Anything in excess, be it a hobby, a pursuit, an attitude, or action, often takes on the attributes of its opposite. Too much help becomes a handicap, adoration becomes obsession, pacifists become militants, all showing that too much of a blessing can be a curse. To some degree, I feel the ease and forgiving nature that comes with digital photography can be a drawback.
While it has enabled a veritable army of people to pick up photography and produce decent looking images within moments, it may be fair to say that it’s almost too easy. Of course, there are always challenges, but the ease and low cost at which a shot can be discarded puts less value on each click. Ergo the effort into production is likely less, and when the effort is less, the rewards tend to be also. The sweet ain’t as sweet, without the bitter. Or some such platitude.
I could sit here and predictably pen some love letter to analogue shooting, but I won’t. I did a little of that here, but also because I don’t need to. There are more and more people coming out to re-educate us all on the value of it. People like Edson Dias, and others at Goa-CAP (Center for Alternative Photography). He, in this wonderful 3-Minute Stories documentary by Amrit Vatsa, discusses why it is that some photographers are still advocating, and relentlessly shooting this older, slower, more costly way.
Most strikingly, in a beautiful analogy, compares analogue photography and the developing process, to painting. He discusses how how a digital printout, while not necessarily worse, is more akin to a printed reproduction of a painting, and how a proper film print is like the original on canvas. It’s a nice thought, and one I’m inclined to agree with. Even if you don’t, seeing the passion, and hearing it from Edson, may at least cause you to pause and reflect. It may be a bit of romance for film, but what it assures us is that it’s not film’s swan song. Thankfully.
Source: The Phoblographer, Images are screen captures from linked video