Rolling Along

As a counterpoint to the previous post I’d like to expound on some of the environmental benefits of analog cameras. The first is that digital cameras are frequently used for a few years or less, while analog cameras are often used for many years. (I have been using this camera for 10 years, and my father used it for more than 10 years before that-and I can still get parts and repairs for it, whereas most digital cameras will be obsolete after several years.) This is significant because the production of cameras and the production of the materials used are harmful to the environment. While developing film is more harmful that printing digital photos, storing prints is not as opposed to most digital pictures which are stored on hard drives which are harmful to produce and dispose of. To sum up, it’s not immediately obvious which is more environmentally, analog or digital cameras.

The switch from analog to digital cameras was arguably driven primarily by ease of use as well as convenience, however the environmental benefits of that switch should be noted, in order to maximize the effect. The most obvious benefit is the reduction in paper use because when people take digital photographs they can choose which ones they want to print, or may chose not to print any at all. The reduction of paper use, if significant enough, would cause a decrease in the number of trees that get cut down as well as a decrease in the amount of fuel used to produce and transport the paper. Developing film uses a significant amount of water as well as a large amount of chemicals, which are environmental hazzards when they are discarded.