I think I've posted this link before, but it's no less valid...
http://www.shutterbug.com/content/point-view-prints-are-precious-or-praise-shoebox
And...after you've made a print of family members, note on the back who
they are. I have prints from early in the 20th century that I know are
family members, but have no idea who they are or where they fit into the
family.
-p
On 8/11/2013 12:30 PM, Christine Aguila wrote:
On Aug 10, 2013, at 2:22 PM, George Sinos <[email protected]> wrote:
That is the viewpoint from a collector, of course. If we don't
produce any artifacts now, there won't be anything to collect later.
The basic concept has been brought up several times over the last many
years. Not only do people not make prints, they don't get the photos
off of their devices. I guessing most of us know someone that lost
all of the photos when a phone or computer was lost.
Apple, Google, Smugmug and others may help a little bit as photos
taken on a phone can automatically be copied to the Internet, but when
the person quits using the account (for whatever reason) all of those
photos go away.
If you don't take an active part in constantly backing up your photos,
and moving them to whatever new and improved media emerges, they will
be gone.
As silly as it sounds, the fragile paper print may be the most
archival media for most people simply because it can be put in a
shoebox, stuffed under the bed and forgotten for a few decades.
Agreed!
This is an interesting topic both in the general and personal sense. Having
passed the half century mark and not having kids, I've been thinking about all
my stuff, and, of course, that includes photography. What do I leave behind?
Is anybody really going to be interested in my stuff (probably not)?
Darrel & I have started cleaning house this summer, culling my personal
library, giving away clothes and household items to charity. There's much more
work ahead, but it's really starting to feel liberating.
I don't think anyone in my family will be interested in the stewardship of hard
drives with digital negatives (frankly, I don't find it much fun either :-)),
but they do have interest in prints and as you'd expect, prints of family
moments. Prints are mainly stored in boxes to be sure, but not all.
And my family really enjoys looking at the photo books we can make through
blurb. They enjoy looking at the PDML annual, and they really enjoyed looking
at the Wilson book the UK PDMLers and I made for the Wilsons as a thank you
gift after last year's trip to England.
So this is the direction I'm headed. It's no longer a question of, how am I
going to store this stuff digitally (though that issue doesn't go away
obviously), but rather, let's get these photos printed up and in books for both
future enjoyment and perhaps more reliable backup if you will. This also
includes my own personal work--the GESOs and PESOs and photo essays I've done
over the years. I'm even planning to do some quick books by year; that is,
best snaps of each year since I've been back in photography. With Lightroom
it's pretty easy to go through large groups of photos, make collections, then
pop over to the book module and do a basic layout. Granted I may be
oversimplifying a bit, but if you don't over-think the project, you can get a
project done pretty efficiently. So I say get them in books and prints and move
on.
I'm not sure I completely agree with Robert Jackson's definition of a snapshot,
which he claims is often a mistake, but I do agree snaps of family and friends
should be printed up for posterity. Printing should not be an activity
exclusive to fine art printmaking. Print the silly, the playful, the fun--then
share!
Cheers, Christine
--
Being old doesn't seem so old now that I'm old.
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
[email protected]
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
