The Sunk Cost Fallacy and Film

I feel like I've seen a number of posts in photo forums recently about "how to shoot X"

These are not questions about people using odd and rare film, or doing cool hacks like trying to shoot 35mm film in a medium format camera. These are people talking about an old roll of Tri-X or Kodak Gold. Film that, mercifully, is still being made today.

So... to those people I say... shoot the damn roll. Just put it in your camera and find out what happens.

The difference between the cost of a frame of 35mm and the bits in digital photo is like comparing Jupiter to the Moon. I get it, that is kind of a weird thing to think about, the notion that it cost real money to make something. And while I also tend to believe that therein lies some of its value as a form of expression, there is an intermediary stage in this creative process where the film is worth nothing.

NikonFE2_K400_variousMay2018021.jpg

Film is worth nothing.

Just remember that. It's not worth anything until you've shot it. You have contributed nothing of value until you click that shutter button and forever altered the chemical structure of that piece of film.

I know it's sad that Fuji discontinued Acros.

Shoot the roll.

That pack of Polaroid film cost $20? Shoot it. Put some love on it, dammit. a snapshot, a beautiful tree, your friend wearing a hat. All more valuable than blank nothing.