1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Hmm, how do you define traditional photography?

Discussion in 'Everything Film' started by Danny_the_Benchist, Jan 18, 2007.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Danny_the_Benchist

    Danny_the_Benchist Well-Known Member

    Curious this forum and its two sister forums contain the term "traditional".

    How do we define traditional?

    This forum defines traditional as being film photography, which says to me that digital photography is classed as non-traditional.

    What about plate photography? Pinhole photography? Would they be considered traditional photography in that they were about before 35mm film?

    Or would they be deemed non-traditional photography as this area has become all but obsolete? :D
     
  2. huwevans

    huwevans Not Really Here

    For the purposes of this forum it simply means non-digital capture.
     
  3. TimF

    TimF With as stony a stare as ever Lord Reith could hav

    Why not just say so then? ;) Even better for sticking the metaphorical pins in to the bottoms of the overly-sensitive, rename the board Proper Photography :D :D
     
  4. El_Sid

    El_Sid Well-Known Member

    According to a letter in the last AP we should call it 'Real Photography'
     
  5. Danny_the_Benchist

    Danny_the_Benchist Well-Known Member

    What I am saying is that Digital Photography is also traditional photography. Everything is done the exact same way as it always has been except the CCD or CMOS sensor is the "film"

    What's the difference?

    Film Photography
    Digital Photography
    Plate Photography
    Pinhole Photography

    Forgive me if I am wrong but wouldn't ALL come under the heading of traditional photography? Each one is a different medium! :D
     
  6. huwevans

    huwevans Not Really Here

    Anyone who has observed either these forums or any others, or for that matter any photography magazine's letters pages in the last ten years or so will know that interest in photography and the types of things people are concerned about and want to discuss divide very naturally - and sometimes very sharply - between the new digital processes on the one hand and photo-chemical processes dating back to the early 19th century. Equipment, techniques, even standards of various things divide similarly. 'Traditional' and 'digital' seems to us (and, frankly, it would appear to the overwhelming majority of the photographic world) to be the obvious and natural way to partition the boards.
     
  7. huwevans

    huwevans Not Really Here

    To be perfectly honest with you this is the first time I can recall the 'traditional' label giving anyone any problem. It certainly seems staggeringly obvious to me what it meant.
     
  8. TimF

    TimF With as stony a stare as ever Lord Reith could hav

    Indeed. The winky should have suggested I wasn't entirely serious there.

    On the other hand, traditional is a rather 'blah' word. Are we to call vinyl records 'traditional' audio products in the CD (and, God forbid, MP3) age.
     
  9. Danny_the_Benchist

    Danny_the_Benchist Well-Known Member

    I never said I had a problem, I was just curious as to what people define as "traditional". :)
     
  10. huwevans

    huwevans Not Really Here

    Okay - winky noted. :)

    As for the blah name, well I can't recall when exactly the 'traditional' label was put in place for this board, or by whom, but after all it is just a name. Obviously 'film' doesn't work, and 'photo-chemical', whilst accurate enough, is a bit of a mouthful. 'Non-digital' seems to me hardly appropriate, since it defines something that was the fundamental technology of photography for well over one and a half centuries in terms of what it isn't rather than what it is.

    But I guess if someone comes up with a better term we can change it.
     
  11. Danny_the_Benchist

    Danny_the_Benchist Well-Known Member

    How about Chemical Photography and Digital Photography?

    Chemical would cover film, plate and pinhole since all three need chemicals to produce them?

    Just an idea.
     
  12. chris000

    chris000 Well-Known Member

    It has worked perfectly well up until now, let's just leave it as it is
     
  13. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    Quite. It hardly matters, does it?
     
  14. huwevans

    huwevans Not Really Here

    That would be my view - only one query ever suggests there simply isn't a problem with it.
     
  15. Alex_M

    Alex_M Well-Known Member

    Why not just adopt the terms 'digital photography' and 'proper photography'?


    Alex
     
  16. Benchista

    Benchista Which Tyler

    OK, I think that's enough silliness.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page