4 ms·

I couldn't understand having a nostalgia for a time when cameras sucked. At least go film. Hell, go for disposable film cameras or something. Cheap 35mm point a

I couldn't understand having a nostalgia for a time when cameras sucked. At least go film. Hell, go for disposable film cameras or something. Cheap 35mm point and shoots rule.

goldenchrome 4y ago
It’s because they’ve all grown up with great digital cameras that take a good neutral photo. To get any sort of interesting film effects they’ve had to apply filters after the fact. These 2000s point and shoots take photos that look like a “retro” filter but straight out of the camera so it’s somehow more authentic. Also it’s a entire piece of hardware dedicated to this one seemingly simple task, which is endearing. But it’s also digital so it’s familiar. It’s from 20 years ago which means it’s something their parents probably used, so it’s personally relevant nostalgia too.
- quartesixte 4y ago
  > It’s from 20 years ago which means it’s something their parents probably used, so it’s personally relevant nostalgia too. Oh my god this makes me feel ancient now.
  - Normille 4y ago
    >Oh my god this makes me feel ancient now. Interesting to muse on people's various "Now I feel ancient" moments. For me it occurred about 5 years ago when I used to teach at a university. The first time I picked up an application form from an 18 year old applicant, which had the year of birth filled in as '2000', I thought it was a typo. It barely seemed like a handful of years since I'd been seeing in the new millenium at some sleazy nightclub --and here I was interviewing 'adults', who weren't even born then.
okasaki 4y ago
Except that they don't suck? They were made by companies specializing in imaging, had decent sized sensors, glass lenses, and no fake computational/"AI" photography.
- hgsgm 4y ago
  They were terrible, because the resolution was low in the early models. And they were JPEG, so they were "fake" computational.
  - okasaki 4y ago
    Resolution isn't important in small sensors, and the JPEG processing can't be compared to what phones do. A 2007 P&S isn't going to turn a grey overcast sky blue because it thinks skies should be blue like an iphone does.
  - Normille 4y ago
    >They were terrible.... If these kids want to really push the envelope of crappy digital imagery, they should get themselves an early Apple QuickTake. Now that was a dire camera. A mighty 640x480 resolution and colour rendering that made poeple look like they were made of clay. I wonder whatever happened to the company that made them? Probably went bankrupt, soon after inflicting that monstrosity on an unsuspecting world.
et-al 4y ago
Cheap 35mm point and shoots are no longer affordable. The once thrift store staple mju-II is now over $300 and film prices are closer to $5-10/roll. Because Gen Z grew up with parents who used these digital cameras, it makes sense to covet them now. And luckily they're easily attainable because they're cheap. Film is a luxury for a past that was never theirs.

I couldn't understand having a nostalgia for a time when cameras sucked. At least go film. Hell, go for disposable film cameras or something. Cheap 35mm point and shoots rule.

goldenchrome 4y ago

It’s because they’ve all grown up with great digital cameras that take a good neutral photo. To get any sort of interesting film effects they’ve had to apply filters after the fact. These 2000s point and shoots take photos that look like a “retro” filter but straight out of the camera so it’s somehow more authentic. Also it’s a entire piece of hardware dedicated to this one seemingly simple task, which is endearing. But it’s also digital so it’s familiar. It’s from 20 years ago which means it’s something their parents probably used, so it’s personally relevant nostalgia too.

quartesixte 4y ago
> It’s from 20 years ago which means it’s something their parents probably used, so it’s personally relevant nostalgia too. Oh my god this makes me feel ancient now.
- Normille 4y ago
  >Oh my god this makes me feel ancient now. Interesting to muse on people's various "Now I feel ancient" moments. For me it occurred about 5 years ago when I used to teach at a university. The first time I picked up an application form from an 18 year old applicant, which had the year of birth filled in as '2000', I thought it was a typo. It barely seemed like a handful of years since I'd been seeing in the new millenium at some sleazy nightclub --and here I was interviewing 'adults', who weren't even born then.

okasaki 4y ago

Except that they don't suck? They were made by companies specializing in imaging, had decent sized sensors, glass lenses, and no fake computational/"AI" photography.

hgsgm 4y ago
They were terrible, because the resolution was low in the early models. And they were JPEG, so they were "fake" computational.
- okasaki 4y ago
  Resolution isn't important in small sensors, and the JPEG processing can't be compared to what phones do. A 2007 P&S isn't going to turn a grey overcast sky blue because it thinks skies should be blue like an iphone does.
- Normille 4y ago
  >They were terrible.... If these kids want to really push the envelope of crappy digital imagery, they should get themselves an early Apple QuickTake. Now that was a dire camera. A mighty 640x480 resolution and colour rendering that made poeple look like they were made of clay. I wonder whatever happened to the company that made them? Probably went bankrupt, soon after inflicting that monstrosity on an unsuspecting world.

et-al 4y ago

Cheap 35mm point and shoots are no longer affordable. The once thrift store staple mju-II is now over $300 and film prices are closer to $5-10/roll. Because Gen Z grew up with parents who used these digital cameras, it makes sense to covet them now. And luckily they're easily attainable because they're cheap. Film is a luxury for a past that was never theirs.