genesampson

I donated mine to our local HS and they sent me a receipt which I used as a tax write off.

paddywillshootyou

A favorite charity of mine is Pablove Foundation (you can find it with a quick google search) for research and compassion on childhood cancer. One of their programs is to teach the kids photography then they auction off the prints to raise $$.

paddywillshootyou

A favorite charity of mine is Pablove Foundation (you can find it with a quick google search) for research and compassion on childhood cancer. One of their programs is to teach the kids photography then they auction off the prints to raise $$.

Cdouthitt Loc: Traverse City, MI

Offer it up here on the UHH buy/sell. Someone will gladly pay shipping.

John_F Loc: Minneapolis, MN

Some camera stores have old camera displays - like on top of display cases. If you have one near you, they might take a donation.

csmith4math

I agree. One of my grandsons took photography in high school and I was amazed to find that they started with film. Better, IMO, to learn to get a "photographer's eye" and learn composition first with a Digital in Auto or Program mode, then move on to controlling exposure and other more technical aspects. Film can be taught as an advanced class for those who are interested, but digital post-processing is probably more important today, and more interesting to the students.

When I studied Accounting in college in the 1960's we learned to keep manual journals ledgers, but no one would think of doing that in an introductory class. Why should photography students be stuck with older, more labor-intensive technology.

I'm sure not everyone will agree with this, but I'll bet it would get and keep a lot more students interested in photography!

But we're drifting off -topic. Today's (May 28) UHH digest also had a post from another member, jonfrei, seeking used equipment for a home-schooling co-op. Hopefully the OP saw that--and anyone else with unused equipment who may want to help.

10MPlayer Loc: California

It's like computer classes I took in the early 90s. They thought, in those days, that in order to learn how to use a computer you first had to learn how to program in MS Basic. All I needed was to learn how files were managed and how to open Word or Lotus or whatever and how to save a file. I believe there is still a question or two on the California Land Surveyor's license exam where they give you a snippet of MS Basic and you have to parse out the code to explain what it does. Ridiculous.

As far as donating equipment, I've stipulated in my will that my musical instruments go to the Mr. Holland's Opus Foundation. I wonder if there are similar foundations for photography donations. https://www.mhopus.org/

anotherview Loc: California

Avoid any school that requires learning film photography before digital photography. The future clearly lies with digital means of photography.

Knowing and doing film photography does not a better photographer make. Insisting that it does only serves as a doctrinaire position.

The craft of photography, whether film or digital, has its basis in composition and exposure along with the importance of subject.

Further, experienced photographers say digital surpassed film photography years ago. Film has become obsolescent.

Of course we have with us diehard film photographers who swear by this mode of photography. The present two main arguments as proof of film better than digital photography. One, they assert that doing film photography forces the photographer to slow down to ensure more thoughtfulness and carefulness because of the cost of film.

Two, they always refer to the special experience of watching a photograph gradually appear on a sheet of paper.

The first argument does not stop a digital photographer from taking due care in his work. In addition, bringing out the potential of a photograph in the photo-editing software offers its own pleasurable experience.

Enough said.

axiesdad Loc: Monticello, Indiana

In our community we have a sheltered workshop that assists people with special needs. They run a resale shop that takes donations of things that can be resold to help fund their endeavors.

BartHx

Yes, a high school with a photography program could be a good choice for donation. From my perspective, arguing over film vs. digital is like a painter arguing over oil vs. water colors. They are two different media, each with its own benefits and pitfalls. In our high school, students do learn the basics of film (and there are more who want to then there is room in the classes). In the same class, however, they learn how to do some amazing work with their cell phones. Most will never see a darkroom again, but nearly all will have cell phones. Most will never have extensive post processing software. Given a ten exposure roll of black and white film with which to earn a grade, they learn to make every shot count and the "photographer's eye" quickly becomes evident in what they produce with their cell phones. I do not personally teach the classes, but I have personally seen the difference it makes in the quality of photography being done. I might go all digital when I can afford a digital medium format or view camera. Meanwhile, since I do not use it to earn my living, I will continue to use what I already have.

anotherview Loc: California

The techniques of good photography one can learn whether with film or digital means.

Coming to grips with composition and exposure along with the importance of subject presents the route by which all worthy photography happens.

Digital photography surpassed film photography years ago. Film photography has become obsolescent. The future lies with digital photography.

BartHx

I don't disagree with your view. However, sometimes with high school students it is useful to put them into a situation where they have limited resources to produce a usable product before they fully apply themselves to the task at hand. Meanwhile, I do not choose to discount film photography as being its own medium for producing art. My sister was a professional botanist who produced beautiful, detailed steel plate etchings of plants. The fact that she could have much more easily produced an accurate image of the same plants with her camera does not discount the beauty or value of her etchings. From the art perspective, just because they may use a lens in common and produce an image, I cannot rate the intrinsic value of film or digital one above the other. They are two different media.

anotherview Loc: California

Okay: "sometimes with high school students it is useful to put them into a situation where they have limited resources to produce a usable product."

So give them a very small memory card for recording images.

I believe film photography will remain alive for some time to come, and maybe indefinitely as a niche technique, not unlike other past methods of producing a photograph.

BartHx

With the ability to erase and reshoot, a small memory card would defeat the purpose. Where do you find a memory card small enough to limit them to only ten shots? I realize my experience with high school students is limited but, after 31 years in the classroom, I am finally beginning to get a feel for how they tend to think.