Photos, photos everywhere

…but not here. We’re working on it. Be patient.

I used to be really good about getting my rolls of film developed and into photo albums right away. This fell by the wayside in early 2000, because I was busy planning/working on/being in my own wedding. Now, our professional wedding photos are in an album (after much screaming and pulling of teeth – moral of story: NEVER hire family to be the photographer… but that’s a story for another day), but I slacked off for quite a while on my regular old snapshots. That is, until Thanksgiving of 2003, shortly before the Munchkin made her appearance into the world. I started up with a whole new photo album and since then, I have diligently kept up. When I finished up a roll of film, I would send it off with the Webmaster to get it developed (he works right across the street from a Costco). He’d bring it home, I would put it in the photo album (I’m not a scrapbooker, I just play one at Christmastime), end of story.

And I LOVE my film camera (an Olympus IS-20 – I don’t think it’s available anymore). The Webmaster bought it for me on my first birthday after we were married. It takes great pictures, and I’ve really enjoyed using it.

But we’ve long since entered the digital age, and the Webmaster brought home a digital camera last January. We own a Kodak EasyShare V530 now. And I will admit, it’s really nice. The picture quality is good, and the camera is MUCH smaller than the Olympus, which makes it easy to just tuck in my purse or the diaper bag when we’re headed out to do something fun or going to visit family. Plus the memory stick will hold up to something beyond 500 pictures, if needed. So, what’s the problem?

The problem is me. I still yearn after my Olympus camera. There is something magical about film to me. As a senior in high school, I was on the newspaper staff and I dabbled in photography while I was there. And we were mixing our own developing chemicals and printing our own stuff at the time. That smell could follow you all day if you weren’t careful. And then I worked as a photographer at JC Penney for a period of time. I really love taking a well-staged picture, and some of my friends have taken advantage of my skills. A digital camera doesn’t interfere with this, but it’s still not my film camera. We can’t afford something hugely advanced and expensive (which would also be heavier and bulkier than the Kodak, which would defeat the “small and light” argument), so I still think that the film renders a better overall picture. Still, with kids and their tendency to blink/run away/look away while a picture’s being taken, a digital camera makes more sense, right?

The other difficulty that I personally have with the digital is that it’s not so easy to get my prints. The Webmaster touches up our pictures in Picasa (or some variation thereof), so simply uploading them to Costco’s website doesn’t always work. And in the meantime, I’m still taking film pictures, so now I have to wait to reconcile the film with the digital to make sure that the photos make it into the album in the correct chronological order. I really like having the photo album up-to-date and in my hands, and not all on the computer.

I have an uneasy truce at the moment… all pictures taken in and around our house are film, while the digital goes with us to events outside of the house, like parties and holidays and outings. This sort of works. Anyway, I know that you all have opinions out there, so don’t be shy – speak up, and help me either strike a fair balance, or convince me one way or the other. I take a lot of pictures with two kids, and I need help. What works for you?

4 Responses to “Photos, photos everywhere”

  1. Little Cousin' Mommy
    June 14th, 2006 06:20

    When I went hunting for a wedding photographer. Every single one stated that film takes better pictures. I agree. I know that digital has gotten better over the years and it has advantages in our fast-paced world, but I’m not ready to make the plunge and go digital, yet.

  2. DozeyMagz
    June 14th, 2006 09:09

    OK, personally I find printing my own digital pictures SO much easier – I was always rubbish at getting my films developed! I only have limited experience with Kodak Easyshare, so I may not be much help. I have a pentax Optio50 digital camera and I print my photos out on my Canon Pixma IP2000 printer. The printer came with a really good software package which makes printing really easy – ie pick your photo, type of paper and size of paper and that’t it. I find using the same brand of photo paper and inks as your printer gives better results – I swear by Canon stuff! Have a look to see what was included with your own printer – you’ll probably find some photo imaging stuff hiding in your computer somewhere! You should be able to get the date and time of the picture using the Kodak software that came with your camera, although I use ACDSee which came with my camera software – I think it would probably work on any camera though. You can dowload a version over at:
    I don’t know which version I have though!
    I think the trick is to get a decent photo paper and inks. Hope this helps!
    It takes a little while to get the hang of it, but it really is worth it! Good luck!

  3. Webmaster
    June 14th, 2006 12:54

    Costco will do digital prints for only $0.17 per print (or about £0.09).

    Still, there’s something to be said for having complete control of the entire process in your own home.

  4. Domestic Chicky
    June 14th, 2006 22:32

    I have been guilty of having all of our pictures on the computer, but nothing in print. So I edit the pictures as I want to, then upload the pictures to walgreens.com, and let them do all the printing. I usually pick them up in an hour or so. The first time though, I had almost 200 pictures, but it just cost a little over $30 – I couldn’t buy the paper or ink for that! And the pictures came out great!