Hey all, Erik here with a quick guest post about a subject that’s raised a lively debate in our studio. Everyone on our crew has long been shooting with Polaroids, rangefinders, micro 4/3 cameras adapted to accept vintage lenses…even processing digital images to look like they came out of an old dusty camera. Surveying the landscape, it’s clear this tide has been rising for a while now and we’re not the only ones attached to this stuff. So the question I present to you is this:
Why is retro or faux-retro photography so popular these days?
Why, when we have such capable and inexpensive cameras at our disposal, are we reverting to old technology and old aesthetics? Is it pure nostalgia? Is it a palette cleanser from the ease and accuracy of said capable and inexpensive cameras? Is it a passing trend? We have opinions–especially Chase does as you might expect–but we’d like to hear from you.
I love digital cameras, don’t get me wrong, but I love to take out one of my vintage 35mm film cameras load it with black and white film and get back to my roots, I always learn a lot about photography in general by doing that. Also film / retro photography perfectly separates work and pleasure for me right now.
I might sound like an old guy, so I would like to say I am in my twenties – just fyi. 🙂
Because it’s FUN!
I love your comment and second that!
I agree – I like the vintage looks, because they can be fun – highly dramatic, and not to mention a great way to disguise weaknesses in composition and lighting. I do think it’s getting to a point where extreme vintage looks are a bit “played out”. But really, the moment you adjust any image in post, you’re applying a look – why not take it to extremes?
I think it’s the same reason we put distortion effects on guitars. There is something appealing about the play between the expected (chord progression / lines in photo) and the random noise introduced by distortion or grain.
I totally agree. There’s something about a photograph that turns out looking exactly like what you pointed your camera out that is disappointing.
Now the question is, is that disappointment inherent in the clean images digital cameras produce so easily, or we so deep in a fad that we aren’t even aware that our expectations for what makes a good image are coming from what’s currently cool?
get some flashes?
Love this analogy Neilson!
Very interesting point!
Seems like it is more than just photography that is going in that direction. I do really like the warm/raw feel of vintage photos.
There’s always some sort of backlash to current trends. My background’s in graphic design, and there was a huge shift not too long after design “went digital.” At first, everything was super clean (everyone remember web 2.0 being named as a style?).
After a while, people sort of rebelled against that, and wanted things to look more hand done. Scanning in textures, and that sort of thing.
I really think it’s the same thing with photography. Digital has a certain look to it, and now people are playing with old techniques and equipment to make something different.
I think it’s because it’s easy way to augment an image that otherwise might not be that interesting. It seems like there are so few ways to differentiate your work that things like vintage processing, HDR, etc. become ways to give it a wow factor. Not saying that these techniques are a negative, but I think that’s a factor.
it’s like the sweet, warm sound of vinyl vs the cold precision of a CD