Shooting Cheap Stuff, And Complaining About It----Yawn

Lately, the interwebs have been feeding me photography videos that are relentlessly negative about a familiar set of targets: cheap film (which somehow isn’t cheap once you’re done), thrift-store camera finds (old, dusty, and allegedly useless), and now—most recently—the Holga. 

At first I almost wrote all this off as just an aesthetic thing. Maybe there’s a subset of photographers who simply enjoy trashing everything. It’s their right—they can poopoo whatever they want.

Then after an hour or so of these, I was ready to agree with this video, and the others like it. Cheap film is trash. Thrifted cameras are a waste of time and money. Holgas are stupid. 

One existential crisis later, I took a step back and started asking a few questions. I landed on three that feel worth asking every time one of these videos pops up:

What are you expecting?

What is your experience?

Why are you doing this?

Putting words in these vloggers’ mouths, it seems like they’re expecting too much from too little. My guess is they want a $15 roll of film in a $50 Holga (which is already overpriced) to look the same as a $15 roll of film in a $500 Nikon. That just isn’t happening. And honestly, that’s what makes the occasional banger that comes out of a $10 antique or a $15 internet-auction Holga so satisfying. 

But that's not all. 

Why idea that putting expensive film in a Holga and getting light leaks is somehow a failure. If a $20 roll of film in a $50 (still too expensive) Holga is your bag, go for it. Knock it out of the park. Maybe there is some strange equation where expensive film plus a cheap camera equals perfect pictures. But if that’s true, is the inverse also true? I’m genuinely asking. Shooting something like Fomapan or Arista levels expectations in a Holga far more appropriately. Oh what though, blaming cheap film is trendy, too.

After watching enough of these channels, a pattern shows up. Many of these photographers shoot digital, or shoot film with really advanced cameras. Those setups demand their own skills, but they’re not the same skills required to work with older, simpler gear like a Holga or something you find at Goodwill. I’d argue those modern setups foster a reliance on bells and whistles that erase space for artistic subtlety and productive mistakes. So when someone used to all that decides to make a video titled “IS THIS THRIFT STORE CAMERA WORTH IT?” or to dooky on a Holga, suddenly there’s endless fodder for complaints.

Which brings me to the third question: why are you doing this? If you’re happy shooting expensive gear (digital or film) with skills built around that gear, that’s a proven formula. Why mess with it at all? Is the goal the feigned shock when it doesn’t work out? If so, move along. That bit’s been done.

Yes, film from Five Below has hidden costs, but the pictures you take can be cool. Yes, that thrift-store camera is going to have light leaks and lack features your modern camera has, somehow, photographers made phenomenal images on this stuff long before vloggers were crapping their diapers about it. Theres no shock here. 

I’m a broke librarian. I don’t have anything but broke librarian money. (And yes, I fully see the absurdity of running even cheap $10 rolls of film through a camera that itself cost $10.) The hidden advantage of being a broke librarian is that when I fork over my money for film and a camera (Holga or otherwise) I’m not expecting anything more than exactly what I've paid for. And I'm actually happy with whatever the results. 

Besides, this site is dedicated to light leaks.