Why analog? Why not digital?

To me, the reason to shoot analogue instead of digital lies in our obsession with the “object.”
Analogue photography is a way of taking the intangible — an image — and making it tangible — on film.
For the entire span of civilization, we have known visual art to be an “object,” and the persistence of this viewpoint into the digital age bespeaks a certain kind of romanticism.

For me, I think of my photos as trading cards… taking a picture, and putting it in my box of pretty things to keep and look at later. Most people I meet, or things I see become trading cards (and many of them become a whole series of trading cards). Is it a highly reductive way to live your life? Yes. But the more you do it, the better you get at capturing your own subjective experience, so that it might become accessible to others of, at the very least, the flavor of the life you lead.

But, I won’t lie… I’ve gone digital in the past year, and I can see the merits of digital as well. It’s (wildly) less expensive, far more malleable, and allows you greater precision. But I don’t think it should be called photography, because without the creation of the art object, it’s not exactly the same art form, now is it?


Aku sokong ayat diatas yang dipetik dari sini  oleh panelomo.