The Online Photographer

35MMC, check ‘em out.
https://www.35mmc.com/

-Eric

"Just musing now, but the very first question might be, who are these younger photographers who are allegedly interested in film photography? They are rumored to exist, but are they more like the elusive snow leopard and giant squid, or more like Sasquatch and Nessie? If they're a real species, I'll have further questions. Where do they hang out?"

Based on my recent experience these neo-cryptid YETIs (Young Enthusiast Telephoto Ingenues?) may be found (at the very least) in the following locales: Burlington, VT and Brooklyn, NY. Leicas, Nikons, and Minoltas as far as the eye can see. I don't even do double-takes any more.

Getting here very late...missed the earlier film topic. But here's my 2 cents.

Mike, this is your blog. You should feel free to use it whimsically as you have for most of the recent years. Pool, coffee, cars, ... and much more have been your topics in recent years. And, demonstrably, photography has been very much a minority topic here. Clearly you have many readers who don't mind so ..shrug.

I am not interested in film photography, per se. I have no plans to ever use film again. It's a historic medium whose time has passed, a chemical medium that offers nothing but limitations. In the words of Kamala Harris's campaign rally chant, "We're not going back!"

Nevertheless, I am interested in occasionally watching masters of historic "alternate" photo media tease evocative results from wet media. But for me it's a subject to watch, not to read about. (And YouTube features plenty of young people experimenting with film these days, albeit not I can call expert. The subscription site The Darkroom Rumor is best for this.) That is, essays won't interest me at all.

Further, with all due respect, how long has it been since you've been involved in chemical photography? Are you suggesting that you're going to set up a darkroom and immerse yourself in chemical photography again? Or are you just going to reminisce and speculate?

Again, your blog, your call. You don't need anyone's permission. You clearly have many readers willing to support whatever you write.

[I'm well aware of your position, as you are of mine, but don't know, Ken. Read Zed's comment a few below this one. I'd just be following the flow.

People still wear watches, make their own furniture (often in personal workshops far more elaborate than any personal darkroom ever was), listen to symphony orchestras play 18th-century music, ride horses, write with fountain pens, play board games, buy bound-paper books, have fireplaces in their homes, etc., etc. You seem to be arguing that analog photography, rather than an alternative-process craft, is more like CRT tubes, Rolodexes, phone booths, Pong, or 8-track tapes: just something that is outmoded, useless, and extinct. I would argue it's more like learning to throw clay pots, painting in oil on canvas, copperplate etching, or learning to cook gourmet meals: not something anyone has to do, but that some might do because it's fun and satisfying. --Mike]

When I started reading your blog (probably near the start) I had zero interest in film photography. I was a student and I was time rich, digital and cash poor. I could stump up for a cheap dslr and a lens or two but I needed ongoing costs to be nil. I also had time and energy for editing and sorting my photo library.

Recently I've started shooting film for the first time in my life (except as a child but that's when we had no other options). Maybe I'll learn to develop it, but the main thing is the camera (Nikon EM) works with a nice set of Nikon ai lenses that also work with my D700, it's cheap and I don't worry about it getting damaged, I have my phone for anything I need to share more quickly or print at home immediately, and I don't mind the film costs any more. I also have far far less time to edit photos and the stuff that comes back in scans from the lab is beautiful as is. I mainly shoot Ilford HP2 and often push it to 1600/800 and love the look. I can print at home from digital scans as needed.

I was always interested by your film photography posts, but in an intellectual way. And until last year it never occurred to me I'd bother shooting film, but now I am. And I think my experience is similar to a lot of other people who are getting into film.

So yes - please do this!

Most of these young-uns are new to the old timey 'craft,' captivated by the hands on process. It's not a nostalgia thing- it's the novelty! Others are dedicated street 'togs' (apologies), and believe to do it right and true, it's gotta be analog, as practiced by the ancient ones.

I think it's great they keep both the tradition and tech alive! Personally, B&W is best served analog, color successfully translates in either.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QLg-cLEAgSI

You probably know this, but one place where you might encounter young film photographers is "Lomo" https://shop.lomography.com/us/

Also, my friend Steve Anchell has just finished a new edition of his book, "The Darkroom Cookbook" which he re-edited to focus on young people coming to film for the first time.
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1032404868/ref=ox_sc_act_title_1?smid=ATVPDKIKX0DER&psc=1&fbclid=IwY2xjawGOHgNleHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHUdBCmJk_ns-3AgIReR9AwpjWh1k5IkfJa7BN2IqYifhszKHcBdoya2ImQ_aem_4JYBEbKRCfPjrFMZ9wHQqA

He might even have some insight on what's happening with the youngsters now.

I don’t understand the negative comments. Film photography is still photography, and it’s not The Digital Online Photographer. It’s way more “on topic” than pool, tennis, cars, watches, fitness and nutrition. I would suggest you keep things current though. Shoot a roll. Send it to The Darkroom in California (one of the most popular national processors). Download the scans and post them on here or Flickr. This is the modern film experience for people who don’t live in a big city.

I’ve shot maybe 10 rolls that way over the years. Always return to digital. By the time shipping is calculated, it ends up around $30 a roll total, without prints. (Film+shipping+development/scans). Plus it’s so much slower than the old days.

Another thing young people have been doing is shooting with early digital cameras. You could try that too : ) .

How often you want to write about film photography is up to you. In writing, there are good days and there are bad days. It is important to keep writing and avoid hitting the dust.

Personally, I would like to read something about film at least once a week.

If it’s not ok to write about a photographic process used by contemporary photographers such as Barbara Bosworth, Judith Joy Ross, Alec Soth, Rahim Fortune, Mark Steinmetz, Matthew Genitempo, Deana Lawson, Rinko Kawauchi, Willian Eggleston, Toshio Shibata, Guido Guidi, Masao Yamamoto, Rineke Dijkstra, Hiroshi Sugimoto, Mikiko Hara, Antony Cairns, Takashi Homma, Gerry Johannsen, Robert Adams, Dolores Marat, Alys Tomlinson, Trent Parke, Michael Kenna, Raymond Meeks, Curran Hatleberg, Vanessa Winship (with apologies to many, many more) then what is it ok to write about?

Bring it on, brother! As a long time film photographer and a presently occasional film photographer using the hybrid process (self-processed film, camera and flatbed scanned into digital and inkjet), I look forward to what you would have to say and the discussions that would follow. Bring it on!

I read that more units of vinyl than CD's were sold in the US in 2022. And when I stopped in to the music shop for some guitar strings a while ago I noticed the display of new and vintage vinyl has grown at the expense of the formerly large CD display. I asked the clerk about it. She said that in their shop at least CD's are dead.

Thinking about the confluence of trends in photography I think the same thing could happen with cameras. I wonder if AI and the introduction of new film cameras could portend the replacement of the digital vs film model with the choice of AI powered camera phones vs digital as we know it vs film and I wonder if there is a future for digital cameras in the long run.

I got into photography in 2001 and shot film for 7 years. I have no interest in doing film photography again but I want to read about it and any thoughts and discussions about photography in general.

I don't know anyone personally who's shooting film either as the main or occasional medium and have no idea how popular it is. Based on the film photography-related content I see online (mostly vlogs), it seems similar to the resurgence of vinyl. There are few people who never stopped buying vinyl, some who did stop for a decade or two then got back into it, and many who are experiencing vinyl for the first time. Most people creating content about film photography appear to be young enough not to have been around when film was the only option. I've seen a few who are pursuing it seriously and creating engaging videos of their experiences but many seem to be using film as a gimmick, as if shooting film in itself somehow makes it noteworthy.

TOP is the only photo blog I still read regularly (partly because there aren't many blogs on any topic still around) and I'm glad that the site hasn't really changed since the time I started visiting it 20 years ago. I think the main reason why I still read your blogs is because you have an aptitude for writing that few other photo bloggers have. Even when you write about a topic I'm not particularly interested in or expressing an opinion that isn't unique, the way you put it into words usually makes it a worthwhile read. So, yes, I am interested in reading what your thoughts and feelings are on film photography, especially if they will cover various sub-topics instead of focusing on just one, such as a series of long essays about building your own darkroom. Even though I was in my early 30s when I started photography and shot film for only 7 years, that experience made a lasting effect and still has a strong influence on how I shoot, a lot like the first language you learn as a child has throughout your life. So it would be interesting to hear about this topic from someone who's lived through the film days and whose mind is still very much preoccupied with photography.

Here is a young film photographer that is not only talented but who also has a great sense of humor: http://www.youtube.com/@grainydaysss

My experience with "younger" generation interested in film is they don't understand the basics and don't want to know about things like aperture, depth of field, film speed, shutter speed etc. They are astonished that it's all done by chemistry but don't really care about that either. They just want to be able to point and shoot and get an image back that wasn't created by a computer. It's not important that it's properly exposed, or well composed, or even in focus. That they don't understand it is effectively the magic. IMO that's why Fujifilm's instant film cameras are so popular, and why Ricoh/Pentax has such a hit with their new half-frame - it doesn't require focusing or thinking just take a guess, point and shoot - the format is familiar to everyone with a phone camera - and its light, small and kinda cool. So if you want to speak to a new film audience, stay away from everything gear based or technical - they are embracing analogue precisely to avoid those topics. Instead, you need to write in a compelling way about analogue images and what makes them special and why... bearing in mind that reading is - well - just so analogue. Getting them to read at all will be the really tricky bit! Just do a vlog...

where are the young filmniks? on youtube, tiktok (not that i would know - it's banned in india) and instagram shorts. here in india there are quite a few groups on whatsapp - kind of a less reliable online forum, with worse search and inaccessible archives. A gentleman in my city has put some effort into compiling a single point of access for indian photographers looking into film at https://clikte.com/resources/

I do not pretend to understand the need for some folks to go through the tedious process (and extra expense) of shooting film, when the end result is most commonly a digital scan.

I’m positive your wealth of knowledge would be appreciated by a new generation of film shooters. But I think they'd want you to teach the old ways on a new platform like TikTok, which I'm not sure would suit your sensibilities, but it brought the marketing guru Rory Sutherland to a new generation, so why not you?

https://amp.theguardian.com/media/2024/oct/28/i-woke-up-and-found-myself-famous-rory-sutherland-tiktok-success

Honestly, I am not sure what you are going to bring to the table as far as film photography, especially to the current generation of film shooters.
Frankly there are a lot of film photography practitioners in this country and elsewhere.
Look at film sales, There are a lot of film being sold, so someone is using them. No point in buying film if you're not going to use it.

There is significant amount of you tube content expressly for film photography and in my opinion most are very good with many followers and subscribers. Not only do they shoot film cameras, they dive into different camera types, film development, creation of Zines, all from a new set of eyes perspective. Young people like Willem Verbeek, Cody Mitchell, Teo Crawford, Granydays, etc. etc. etc. there are many of them.
They appeal to the new generation of film shooters and from an old guys perspective (Me), who has been still shooting film from the 1970s, it is kind of interesting to see their POV, vs. old hand practitioners.
Frankly these shooters and viewers really have no interest becoming Ansel Adams in the darkroom. They want to use tangible, cool cameras with an organic medium and their new, youthful content is simple for the median film shooter to relate to.

I think your blogs on film photography isn't going to draw in these shooters. You will get views and interest from your current viewers and followers. If that is important to keep the MoJo flowing, I think you really should do it. I mean you had more comments about this subject then pretty much any other subject as far as I can remember in recent memory, but these commenters are from the same existing base. My 2 cents.

There is a camera store and lab a few miles from me called Dexter's, in Ventura, CA (lucky me) which is full of young people dropping off film every time I go in. I would seek out young film photographers by seeking out labs, because that's where they seem to gather.

If you’re trying to engage younger photographers, you may want to see if Typepad offers a display option more geared toward phones (referred to as “responsive design”). The younger your audience, the more likely that their phone will be their primary (or only) device for accessing the web. You can certainly bring TOP up in a phone browser, but it has teeny-tiny type. A responsive design provides for different displays based on the type of device (e.g., mobile vs. desktop). (Before he shut them down, Kirk’s blogs were responsive.)

I'll just say this: You often complain about gear-oriented topics. You think it is particularly unhelpful to talk gear because all of it is so good now.

Well, film and film processing are just gear. They have nothing to do with making a good photograph except that they are infinitely inferior in just about every way. Film may have a "look," but that can easily be duplicated in digital just by (IMO) degrading an image in a certain way.

Film and its processing is essentially a non-photograph-related topic at this point.

Good idea. There are a lot more film photographers out on the street these days (especially around the university) and my local camera store (yes, we have one of those) just opened an in-house film lab, something I thought I'd never see again. Just shy away from religious arguments (stand development, the correct Rodinal dilution, etc.).

I go to quite a few gallery openings in the wilds of northwest Connecticut and it's very common to encounter a twenty-something young woman (almost never a young man) with a 70s or 80s era SLR over their shoulder. The cameras are usually Pentax or Minolta or a non-flagship Nikon or Canon. The cameras are often quite beat up and my impression has been that this is a fashion accessory since I've never seen one of them reach for the camera and take a snap.

My college-aged son has been experimenting with his grandfather’s Nikon, using all the 2-decades old expired film lying around our houses. As for where these kids are, I’d check the colleges. His college’s photography club leans heavily towards using film.

I always used to read your articles in photo magazines on black and white (film) photography. One of the articles was called “not quite a zone system” and simply one of the best articles I have read about how to take a well exposed and developed photograph. The last of the three articles summarised it he entire thing brilliantly.,and led to me finally able to make photographs that ‘popped” it taught me to see a black and white photograph before I took it for the first time.
You are a great teacher and methods of crafting an image film or digital are I think a useful means to help people see an image properly. There is a lot of interest in the subject of film and its craft I am always interested in digital images as well but there would be something missing if you excluded your knowledge of film from your writing. Put simply we need good teachers that influence our craft however we get there. Thank you. James

Agree with others in that it's your circus, write what tickles your VTA, (ventral tegmental area) :-)

Just one ask, that you cover the highly questionable need to continue to pollute the environment with those chemicals for what seemingly is an easily replaceable solution. Change your shutter setting to S vs C.

p.s. back story, 15 years as a photojournalist and darkroom tech. for the newspapers in British Columbia during the film era. Nothing against film just feel it's time to move on.

Art is often inspired by the archaic technologies discarded by the current generation. Unbound by expectations artists find new and interesting things to explore with them, which may not have been their original intent.

Re: antique glass plates: Atget.