Well, why does it have to be film?

Me: I want to start shooting more shots just of our real daily life. Not posed, composed, not only when the light is right, not only when the moment is perfect, just the realities of it all.

Him: Okay

Me: But I worry that because these photos won’t be as “good” or as “pretty,” they won’t make facebook, flickr, the wall, the frame, and so they may be forgotten. How should I curate them to make sure I look back at these photos years from now and not just the ones I really worked at or liked? Or should it not be a forced thing, to have to look at them? I just really want to remember all those details, not just the pretty ones, via photos. And is it worth the cost then?

Him: Well, why does it have to be shot on film?

I suppose the answer to that lies in the fact that I never even considered this would be a digital project. Film was the assumed media and digital never occurred to me. Hmmm…

Also, please read this great post by my younger sister, a photojournalism student at UMass. It is very near and dear to my heart.

http://www.umass.edu/viewmass/visit-my-sister

Advertisements
This entry was published on February 27, 2013 at 4:44 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink. Follow any comments here with the RSS feed for this post.

7 thoughts on “Well, why does it have to be film?

  1. I like the way your thinking because as I look back at old film pictures I would take of our first apartment, it may be similar to your scene above the kitchen sink for instance, it brings back a flood of memories. I know since digital came along many of my images get stuck in the computer, I have a laptop full of them that doesn’t even work anymore (pictures lost) I have an old mac disconnected pictures just sitting on the hard drive (lost) film is printed. It’s there to hold in our hands, to put in books. I get it, I love it. I think I should read your sisters post. moments, imperfect are especially my favorite.

  2. Those two are wonderful, why do you worry about the quality?

  3. damiec on said:

    apples and oranges. some the pictures are designed for an audience, others are meant to delight an audience of one – you. you can’t help but bring your skill and your knowledge to both kinds of shooting, and maybe you’ll learn some things when you shoot expressly for that personal memory that will carry over to the other. if you are worried about the cost, don’t shoot a whole roll, maybe only a few frames, but give yourself the license to shoot as you wish. that’s my two cents.

  4. That is interesting. I do still love my digital camera and I am still relaxed by spending time in photoshop. Right now I’m happy doing both.

    My kids and I tend to go through my photos regularly, and there are plenty that aren’t “flickr-worthy,” but they mean a lot to us. Without kids around, I guess I’d be more interested in coming up with something different. I don’t think everything has to be shared, but sharing does have it’s qualities.

    I think slideshows can be good ways of sharing the photos that aren’t perfect but have meaning to you. I will put lesser-but-meaningful-to-me-and-my-family-and-friends photos up on facebook.

  5. Film really does have a look that digital can’t replicate. Your shots always have a quality that I admire 🙂

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: