After listening to Edward Burtynsky talk about his 10,000 year Gallery on CBC radio I started realising something: I agree. Specifically on his thoughts on the digital age and how we should welcome back the traditional ways of printed film photography!
We all think digital is fine and dandy, clicking here and there at every moment we live through, hoping our ridiculous amount of megapixels will be better than our friends’. We all do it. We click without really looking, and if the picture isn’t good we take another while deleting the last. So once we’re satisfied with our picture we need to find a machine, usually the expensive kinds that you can’t really get under 500$ unless its second hand. What kind of machine you ask?
A computer of course! Unless you think going to those printing machines at the department stores are cheaper. It’s up to you. Either way we need to find a way for our digitally formatted photography to be viewed. So then we print. But what if you have over 5000 pictures? Why would you spend so much money printing them? Well, you don’t. You’ll just en up showing off your pictures from the screensavers or make lots of slideshows. But you’ll still need a machine with a screen. Either that or you’ll only print out selected pictures that you never really put any more thought into than that.
But what about the manipulation of pictures on the computer that could never be done in the traditional ways?
A good point made. But in my opinion, in this digital age we need to upgrade so often that even if you’ve managed to create a piece of art on Photoshop today, you’ll need to find a computer that hasn’t become obsolete in 5 years just to view it. So print it before its too late!!
But in that case, u'll then need go buy another computer which can become more expensive than just buying the blasted 35mm flims!
Ok, so now we've switched to films. A supposedly long process of buying the 5$ film, loading it in the camera, and then clicking away. Or just buy a disposable for a couple more bucks. Oh, but wait! You only have 24-36 shots! Better make the most of it and save your time on things that are worth remembering. But isn’t that a good thing? Isn’t that what photography is all about? Taking your time, looking, observing, seeing things as they are with your own eyes first? Contemplating and hesitating are keys to taking a good photograph since you won’t really know the result until it’s developed. I don’t remember the last time I did that with a digital camera in my hands knowing the picture will instantaneously appear on the LCD screen. So what if we all take a little more time with film photography? Why have we come to think that film is too time consuming? Why do we all have to hurry?
Unfortunately hastiness and laziness is inevitable in this technological age and that is why traditional photography is disappearing. So until everyone decides to slow down again, I think it should come back!
http://blog.longnow.org/2008/07/24/edward-burtynsky-the-10000-year-gallery/
http://www.cbc.ca/spark/blog/2008/09/full_interview_ed_burtynsky_on_1.html
olor negatives. It’s sad how people today have all converted to the digital world. It hasn’t occurred to anybody that digital photography is completely not the same as traditional?... It’s sad to find out that artists like me who take traditional photography seriously isn’t able to develop a simple good quality 4x5 color negative. I’m trying to create an impression of lights into a masterpiece but am limited because of technology. Don’t get me wrong, I’m not against it. I just don’t see why film photography has to disappear, because, let’s face it, it soon will and only artists like me will try to keep it alive. Struggling.
evelopment through lights and chemicals. As for black and white, you can actually see the image appear right before your eyes… it’s like magic! Why would we want to let this all go?
