As part of my preparations for my trip to London, I have let my OCD run wild with all the possible things I might need to make this trip as successful as possible. While I have not yet started my packing list, I have recently bought a new carry on, and a new camera. I deliberated on my camera options for a long time. I wanted something that would allow real photos, not digital, but also not picturesque. I want my photos from London to be different than the ones I can buy on a postcard, so that when I hang them on my walls, its clear that I took them. For a long time, I debated the merits of investing in the ever-increasingly expensive Polaroid world. Film itself averages at least $1 per photo, and there’s no guarantees given that most film is now expired.Finally, I decided on a Diana F+ camera, which is an analogue camera recreation from a 1960s kitsch camera. It is notorious for its chaotic and unique photo capturing, and uses real film. I invested, and received my camera a little over a week ago. Since then, I’ve shot one roll and had it developed, and I’m glad I bought it early enough to have figured out the camera first. Of the 13 photos I shot on my first roll, one is pretty clear (first) and the second is the only clear one (second). The others didn’t get exposed enough because my film and aperture weren’t correct. Luckily, I took a photography class in high school and know enough how to correct these mistakes, but it still was sad not to see more of what Diana can do. I thought I’d share though, and continue to do so, as I learn how to play with the chaos my camera can create. A nice change of pace from digitally enhanced, photoshopped photos, eh?
written by vstimac on 2011-08-08