Porta 400 – why so popular?
In looking about recently I’ve been seeing a huge amount of post, ads and stuff about Porta 400, it’s confused me? I think the reasosn I’m seeing it is that it’s just a successful marketing campaign run by some savy people, I’m unsure about who owns the Kodak brand these days but they were always up on advertising and how it works (the Kodak story is an interesting one, they invented digital photography but never successfully optioned it as reportedly they thought that nothing could replace film and printing. Then watched as digital bit into their profits until their eventual demise from the giant they were, a case of management leading the charge over the precipice…
With these blogs sometimes the subject cross over and this subject is an example of a crossovers of my practices and the film/scanning/digital/analogue subject matter is something I’m exploring in my research based one at Urgent Temporality, so I’ll expand this blog post into the areas that I’m not exploring there. I also better make this confession that I never really got kodachrome or Kodak products so my natural (aversion?) to Kodak is long held, back in the day (and even now) I’m a Fuji person, always have been, same as, I’ll always be a Canon cameras person…
Back to my confusement over this surge in Porta 400 popularity, It’s solely based on what I’m seeing, so I’m not sure if anyone else has seen it?
The opening point of this blog is that I’m not seeing any benefits to using this film stock over anything else that’s around, it’s a fashion thing I know but with no added benefits of choosing?? Am I right? I’ve also never understood total utter devotion to a film stock especially when you’re only adopting one part of it in the developing then scanning it therefore digitising it to a uniform nature???? You’re not printing from it on Kodak paper processed through Kodak chemicals with a Kodak frame exhibited in the Kodak style, are you?
Photography is all about these devotions, some go too far, it’s rare that others go the opposite way but think we all hold some devotions don’t we. Is there a reason behind it? Does there have to be a reason behind it? It seems that photography has a lot of these quirks and foibles much more than other industries, some of them completely ridiculous and some others more genuinely; does every creative aspect have this?
Do poets only use one type of pencil?
Do musical theatre directors only sit in one seat to direct?
Do painters only use one type of canvas?
I won’t mention anything to do with music, as well you know I think cd’s sound better…
Cue the replymen comments (who you absolutely know use Porta)… extolling the virtue of vinyl in 3…2….1…)
How much of this is just creating the aura of the creative and how much is proven in results?
How much is down to the need to exhibit these traits to be taken seriously and how much is about the qualities that are needed?
Not sure there is answers to these questions so you can either be supportive of this or you can play the cynic card or you can dismiss what other people hold dear. As is my want I will play the supportive angle and say that if you’re producing stuff you like with Porta then you do you and keep doing what works for you !
Always a need for an image for the blog so here’s something I shot on film in what I think was 2002 at the G-Percussion event that celebrated the Commonwealth Games in Manchester, it’s a shot of Crazy P performing, a band that are still going and who you definitely should check out.
Now here’s the punctum (or studium??) can you tell what film stock it was shot on?
Thanks for reading