"Photographer" or "Digitographer?

[angle of view]

I ran into a fellow photographer yesterday, who had his work displayed for sale at a local cider mill. I tried to engage in friendly shop talk. The first thing he asked me when I said "I too am a photographer" is "are you film, or digital?" I'm a digital photographer. This guy then started on this long winded explanation about how (my kind) are not really photographers, we are considered "digitographers" for our specialty, according to Kodak specs. He also was totally demeaning the idea of digital photography in any light he could. He really just seemed bitter.
Now, I've worked with wet process before, and I have total respect for film. I'm not going to say one is better than the other. They both follow the same basic principals. It's just matter of what you want to achieve as an artist, and as a professional.
I would like to know how this community feels about this. "Photographer" or "digitographer?"

 

[Sw1tchFX]

meh, who cares? as long as good images are being made I don't care if the format is 4x5, digital, or quicksnap disposable.

If someone asks me that, I tell them both, even though I shoot more digital (actually recently, more film), and if they're older or if they come off as bitter, I just say more film to avoid what happened to you.

 

[pm63]

There are a few snobs out there who think that film is the only way to go for any kind of serious photography and that digital is in some way cheating or not real photography.

This is rubbish. Yes, that it an assertion. No, I won't take it back. Photography is the art of capturing an image, why should the medium matter? The basic principles of pre-visualisation, composition, lighting etc all remain the same. Photographers can use whichever medium they want to create what they see in their minds eye.

 

[Overread]

meh I am what I am
the rules have not changed its just that the kit has evolved.

Never heard the term digitographer so my guess is he is just a bitter photographer who hates computers and who also is not willing to learn. Would not give it any more thought than that really.

There are film and digital users who are snobs and blind to the advantages of the other medium. Either try to enlighten or just walk away

 

[Garbz]

Likened a lot to the Nikon vs Canon debate. The resent comes from a complete miss-understanding or total unwillingness to learn the other side. If you come across these people just ignore and work away, or better yet, kick them in the nads.

 

[Josh66]

Like those above me have said - sounds like a bitter old man, ignore him.

 

[Ccauceg]

Does he even know what "photograph" means? photo = light, graph = Drawing. Together you get "lightdrawing" Last I checked a digital senor senses light to create an image.

 

[butterflycraze]

^ That is a good point. The man was splitting hairs, and not even doing so properly.

I wouldn't pay too much attention when people try to force their views onto you like that. He didn't even ask your opinion. He was probably just looking for someone for him to vent his grievances, probably because he feels threatened by digital photography.

Any real artist won't shun another medium, but will appreciate the value of each one.

 

[PhotographyIsConfusing]

How bout both?

 

[bhop]

You should've told him the Daguerrotype is for REALLY real photographers and that he's just a poser..

 

[table1349]

I ran into a fellow photographer yesterday, who had his work displayed for sale at a local cider mill. I tried to engage in friendly shop talk. The first thing he asked me when I said "I too am a photographer" is "are you film, or digital?" I'm a digital photographer. This guy then started on this long winded explanation about how (my kind) are not really photographers, we are considered "digitographers" for our specialty, according to Kodak specs. He also was totally demeaning the idea of digital photography in any light he could. He really just seemed bitter.
Now, I've worked with wet process before, and I have total respect for film. I'm not going to say one is better than the other. They both follow the same basic principals. It's just matter of what you want to achieve as an artist, and as a professional.
I would like to know how this community feels about this. "Photographer" or "digitographer?"

If you happen to see this pompus windbag again, you might tell him you thought about it and that by his definition he is a Filmographer. Then explain to him that if he is not using medium or large format cameras and producing his own wet plate negatives he is just a sham photographer working with film. Just for fun give him this link and tell him he ought to try it and see what real photography is all about.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/eastman/sfeature/wetplate_step1.html

:mrgreen:

 

[Dubious Drewski]

There are a few snobs out there who think that film is the only way to go for any kind of serious photography and that digital is in some way cheating or not real photography.

I am reminded of stories of ancient Kings denouncing the use of Crossbows when they first became popular; because the user needed almost no training. Any soldier could just point and shoot. Compare that to a bow and arrow user, who had to undergo a whole lifetime of training to become equally proficient. Use of the Crossbow was seen as dishonourable for a long time before generals started to realize that maybe nothing should matter but getting the shot.

Get it? Getting the shot?

Sorry, I've been playing Medieval 2:Total War for like 4 hours today. My mind's in that place.

 

[PhilGarber]

meh I am what I am
the rules have not changed its just that the kit has evolved.

Never heard the term digitographer so my guess is he is just a bitter photographer who hates computers and who also is not willing to learn. Would not give it any more thought than that really.

There are film and digital users who are snobs and blind to the advantages of the other medium. Either try to enlighten or just walk away

Yeah! Sounds like some artist wannabee. As said, any REAL artist doesn't discredit another medium.

 

[epp_b]

Sounds like a overly-purist, bitter, snobby old hag who thinks that something is worthless if the process is simplified.

The fact is, your customers and audience doesn't give a rats rectum about how you make your photographs. The only thing that matters is the end result.

 

[angle of view]

Great responses guys!!! I just had to put it out there, because it really bugs me when a fellow photographer makes me feel less than, because of my choice of how I capture light, and paint with it, and express myself as an artist!
Thanks for the laughs!