Weird thoughts come to old people with too much time on their hands.

Should we continue to call ourselves photographers? Photographers record analog images on film, process and print the images creating photographs and if you are a professional sell these little pieces of reality as a source of income. I suggest that we have become collectors and manipulators of electrons. For many, if not most of us, the great majority of our electron collections remain just that--electrons. I sent my last roll of film in for processing and what did I get back, a link to a web site so I could retrieve my electron collections. I have begun thinking of my images stored on my computer as Electron Collections and the prints stored in my photo albums and files as pictures. Electron collections only become images when they are viewed or printed.

Before I change my mind I am going to send this and see what happens

Weird thoughts come to old people with too much time on their hands.

Should we continue to call ourselves photographers? Photographers record analog images on film, process and print the images creating photographs and if you are a professional sell these little pieces of reality as a source of income. I suggest that we have become collectors and manipulators of electrons. For many, if not most of us, the great majority of our electron collections remain just that--electrons. I sent my last roll of film in for processing and what did I get back, a link to a web site so I could retrieve my electron collections. I have begun thinking of my images stored on my computer as Electron Collections and the prints stored in my photo albums and files as pictures. Electron collections only become images when they are viewed or printed.

Before I change my mind I am going to send this and see what happens

Wow, I feel the same way, just never had words that would explain how I felt about photography in general since the digital era took over. I grew up in the 80s to 90s and taking pictures of grand adventures was something that my best friend and I would do. It was important to us to have the prints and we would scrounge every penny we could find to get our pictures in our hands after all the hard work. We always had our cameras and if we developed without the other we insured to get "doubles" so we both would have the prize.

I followed suit with the digital era like most. I started out still needing prints but slowly faded out of the habit, "they are right here for free if i want to see." Over time I looked less and less and on a few occasions lost some dear memories from technical malfunction. I use to make damn sure all the prints were safe but let digital desensitize me to the point where images no longer carried the emotional impact like they did originally.

Recently, I submitted four images to a local jury show, and to my delight, every single one made the show. Two were analog and two were digital but they were all great in their own rights. My all time favorite analog won best of show. The image is great in technical terms, but it carries a deeper meaning and story for me than being just a cool print. As I type this, it occurs to me that, while I nervously paced the room on opening night I acknowledged my two 35mm analog prints and didn't hang around the digital much, they felt fake or insignificant, and I didn't want my face and name connected to "those" prints. (I didn't even bother to go see one of the two digital images) I didn't feel pride for "those" pictures, however great they really are. The prints on the other hand I pointed out and stood looking at them a little kinder.

Its just something odd that i noticed. I guess, as it turns out, I am digitally prejudice stemming from childhood experiences.

Wow, I feel the same way, just never had words that would explain how I felt about photography in general since the digital era took over. I grew up in the 80s to 90s and taking pictures of grand adventures was something that my best friend and I would do. It was important to us to have the prints and we would scrounge every penny we could find to get our pictures in our hands after all the hard work. We always had our cameras and if we developed without the other we insured to get "doubles" so we both would have the prize.

I followed suit with the digital era like most. I started out still needing prints but slowly faded out of the habit, "they are right here for free if i want to see." Over time I looked less and less and on a few occasions lost some dear memories from technical malfunction. I use to make damn sure all the prints were safe but let digital desensitize me to the point where images no longer carried the emotional impact like they did originally.

Recently, I submitted four images to a local jury show, and to my delight, every single one made the show. Two were analog and two were digital but they were all great in their own rights. My all time favorite analog won best of show. The image is great in technical terms, but it carries a deeper meaning and story for me than being just a cool print. As I type this, it occurs to me that, while I nervously paced the room on opening night I acknowledged my two 35mm analog prints and didn't hang around the digital much, they felt fake or insignificant, and I didn't want my face and name connected to "those" prints. (I didn't even bother to go see one of the two digital images) I didn't feel pride for "those" pictures, however great they really are. The prints on the other hand I pointed out and stood looking at them a little kinder.

Its just something odd that i noticed. I guess, as it turns out, I am digitally prejudice stemming from childhood experiences.

I completely understand. I shoot film and digital. I took along a film camera for my 2017 US eclipse road trip intending to shoot mostly film. I got some great shoots of Antelope Island, Utah, but then the camera had a mechanical failure DURING the eclipse. Good thing I had my digital M43 camera for a backup! It saved that day and the rest of the trip.

This year I was on a hiking trip and again, with a repaired film camera, I shot film and digital. I found that my film pics had a much higher keeper rate, and I had one 5-star pic, it was shot on film. Various reasons for that. One being that I take more time with film. (And is taking more time a bad thing for a hobbyist? After all life is fast paced and our hobbies give us some relief from that.) Another reason is that film records light very differently from a digital sensor.

I had the same shot on digital, and showing it to different people some liked the film version some liked the digital version. ME the “artist”, the creator, likes the film version better.

So it’s all very subjective but what **you** like is the important thing. You like film, then shoot more film. I plan to do that myself.

Weird thoughts come to old people with too much time on their hands.

Should we continue to call ourselves photographers? Photographers record analog images on film, process and print the images creating photographs and if you are a professional sell these little pieces of reality as a source of income. I suggest that we have become collectors and manipulators of electrons. For many, if not most of us, the great majority of our electron collections remain just that--electrons. I sent my last roll of film in for processing and what did I get back, a link to a web site so I could retrieve my electron collections. I have begun thinking of my images stored on my computer as Electron Collections and the prints stored in my photo albums and files as pictures. Electron collections only become images when they are viewed or printed.

Before I change my mind I am going to send this and see what happens