Find solution
REALLY FUNNY PICTURES?

If the new vintage" fad included making pictures look like they were from the 90's, what would they look like?

  • I'm sure most people know what I'm talking about. There seems to be a huge fad right now with trying to make pictures look "vintage" as if they were taken in the 60's \ 70's, etc. Although of course, most of them get it completely wrong because they have only a vague idea of what old photographs actually look like. I wasn't around in the 60's or 70's, but I have seen plenty of old pictures and they don't look anything like most of the "Photoshopped" digital pictures I've seen. The other funny thing is when people try to edit digital pictures to make them look like film, and get it completely wrong. (There's apparently even a fake light leak feature on some editing programs, but it looks absolutely nothing like a real light leak). Anyway, my question is do you think eventually this fad (if it survives) will extend to trying to make pictures look like they were taken in the 90's? I was talking about this with someone earlier. I personally don't see how since the 90's isn't really "vintage." I was a kid in the 90's and everything was electronic and plastic then. Computers and video games were around, and by the mid-90's video games even had 3d accelerated graphics (Nintendo64, anyone?) And I started going on the internet and going in chat rooms by around 1995. And Google started in 1997 or 1998, if I remember right. But hey, maybe I'm missing something. How will people view the 90's 10-15 years from now? Do you think eventually we'll maybe see a new fad where people try to make their pictures look like vintage early 90's photos and they dress up in baggy MC Hammer pants or dress like Kris Kross...or Vanilla Ice (heaven help us)? What do you think? As weird as it seems, do you think eventually we might see people trying to make "vintage" pictures from the 90's? And do you think they'll get that wrong too?

  • Answer:

    Defining the 90's must surely have peoples' heads and feet cut off as the viewfinder image in compacts was always far bigger than the recorded image... Of course - you're absolutely right about the 60's/70's images being retro-wrong. If anything, you could define the era with slightly more saturation than we see with our eyes especially where Kodachrome 64 was concerned. But today's image editors would like us to think that there was a strange yellow cast to the muted colours of that era. That's what happens to some photographs FROM the era not photographs OF the era.

Diverging Point at Yahoo! Answers Visit the source

Was this solution helpful to you?

Other answers

I think it's hilarious that people will waste HOURS to make something look "vintage" and no matter how good of a job they do, nothing can really replace the characteristics or film and the aging that the photos they've seen from those decades. I can totally see a 90's revival from future generations. I'd be easy I guess, just go buy a disposable camera with flash or one of those old 35mm point and shoots everyone had - with flash of course! And yeah I think they will get it wrong too, because they probably won't buy/be able to find those cameras and they'll be a bunch of lazy people who'd rather do it on photoshop. Just generalizing of course, but ya know... Ps. People are wearing those ugly *** MC Hammer pants again already...

Gueule

I think disposable (one use) cameras would pretty much nail it. Most of the other cameras of the 90s were too good to give any sort of "vintage" look. Regarding real vintage photographs, 40 year old photos have that "look" because they ARE 40 years old. They age, tone, fade, curl, crack, etc. Hard to replicate that. Interesting question. Congratulations, starred.

Mere Mortal

you have magically stumbled on history. Movements in photography is nothing new, for literally thousands of years, making images has had social swings. The first "cameras" were called "camera obscura" all they did was project an image on a wall, inside a room. A painter could come in and paint the picture and therefore keep the image, but there was also the camera lucida, which was a way of looking at anything and also looking at a paper at the same time, this allowed people to sketch what they saw looking at two things at once. Fast forward, to more modern times, we had the groups like pictorialist, the f64 crowd ( Ansel Adams), and tons more, a lot more. One thing that keeps going back and forth is the idea wheather pictures should be more real or more creative. I am doing you a great disservice by not telling you more of the movements that have affected photography, but the point is, there have always been changes in attitude and this movement you speak of, is just another turn in the cycle. The same can be said of camera's and music, music changes over time as I am sure you are aware of, but lets talk camera's for a sec, The modern digital camera is hot right now, but it is hardly the end. You will most likely see the end of the digital camera in your life. New technologies are constantly coming out and if you think digital is the end, you would be wrong. Enjoy the changes of attitude and technology they are the only certain thing.

cedykeman1

I just find it hilarious how these kids call it "old". Okay, sure people born in 1970 are turning 40 now and those born in 1960 are hitting 50 but so what? Doesn't make them or the images "old". Hell, I'm turning 30 this year and I sure as hell am not old. Pictures from the 90s? Think some stuff from the 80s but also grunge, more rap (shudders), New Kids on the Block crap. Damn. I was a teenager from 1993-2000. Yow. EDIT: LOL. Gateway, you're my boyfriend's age. Not much older than me.

Mrs. U

I was a little kid back in the 90s, so I didn't care for cameras, I didn't know how to operate one, much less care to use it, I didn't have any uses. I mean I did take pictures with a small toy film camera, well, digital wasn't popular back then, so I never used digital back in the 90s, I lost those images I took, cause I didn't care to keep the camera somewhere where I can find it, and they never got developed, meaning, me, specifically, don't have any images from the 90s, it would have been nice though, but I don't resort to trying to make my photos look retro or anything, it's all done now, nothing I could do about it, if I really wanted them, I would have kept the camera and had it developed, so now I just appreciate the pictures of the 90s that were taken by my parents, or any other family member, at least I can do that. add: I didn't star your question at first, but now, I gotta, for saying you like Pearl Jam, and also, Jeremy is a great song, as well as Black. haha.

Zombo

They would look like my kids when they were little. Hey, that's what most of my pictures from the 90s were! And they just look like pictures to me.

Related Q & A:

Just Added Q & A:

Find solution

For every problem there is a solution! Proved by Solucija.

  • Got an issue and looking for advice?

  • Ask Solucija to search every corner of the Web for help.

  • Get workable solutions and helpful tips in a moment.

Just ask Solucija about an issue you face and immediately get a list of ready solutions, answers and tips from other Internet users. We always provide the most suitable and complete answer to your question at the top, along with a few good alternatives below.