroom. Gary, I often regret having posted photos because when I see them the next day they seem insignificant, but I have never felt that the judgement of those who participate in this forum makes a distinction between film and digital, it seems to me that everyone evaluates quality regardless of the production process. Long live this forum.

 

[Ralph Turner]

Film-based photography does get discussed here often (myself being one of the culprits as you know). Like Gianluca, I've never felt that the forum is especially biased one way or the other, though. A very good thing. Btw sorry I've not been around a lot lately .

 

[Gord Tomlin]

I'm in the same boat as Gianluca (100% digital and not on 35mmc). To be honest, if the forum showed a strong bias against digital, I'd show myself the door. But it hasn't. It's been totally accepting. I joined at the start of 2024, and it already seemed quiet. I'm not sure the activity level has changed much since then.

 

[Gary R. Smith]

I did not get here via 35mmc.

So how did you find this site? Have you ever visited 35mmc?

 

[Tony Warren]

Something of an old chestnut I guess now. 25 years ago the battle was starting to rage but I have always maintained it is the image that counts not how it is produced. I do sometimes argue that digital products should perhaps be called "imaging" rather than "photography", much like LPs are now referred to as vinyl but I have my tongue in my cheek when I do.
As to 35mmc, I did come here from that website which I arrived at, in turn, from www.emulsive.org, a site I started with online but which I can now longer access for some reason. I confess I haven't tried too hard after finding 35mmc and now here.
I use both platforms but nowadays mostly film because after some 70 years at it, it is hard for old dogs to learn new tricks. I did a lot of competition and exhibiting with digital in the noughties and tens but as I now practice my photography solely as a means of amusing and expressing myself here and elsewhere.
As to whether content influences me, yes it does because I enjoy the varied content here and on 35mmc immensely. its origins have no impact at all. Vive l'image!

 

[Gianluca Drago]

So how did you find this site? Have you ever visited 35mmc?

I became aware of this forum when @Stevenson Gawen talked about it in another forum I frequent. From time to time I also visit 35mmc.

 

[Gary R. Smith]

it is hard for old dogs to learn new tricks.

Tony, Tony, Tony...
It's not >>that<< hard...
It's sort of funny. My very 1st SLR was the Canon FTb of which I currently have a working example. I recently took it out with something other than the nifty fifty which was the only lens I had for it 50 years ago. I cracked open the film canister in the dark of my bedroom closet and loaded a developing reel (the same style I used 50 years ago) and developed a roll of film. I have to say that I enjoy the process however I'll also say that I enjoy more the digital process.
At 70, I'm enjoying photography more than I ever did at 18.

 

[Stevenson Gawen]

I imagine that 99% of us have arrived here via 35mmc (which is 99% film I'd imagine).

I did! But I would say that 35mmc is more like 90% film, personally, but that might just be ''interest bias'' i.e. I notice the bit's I'm interested in more than those I don't. Not that I'm not interested in film, but digital is right up there too.

Is there an implicit understanding that this site is also 99% film?

Nope. Not as far as I'm aware, put it that way

As I see it, it's just a site for the "photographer who enjoys photography", but it seems to have self selected to those with an interest outside the 'normal' biggest-latest-best approach to gear, and those who enjoy a more... shall I say contemplative approach?

This kind of of automatically includes all the film-based work, but obviously doesn't exclude digital.
I've usually shared a fair amount of digital, at least.

As to a lack of posts... I'm well aware that I've slowed down a LOT in recent months. To fill you in a little...

It's mostly down to lack of both time and mental space for photography. I've moved countries, from Aus to the UK, on what was initially a working holiday with the possibility of staying if I liked it.
Well, I do like it.
This does mean however new challenges. I'm not happy in my current job here (a very dull manual labour based role) which was only ever meant to be a stop gap, and was fine for a while. But I got burnt out.
I've been forced to admit (much to my disgust) that I have a slightly fragile mental makeup (perhaps it goes with being somewhat creative?) and I simply cannot keep doing something that I have no interest in. I know many people do, or are forced to, but I can't.

Full stop.
I've moved to part time for the present, and have hopes for an upcoming interview for a much more interesting role.

Rather to my surprise.... I have also fallen in love, with a certain very lovely person. Which I have absolutely zero regrets (negative regrets??) about, but all this is taking up a chunk of time where I would probably have been shooting and posting in the past.

Sorry to take the thread a smidge off track but I kind of felt I owed an explanation.

 

[Gianluca Drago]

A lot of news, Steve! I am happy for the good news, of course. I'm sorry about your work problems, but many of us have been there and I'm sure that with your good qualities you will soon find something that satisfies you. Thanks for the update and good luck with everything!

Of course we miss your photos here, but I understand that you have much more important things to keep you busy!

 

[Stevenson Gawen]

A lot of news, Steve! I am happy for the good news, of course. I'm sorry about your work problems, but many of us have been there and I'm sure that with your good qualities you will soon find something that satisfies you. Thanks for the update and good luck with everything!

Of course we miss your photos here, but I understand that you have much more important things to keep you busy!

Thanks Gianluca!

 

[Ralph Turner]

I pretty much echo what Gianluca has said, Steve. I can sympathise with working in a job that, although one is more than capable of, is ultimately soul-destroying. All the very best, both professionally and personally speaking. If you ever find yourself north of the border, give us a shout

 

[Stevenson Gawen]

I pretty much echo what Gianluca has said, Steve. I can sympathise with working in a job that, although one is more than capable of, is ultimately soul-destroying. All the very best, both professionally and personally speaking. If you ever find yourself north of the border, give us a shout

Thanks Ralph! Soul-destroying sounds a bit dramatic but that is how felt actually. And will do

 

[Ralph Turner]

Regarding the film versus digital thing, as y'all know I love shooting on film again but, in a way, this wouldn't have happened if it were not for digital technology and being able to engage in the hybrid workflow. Like Gary, I'm enjoying my photography probably more now than I did in my young days, both for the reason stated and maybe a little extra self-confidence that has come with getting older and which was something I was woefully short of back then. Anyway, all good fun, grains or pixels.

 

[Julian Tanase]

I did came here because of the 35MMC, and my articles are about film and film cameras. I am a film user, not digital, but I am not of the kind who is pooh-poohing digital because, honestly, I do not have a single reason to do so. Anyways, I never thought of this forum as being mainly film or digital orientated. To be honest, I feel all right here, with people who enjoy photography for what it is, not necessarily what it is made with. I enjoy the free spirits here, politeness and friendship, open honesty and fairness. Good bunch of people they are, and this beats anything else in my book.

Film or digital? Whatever floats your boat, I say; I enjoy any photograph that makes me look again at it, which piques my curiosity or intrigues me.

 

[Beth Carter]

i've shot 2 or 3 rolls of film in my life (not counting the disposable cameras i was given on rare occasions as a kid). i learned on digital. i don't remember how i got here, but it wasn't through mmc. forums in general are dying off in favor of social media. which is a shame, because there's very little chance of learning from social media posts.

 

[Len Philpot]

I simply cannot keep doing something that I have no interest in. I know many people do, or are forced to, but I can't.

Been there, done that: Forty years of two occupational areas (first graphic design then IT) in which I had a slight passing interest at best, which the professional context quickly and totally excised. Part of that is my doing, since I can be very compartmental -- Highly interested in one specific thing, but totally disinterested in a related but slightly different thing. End result, work-wise, was that while every day at work wasn't a "day from hell" (although there certainly were more than a few particularly later on ) I also had no inherent interest in, nor any enjoyment of, the work I did. It was just a necessary evil -- Work for pay, nothing more.

But more on original topic, I've not been active here lately due to a photographic lull, because it's summer here. When you add butt-ugly summer on top of extremely limited subject matter opportunities the result is pretty much zero photography.

 

[Gary R. Smith]

As to a lack of posts...

It certainly seems that you have ample reason to not bother with this place! Hopefully things will settle for you and life will be more interesting in general!

 

[Gianluca Drago]

Judging by the many comments, it seems to me that the forum is alive and well. It is normal, I think, that during the summer the activity is reduced. And then we miss one of its main contributors who will hopefully be back soon, with all his wisdom, imagination, criticism, encouragement. And another important member is also missing lately (@Brian Moore, is there anybody in there? Just nod if you can hear me.)

 

[Tony Warren]

Tony, Tony, Tony...
It's not >>that<< hard...
It's sort of funny. My very 1st SLR was the Canon FTb of which I currently have a working example. I recently took it out with something other than the nifty fifty which was the only lens I had for it 50 years ago. I cracked open the film canister in the dark of my bedroom closet and loaded a developing reel (the same style I used 50 years ago) and developed a roll of film. I have to say that I enjoy the process however I'll also say that I enjoy more the digital process.
At 70, I'm enjoying photography more than I ever did at 18.

Oh Gary, Gary, Gary - I am 85 and I too enjoy it more than in my teens. What I mean is that it is hard to shake off habits of a life time but saying that, digital does indeed play an essential part in my photographic life, just that I turn to film cameras more readily. My early printing with a Johnsons Home Printing Outfit was done under our kitchen table that had a large cloth that reached the floor and by the light from the glow from the range fireplace. No safelight - I didn't even know I needed one!