For the Memories

by Sean

Polaroid’s announcement that it is abandoning film is another example of the misunderstanding that digital imaging must replace film as opposed to coexisting with it. The argument is that it’s the same thing but better. It’s not the same at all. And that couldn’t be more true than it is with instant film.

For me, watching a Polaroid picture develop is like watching a memory form right before your eyes. It appears out of a hazy nothingness and slowly forms into a beautiful but often imperfect image. A picture that mirrors the imperfections of life and memory.

I can’t argue with the convenience and clarity of digital imaging. I use my digital camera all the time. It takes beautiful pictures and I don’t have to worry about loading film. But of the thousands of digital photos I have taken in my life, 99.9% of them will likely sit on a hard drive as raw data for an eternity, never to be transferred to paper, displayed, or shared.

With instant film you don’t get to make the choice of whether or not a picture is "good enough" to make a print. You get a print every time. You can’t just hit delete because someone was making a weird face, or the framing wasn’t quite right or in some way the image doesn’t live up to the unattainable idea of perfection we have all have in our heads from being exposed to too many Photoshopped images. The picture comes out no mater what. And even if we don’t like what we see when it develops, it’s life, and chances are, like the photo above, we’ll find it in a box years later and be thankful that we have it – dirty shorts, nervous smile and all.