Before digital cameras exsisted

[Diana1029]

I was just wondering now we can take lots of pictures of ourselves dressed weather in only a thong or fully dresses and make up on but we're the only ones who see it but how did crossdressers took pictures when you would have to take it to a studio to get it revealed? ( I started dressing once digital photography excisted so I just wondered how it was in the past) taking into acount that the guy from the studio would see it

[Loni]

lots of people take photos now, but they never see the light of day the good old photo books no longer exist.
but neither do the grainy photos of big-foot, nessie, or the ufo's.
with in 10 years you will no longer be able to buy chemical film, so real cameras will go the way of the junk drawer. just like the Polaroid did.

[Sophie86]

I can tell you, it was a real pain when I was young, having to sit perfectly still while the guy painted your portrait.... And those whalebone hoops! Ugh. ;)

(My real answer is that I didn't take pics back then. No way was I going to risk being outed by a photo. A big 'thank you' to the folks who invented digital cameras!)

[docrobbysherry]

I began dressing with a film camera! I definitely hesitated before taking my pics to the local drug store to get them developed! But, I looked so BAD back then, he probably thot I was prepping for a Halloween party!

[Cynthia Anne]

No way! No pictures of me before Polaroid! I still have the pictures of me takin' with a polaroid while wearing a dress!

[Frédérique]

I can tell you, it was a real pain when I was young, having to sit perfectly still while the guy painted your portrait.... And those whalebone hoops! Ugh.

Why didn’t you just give the painter a photo to work from? :doh::heehee:


I began dressing with a film camera! I definitely hesitated before taking my pics to the local drug store to get them developed!

I learned to develop my own film in order to take (or make) my own crossdressing pictures. In this case, necessity was the mother of my photographic knowledge. These days, my enlarger is in the closet (where I used to be), and I haven’t loaded film onto reels in the dark for over five years. I even learned to develop color film, not an easy task – my avatar is one of my better efforts...
:battingeyelashes:

[busker]

The possibilty existed for anyone since 1839 to take and process one's own pictures. granted it was cumbersome making a platinum print, but the quality was unlike anything you've seen in the digital age. Simply put, home darkrooms have been around since forever and film will be with us for some time to come. While digital is better now, there is nothing like an 8x10 color negative. Large format photography is still a viable profession and there are a number of journals devoted to it..

[Starr]

I started out using polaroids in the early 70's then I started doing some pro work and got my own B/W dark room set up as well.. did a lot of things developing and printing my own stuff. I wanted some color photos so I did a roll and took them to the drug store and had them sent off and developed. They would develop a lot of things that most of us would never think about. Remember most were done on a machine so people didn't look at every photo as it developed. I am sure they did a quality check and content check but that was just a quick look over the stack of photos.

[Jennifer in CO]

before our fire there were TONS of photos of me around...in the garage..where the fire was. Actually, 99.9% of them I'm glad are gone but there are some I really would like to see again. Like one with my grand parents and me and I was in a wedding dress when I was 14 (long story - no I wasn't getting married), or my wife and I on vacation in Corpus Christi two years after I transitioned...two beautiful girls on on the beach...or my wife and I holding our daughter when we brought her home from the hospital after her birth...lost memories on film

Jenn

[anonymousinmaryland]

I can tell you, it was a real pain when I was young, having to sit perfectly still while the guy painted your portrait.... And those whalebone hoops! Ugh.

I enjoyed your original answer, Sophie.

[Sophie86]

my avatar is one of my better efforts...
:battingeyelashes:

All this time I had no idea that was you. I thought you were just using a GG pic that you liked!

[Princess_of_Hckloins]

After I came "out" in 2003, I used a disposable 35mm camera for those occasions I needed a picture since my real 35mm (point and shoot type) had bit the dust. Pics were usually done at events where someone else could take them. I didn't get a digital camera until late in 2004. As for Polaroids I remember them well, my parents used one that did B&W photos in the early 70's. They got a 35mm camera later that decade.

[Cristi]

From the mid-70s on there were polaroids. Not cheap (I think about $1 per pic) but worth it. Sadly, polaroids don't last forever and everything I took back then has long faded away.

I also did my own black and while. I took rolls and rolls of black and while photos and developed the film myself. I didn't print much of it, but at least did 'contact prints' of the rolls so I could look at the tiny pictures... sometimes with a magnifying glass!

I took a VERY limited number of pics with real color film, but was careful to not show my face in them, and have them developed/printed by a lab far away not by a local shop.

Plus, there was slide film. You still had to send it out to be developed, but nobody had to look at it during the process and you could be pretty sure that nobody in the drug store would bother to browse through your photos before you got a chance to pick them up.

Yup, you young kids have it good.... :)

[andreana]

Ah yes, the days of film. If you look for Pro Labs they still develop film. Nothing better than film negs. I still shoot medium format when i want a quality image. Sorry folks, unless you want to spend 8 or 10 k on a digital then film still makes a better blown up image than any digital. And yes the labs have forced us pro shooters into digital thus making everyone think that they are a photographer, you can tell the difference when you see the image of a shooter that learned film and went to digital compared to an image on a digital that is set for stupid proof (auto focus and exposure).

[aprilgirl]

Oh it was a challenge. My solution was the trusty Polaroid and thin curtain rod to snap the picture. Cristi is correct in saying that it was $1 per pic and you didn't dare blink when you posed. That very well may explain why most of my photos back then appear as though I just downed a pot of espresso.

The polaroid was nice in regards to having immediate feedback and at the time not dealing with the concern of developers seeing your pictures. By the nineties I no longer cared and dropped off and picked up the film with no regrets. It was expensive and I probably expedited some Kodak executives to an early retirement.

I give you exhibit A, circa 1988.

[Gerrijerry]

What is a digital camera. I use this camera that you put the film in from the back and take the photo. You remove the cap over a hole in the front. Count to three cover the hole and then take out the film from the back. Then you got to this dark room and put it in this stuff and there you go a photo is made. You young girls have it made with these new fangeled contraptions.

[Kate Simmons]

Yep, that's the way it was but then the Betamovie camera came out and I could make actual home movies of myself dancing en femme. I felt like a pioneer of sorts, Sigh!, those were the days my friend. Now it's a helluva lot easier with the technology.:)

[suzy1]

April, you look so cute in that picture! And you still do by the way.
I never took pictures until I joined this site. Then I soon rushed out and got a digi one.
It then took about two weeks to pluck up the courage to post it on here.
But I needn’t have worried. You were all so kind to me with your coments.

[carhill2mn]

I tried taking photos of myself using an SLR camera and timer. The worst part was getting your photos back and seeing
that very few, if any, were any good. I often took my photos to be developed and picked them up while en femme but not always.

[5150 Girl]

I had my own B&W darkroom as well. I sat the camera on a tripod, pointed it at a mirior, and triggerd the shutter with the bulb atachment.

[dilane]

The first time I had pictures of Diane developed, I'd taken about 25 film shots of me in various outfits and poses. I asked for proofs (small contact prints of each picture). When I picked them up, the lady looked at the pictures and said "She's very pretty!"

For years after that I just developed them, since my friends and I looked ok on film; nothing glaringly amiss.

[sissystephanie]

Since I started crossdressing before many of you were born, actually in 1938, I did have pictures taken with film cameras. And had pictures developed at a studio. Never once had any comments, since most of the time I cut my own head off in the picture. Even if I didn't do that, I wasn't really recognizable since I was wearing some makeup and a wig! Of course after I got married my dear late wife took lots of pictures! With film cameras!! BTW, I never did have a darkroom of my own!

[trisha59]

Lots of home darkrooms back in the old days. We also used mailers where you would mail your film into Kodak and they would mail the prints back to you.

[VioletJourney]

You have to remember that before digital pictures there also was no online community to share the pictures with... I dunno about any of you but I pretty much only take pictures to show off here!

[Sophie86]

You have to remember that before digital pictures there also was no online community to share the pictures with...

The online community (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PLATO_(computer_system)#Online_community) is older than you think. I was on PLATO back in the mid-80s.

[Sandy1967]

I remember with my 1st wife dressing up and taking pictures, some revealing. Taking the to Costco and having them developed. When we went to pick them up the guy said we made an extra set by mistake, We said we will take them also, not wanting an extra set of my revealing pictures floating around.

Love,
Allison

[Jorja]

Back when I started dressing there was the hammer and chisel. :D

Really though, I just took the pictures and took them to develop just like everyone else. No one ever said a word.

[Diane Smith]

I used to be pretty handy around the darkroom, but I reserved that for my "serious" art and documentary photographs, usually in large sizes; it was just too much work to produce a handful of 4x6 prints when you could pay somebody a modest amount to do it for you. My snapshots, including CDing shots, just went to the drugstore like everybody else's, and I never, ever, heard any comments about any of the content.

One of the things I love most about digital photography, though, is not ever having to worry about wasting film or counting up the dollars with every click of the shutter. That allows me to shoot more, try more adventurous things that might not work out, bracket exposure and focus more often, and in general get a lot more practice using the camera. That by itself has made me a better photographer (and I was pretty serious about it even in film days).

- Diane

[Julogden]

I too developed my own film. I shot black and white negative film, made my own prints too, and color slide film. If I wanted prints from the slides, I took them to a local film kiosk and crossed my fingers that no one would recognize me in the photos. I also used a Polaroid camera a few times, but I didn't care for the image quality as much as 35mm film.

Carol

[Tina B.]

I had my wife take them before I had a camera with a timer, I used to send my film to mail order developers back east, you could find them in photo mags. Then I had them done locally, but never felt comfortable so I'm another one that took up Photography, and set up my own darkroom. Then I fell in love with digital, I'm now going on my fifth generation Digital camera now, and still looking for a better one. And being able to crop and fix the photos myself has become a major part of the digital images I love to work with. It also has worked into a pretty good hobby as a male too, I've sold enough to pay for the newest camera.

[Sarah Doepner]

I had a home darkroom that I could use for B&W images. I shot some slides and had a mail order option to get them processed. Polaroids weren't an option since I didn't have a self-timer or a mirror that was big enough or properly positioned for good self photography. The thing that seems to be missing are those folks who had someone they could trust who would take the pictures of them. I wasn't out to anyone who could help me until well after digital cameras were common.
All that being said, I didn't know enough about how to do makeup, hair or dress to really warrant much photography in those days, so the number of images available are very small. And that's a good thing.

[Cristi]

Trisha: I still have a mailer here for Kodachrome. Someday it will be worth something as a collector's item. :) Mailers were great and easy to use IF you didn't mind waiting a few weeks to get your photos back.

I also know the story from the OTHER side. In the mid-80s I worked in a camera store that had our own photo lab. They were fairly new things back then, so we had it set up where customers could see the prints as they came out of the machine into a pile, then the guy who ran it would look at every pic to make sure they didn't need additional color/exposure adjustments before putting them in the envelope.

The only memory of 'spicy' pics I have is that we had an older gentleman who would come in once in a while who used to take nudes of himself and his much younger girlfriend.

BTW: Back then it was (and probably still is?) illegal to transport 'pornographic' materials across state lines, so if a lab in a different state noticed something they thought was pornographic, they could and would refuse to print it. It was fun to explain to customers who had sent pics out the the lab we used in NY why they were not printed! (we used our own lab for 'one hour' jobs, but charged more for it, so may people still sent out to the lab for overnight).

[vikki2020]

I would just take the film in to a store not in my neighborhood. There was also "Seattle Film Works", where you could mail your film in, and they would send back your pics with a free roll of film. So expensive,though, film and developing, and maybe getting one or two "good" ones out of 24!! Thank goodness for digital, and the "delete" button!!

[Karren H]

I never even thought or taking photos. And I spent a lot more time dressing back then vs taking photos of my dressing now. Lol. Ahhhh the good old days...

[Deborah]

I give you exhibit A, circa 1988.

Love that outfit April, looks like something i'd wear. To the OP i didn't take pictures of myself until digital cameras arrived. I usually looked at a full length mirror to see how i looked.

[AlannahNorth]

Yes, I remember the mail order printing services, and Polaroid - OUCH! In some areas Polaroids cost up to about $1.40/shot - experimenting meant taking measurements and notes so that you would KNOW how to get a good shot, and heaven forbid you blow it... 35mm was enjoyable - I really learned my photography with Kodak slide film. Eventually I built a B&W darkroom and then I really got going. Then, my own colour slide processing. However - it never became truly inexpensive, just less expensive than having the processing and/or printing done by someone else.

A few years ago someone gave me a used digital camera - I haven't looked back since. I gave my darkroom away along with all the chemicals, papers, and other equipment. While it is true that buying the cheaper digital cameras gives you less - remember that a good film camera was also not cheap. And now - low priced digital cams are doing great things. My photography skills have only improved with the purchase of a couple of moderately priced cameras - because I can AFFORD to play with composition and light.

Now, I occasionally do photograph myself while dressed - before - never.

Good cameras are not cheap - and they rarely ever were. Debates on the durability of the digital medium aside, I say digital cameras are a blessing. The quality is now very good, and continuing to get better. The RAW image format stores an enormous amount of data. Keep in mind you will need something like Photoshop to really benefit from this, but the bottom line is this: there are many people who like to take pictures, but it is photographers that reliably take the best photographs.

If you really like photography then consider quality an investment - as it always has been. I'm looking forward to spending about $3K on a good camera and lenses - hopefully late in the year. But I love photography and that is my choice.

Celluloid and paper are growing ever more expensive - but will probably always be around if you know where to look. And now - the pollution associated with it needs to be addressed.

It was difficult to realize that my beautiful cameras and lenses are now paperweights, but I did get over it. Digital - go for it!