Do you remember when taking a photograph wasn’t simply a
matter of whipping out your phone, pressing a virtual button, reviewing, editing
it in some app and then uploading to Facebook or the cloud or whatever?
Photography used to be all turning dials, carefully sizing
up your view, not pointing into the sun and clicking. Of course I’m talking
holiday snap photography and not the serious photography carried out by men who
belonged to camera clubs with three cameras around their necks, dozens of
lenses, light meters, and hundreds of rolls of film all with different speeds –
whatever a film speed is.
Photography used to be hard and very hit or miss. How many
times did I send off my free film envelope to have my holiday snaps developed
only to find, when they were returned a few days later, twenty or so glossy
squares of people with their heads cut off or obscured by my thumb. There were often some strange
orange and black nothing snaps that were plastered with stickers in the packet too. Sometimes, if
I was lucky, I might get two or three passable pictures out of a roll of
thirty-six. But I do remember the elation of being returned thirty-seven prints
from a thirty-six film even if thirty-four of them were really rubbish.
And what about loading the camera in the first place? Such a
fiddly experience with spools and tabs to slot the film in and to top it all
you had to shut yourself in a dark cupboard to do it so as not to expose the
film. I remember once at Dudley Zoo going into the reptile house to load my
camera only to find that I hadn’t closed the camera back fully and my - what
were definitely thirty-six or seven fantastic shots of monkeys and penguins - turned out as a series of grey fogged nothings. Happy days? Probably, but I don’t
have the pictures to prove it.
In my house there are hundreds of photographs, drawers and
drawers full of them. Most of them were taken on all manner of ‘proper’, but
relatively cheap cameras. Some were taken using those useless disposable things
that were all the rage for a while and guaranteed to disappoint. Others were
snapped using a camera that took a film cartridge instead of a roll. There may
even be the odd badly fading and horribly asymmetrical Polaroid lurking
alongside them. What a revelation; a camera that developed instant pictures, although
the films were an astronomical price.
Even with all those happy memories of big rocks and ships in
the very far distance gathering dust, I can’t remember the last time I looked
at them. This digital world has made it all too easy. Everyone seems to be able
to take a half decent photograph even if it is only of them pouting or a pint
of beer and you can keep your whole life on a single USB.
I’m not sure if that is a good thing or a bad thing.
Neil Barrett on FB
ReplyDeleteI wonder what will happen to all the digital photos I've taken, very few have been printed .
We have family photos going back to the 1900s that will get passed on to future generations.
But what will happen to the digital images on a hard drive of my kids.
Andrew Height
DeleteThat is an excellent point. These days kids treat images as throw away items - snapchat. What is the future for family albums I wonder? Crack that one Neil and you could make a bomb.
John Hatton on FB
ReplyDeleteOne of the few good things from the digital age I think? Perfect shots every time but lets hope the "cloud" where they're all stored doesn't burst!!
Andrew Height
Deleteyes, digital has made it all so good, although I loved the smell of the chemicals in the darkroom when I was a student. Maybe there's more to a photograph than just the image, like there's more to a painting than the oils and canvas. Who knows?
Vicky Sutcliffe on FB
ReplyDeletePolaroids were my youth! Dad always had a camera in his pocket. I think I may buy myself one!
Andrew Height
DeleteThey have a totally different feel. In fact all of the old cameras did. We need enhancing and apps to make digital photos half as atmospheric.
Paul Whitehouse on FB
ReplyDeleteAnother very good blog topic Andrew! I have a mixed view on this, I love the digital technology , and I have tens of thousands of pics saved in the cloud which i never look at. BUT I absolutely deplore people jumping at the opportunity to film tragic incidents like RTAs on their phones. And I hate going to any public performance because there are always people in front obstructing the view with their phones held high right in my eye-line. I wouldn't mind but I know their end result is only going to be shit because of the poor light and sheer distance from the stage and this makes me even angrier. I admire artists like Kate Bush who asked her audience not to make her look out from the stage at a wall of mobile phones. More performers need to take this stance.
You are getting me onto mobile phones now, by default. Again I adore and embrace this technology but I hate the public's almost Pavlovian response to them....you CAN ignore the call....you CAN switch the fukker off when you are eating in a Michelin Star restaurant, where diners don't want to pay a premium price to sit and listen listen to you talking absolute drivel to your sister and her kids!
Andrew Height
DeleteBrilliantly put Paul. Everything has become about reputation management through selfies and stuff. Well I say FRICK THAT, I'd rather be real. Well, as real as I can be.
Fraser Stewart on FB
ReplyDeleteThose were the days. Young people don't know how fortunate they are.
Andrew Height
Deletewhich is the subject for my blog tonight.
Fraser Stewart
DeleteLearnt photography the hard way. Hit & miss is the correct term.
Tim Preston on FB
ReplyDeleteI like the permanent nature of old photos and yet I also like the temporary nature of digital photos. But which ones do I like best? There's only one way to find out .......
Tim Preston
Thanks for the memories Andy smile emoticon