Should I get a non-digital camera for my 4 year old?
July 31, 2018 10:59 AM   Subscribe

In this fast moving world of digital devices with virtually endless storage, I can't help but wonder if there's something to the idea of getting an actual camera, with actual film, for my kid to be exposed to and see the process of taking pictures that is irreversible, finite, and focused and then getting a taste of the delayed gratification that comes with developing them. Bonus points for specific things to do/not do if your answer is yes.

So, I guess this is partly a Mr. Rodgers learning experience type thing and partly a throwback to "back in my day we had to walk uphill in the snow both ways" sort of thing. Also it's directly tied to how all the things I mentioned above are nearly exactly the opposite when it comes to digital camera pictures taken with a phone or ipad during family play times.

It seems like everything our kids experience happens so quickly that there might be a benefit to slowing it down and making it more tangible, these youthful experiences. Plus we'll get a roll of film developed and put on her wall or sent to family, hipster idea and all that.

So, should I? She's reasonably trustworthy (advanced for a 4 year old I'm told) and it would likely be supervised pretty closely until she could be trusted not to drop or destroy it immediately. I'm ok with dealing with some basic photography but somewhere between a disposable camera and a nice camera body is probably where I am. Perhaps like an Instamatic that I recall from my youth or maybe even a bit nicer, though that's going to get risky/spendy. I'm ok with buying something used that's quality and could maybe grow with her if she gets a kick out of it.

I don't want to do Polaroid. I've never liked them and it kinda defeats the purpose here a bit. Plus they don't age well that I've seen and, in the case that she takes a good/great/memento picture, I'd like it to not look like poo in 10 years or whatever.

Film. They still make film for cameras right? I kid, but I have no knowledge of this aspect of it and figure I'll be doing mail order/Amazon purchases for film and something similar for developing the prints. I'm ok with that but would rather not spend 30 bucks / roll of however many shots if I can make a slightly different choice in camera/technology and spend half that, doubly so in the beginning.

Thanks for the responses.
posted by RolandOfEld to Society & Culture (27 answers total) 1 user marked this as a favorite
 
The Instamatic from your youth is now called a Disposable Camera (Amazon search)
posted by Rash at 11:04 AM on July 31, 2018


Response by poster: Yea, I know. I'd rather her be responsible for *camera* instead of it being another indicator of the disposable society we live in. I think that's laudable if a bit on the twee side of things.
posted by RolandOfEld at 11:06 AM on July 31, 2018


I think that four is too young to take anything resembling photos that she would want to keep. Film and developing is expensive. Bad pictures are frustrating.
I got my first camera when I was 7 or 8 and did marginally well with it. Perhaps it would be good to wait a couple of years.
posted by SLC Mom at 11:06 AM on July 31, 2018 [8 favorites]


Response by poster: I'm down with that too, can't argue, just popped in my head and figured I'd gather the info/nuts and bolt. To be clear I'm ok with photos that are worthless as long as she gets a kick out of the process and, maybe, thinks about it in a year or two and says 'lets try that again'.
posted by RolandOfEld at 11:10 AM on July 31, 2018


Response by poster: Heck, I could even do a running thing where she got a roll of film a month or something and it becomes a tradition/gimmick thing. Then she goes viral later in life for a week with a snapshot roll call. Then I get to revel in how great an idea that was and gloat from my wheelchair on the porch.
posted by RolandOfEld at 11:12 AM on July 31, 2018 [1 favorite]


Best answer: When I was that age, I had an Instamatic 126 like the one you link; my daughter also had a 'Spy Kids' branded 110 camera that I think came in a happy meal in the mid-90s. Both of us had fun with them; my daughter never really took up photography but I always kept at it.

It's a bit to complicated to give anything fancier than that sort of camera at 4 years old -- even a "hold down the button half-way for autofocus" is too complicated -- it should be "point sorta in the right direction and push the button, then turn the wheel until it stops, if you don't see numbers in this little window then you're done". They may be able to change 110 or other cartridge film themselves, but feeding 35mm through a little slot to roll it on is going to be too much too.

Something else to consider at that age is their patience: regardless of the speed of the internet age, even back in the day a 4-year-old may not even remember what they took pictures of a week ago, let alone care about getting the pictures back. Doing 'team' dry runs of you taking photos, then waiting, then picking them up together, will teach the kid how it works first, rather than starting with "hey, let's have fun taking pictures!" and ending with "OK, next step is to wait a significant fraction of your little life to see what we got!" may be a disappointment. It establishes the anticipation, without investment from the kid yet, then they can emulate you, which is how little kiddles learn stuff best.

(low-tech photography with crappy cameras now has the trendy 'lomography', as a search-term when shopping, and the cameras are kinda spendy, but in 2018 dollars that Instamatic wasn't a cheap camera either)
posted by AzraelBrown at 11:26 AM on July 31, 2018 [4 favorites]


I totally get your idea and why you want to do it, but I'm not sure film is the right avenue for it, given that finding a film developer is a pain in the butt. However, you could do something like turn off the LCD on the camera and only let her seem them on the computer monitor?? I bought a digital camera for my kid recently (he was 12) and the LCD quality was so bad, so seeing them on the monitor was awesome.

I wonder if cooking might be a better avenue (24 hour chocolate chip cookies, Amish bread starter, pickles that have to cure for a month).
posted by Ftsqg at 11:28 AM on July 31, 2018


Best answer: I get what you're trying for here, but I'm not sure a film camera is going to play out the way you're imagining -- especially to someone as young as 4 a film camera is just going to seem like a clumsy and limited form of a "real" digital camera. I'd expect it to have the opposite effect of what you intend.

For a slightly older child you might instead consider something like a pinhole camera kit, or even just play with making a camera obscura out of a cardboard box -- there the mechanism is simple and tangible enough that she can really understand what's going on and how it works, which would probably be a lot more interesting for her than a regular film camera (which are mechanically complex enough that to a child it'd seem just about as mysterious as a digital one, but with bonus limitations and frustrating delays). Or even just try that sunprint paper as an entry-level introduction to the idea of light exposed on film, and work your way up from there if she shows interest.
posted by ook at 11:29 AM on July 31, 2018 [10 favorites]


Best answer: I agree with those who think that 4 is probably too young to understand the process; I was about 7 or 8 when I got a hand-me-down 126 Instamatic and a wodge of pamphlets from Kodak that are probably still up in my parents' attic.

I know you're against Polaroid, but have you considered the Instax range? Wirecutter likes Instax more than Polaroid.
posted by holgate at 11:30 AM on July 31, 2018 [1 favorite]


Response by poster: it should be "point sorta in the right direction and push the button, then turn the wheel until it stops, if you don't see numbers in this little window then you're done".

This is exactly my thinking. Thanks for the personal confirmation/reference to you and yours regarding age, I know she can handle it if it's that simple. As to if she wants to, well that's TBD.

low-tech photography with crappy cameras now has the trendy 'lomography', as a search-term when shopping, and the cameras are kinda spendy, but in 2018 dollars that Instamatic wasn't a cheap camera either

I've been digging and the film for a 35mm looks to be still available and actually not all that expensive via Amazon, ditto for a reasonable price for developing services via something like this. So those parts look to be ok/solved. Do you have a particular camera/body you'd recommend since the instamatic film seems to be a dead platform? I don't minding loading the film for her since, as you said, the slot could be a bit much.
posted by RolandOfEld at 11:30 AM on July 31, 2018


Best answer: If you decide that a film camera isn't really what you're after (which I think it's not going to be what you really want, to be honest), there was a nice link from Cup of Jo recently about kid's vacation photos. It recommends digital cameras for kids including features.

In the meantime though, maybe a few disposables would scratch the itch that you're thinking about. There are certainly the old 35mm point and shoots available for about $20 on ebay, but film and developing is going to be harder than you want maybe.
posted by vunder at 11:33 AM on July 31, 2018


Best answer: Instant Gratification is around you all the time. When you play soccer, you wind up to kick the ball. You kick it, you are instantly gratified. When you bake cookies, you are gratified by the smell and then by the taste.

Delayed gratification can make you want the cookies more, but real delayed gratification is working on chores for a month until you can afford a new toy. That toy, which, provides another instant gratification loop.

I think what happens more often in the internet age is one thing: Novelty. There are so many different toys and games on the ipad, that if you get bored, you can instantly switch to something else! So, it sure feels like kids are more impatient, more bored, than ever before. They can't sit still through a commercial break? They don't want to wait for their turn in a board game? They just haven't learned how to BE BORED.

So, in conclusion, you should consider buying an instax mini camera. They are about $50 and the film is about $0.25 - $0.50 a picture. It develops right away. It's neat and fashionable.

If you want to train your kid to be bored, send them to grandma and grandpas, where they don't have cable or internet. Or send them into the backyard for an hour.
posted by bbqturtle at 11:35 AM on July 31, 2018


Response by poster: A few folks have mentioned developing being a problem, is that mail order type service not workable for some reason? Their prices seemed ok, hell reasonable even since I was expecting it to be a huge pain, at 11 bucks for basic service with 4 bucks more if I want a small print of every shot on the roll and they provide mailers? Am I missing something? That's, in a way, easier than going to the pharmacy (as we did back in the day) for us...
posted by RolandOfEld at 11:36 AM on July 31, 2018


Best answer: Nah, mail-in works great, I think a lot of people just aren't familiar with that option, so they don't know how easy it is.
posted by thegreatfleecircus at 11:48 AM on July 31, 2018


Best answer: Also, I totally support this. I had a camera at that age-- the anticipation was delicious, and I can see every detail of that camera in my mind's eye still. There is something about making a thing, and having to wait to see the fruits of your labor, that seems perfectly capable of being appreciated by a young child in 2018. I would be really surprised if it wasn't at least a little exciting for your kid. At worst it doesn't appeal, or doesn't appeal yet (maybe it needs another year or two depending on the child.) There's something really unique about the process, and I don't see any reason it wouldn't translate to this time and place, especially for a young child who isn't drowning in social media yet. The aspect of receiving the prints in the mail will probably add to the excitement too, I'd think.
posted by thegreatfleecircus at 11:54 AM on July 31, 2018


Best answer: When I was seven, my older brother and sister both got cool new 110 cameras in the leadup to a big family trip. I discovered an old 126 format camera in a drawer and was told it didn't work (hence its being in the drawer) and I couldn't use it.

In an early sign of troubleshooting skills, I fiddled around with it for a while after being told it didn't work. Turned out the only problem with the camera was a design fault that meant it was too easy to pop the back open while it had film (ruining the current exposure), but there was nothing actually broken. You could put tape over the latch and keep it from popping open unintentionally. But then I was told I couldn't take it on the trip because if it wasn't broken, it was too expensive and fragile, and I'd only break it. I threw a fit, saying I should at least be allowed to try, and it wasn't like anybody else was trying to use it.

Eventually I was allowed to take it on the trip, but my parents would only buy me black and white film because color was too expensive. Ironically, all the color prints from the 110 cameras are now badly faded and color shifted, and my B&W 126 prints look great. Too bad most of my photos are terrible.

I still fondly remember that camera, but I was seven, not four. At least part of my fondness may have come from the fact I originated the interest and invested time in diagnosing how/why the found camera was "broken." I think if you want to do this at all, starting it as a group activity where she does something with you and then is allowed to express her own interest in doing it on her own will be more likely to stick than just handing her an antique gadget with mysterious function and a timescale that forces a really long delay on any gratification.
posted by fedward at 11:58 AM on July 31, 2018


I think I understand where you are coming from, but I don't think the film photography has the right timing. A week or more is along time in a 4-year-old's world. I'm wondering about an alternate strategy using a digital camera and getting the delayed gratification element if the digital to print step.

There are other activities with the same lesson, like baking a cake in the afternoon and waiting 'til dinner dessert to have a piece.
posted by SemiSalt at 12:36 PM on July 31, 2018 [1 favorite]


Best answer: I’ve used The Darkroom (mail-order service you linked to) several times and have been happy with their service.
posted by actionstations at 12:44 PM on July 31, 2018


Best answer: I've explored film photography with my child (starting at age 6 or so). I found he doesn't actually care about images at all - maybe they're too ubiquitous now? When I was six I had a 110 camera and used it to take a photo of a praying mantis, whereas my child doesn't feel like photos of praying mantises are hard to come by.

That said, I'd recommend a project for the roll of film that will make it gratifying when you finally get the prints. We did one where we took a closeup photo of each letter of the alphabet from signs around town. At the end, we put them in alphabetical order as an alphabet book. Or, you could do portraits of each family member. Or photos of yard wildlife to make a field guide. Or the same view at the same time for 36 days in a row. Otherwise, you'll just get 36 blurry pics taken too close up of random toys or the dog running past and the results will be low on satisfaction and inspiration.
posted by xo at 12:50 PM on July 31, 2018 [2 favorites]


4 seems very young. I’ve built pinhole cameras with interested 7 year-olds and had them developing their own sheet film from them (ok maybe more than you plan to do if you don’t do that kind of thing already). The 4 year old in my life is good with a phone camera and a supervised instax (that film is expensive and they’ll just run through it!).

You can still get disposable cameras at Walgreens for about $15, and yes, mailing in to be developed is fine. There are also plenty of 35mm point and shoots at thrift stores still.

I’m not sure she’ll quite GET IT at 4, but it seems like not a big deal to try. Just musing here, but a lot of the (professional!) photographers I know even had trouble learning in school because of the long time between taking a photo and seeing it develop. That’s a big bonus for digital. Trying to find a simple digital camera with a viewfinder is tough, though, at least last time I looked.

Cyanotypes like someone above mentioned are also very fun for kids that age, and you can buy “Sun Paper” at an art supply store or online and that’s a good intro to the concept of developing.
posted by jeweled accumulation at 1:10 PM on July 31, 2018 [1 favorite]


I think a perfect camera for this would be a 1970s Olympus Trip, pretty much indestructible, don't need batteries and still take pretty good pictures. They typically sell on Ebay for around $40.
posted by Lanark at 1:46 PM on July 31, 2018 [1 favorite]


I let my kids, presently 6 and 4, play with my DSLR cameras. The older one started using my old DSLR around 2 years ago when she was 4. I keep the settings on auto and lock the zoom to make things simpler for them but apparently they took some pictures on my camera (that wasn't set to auto) last week and did a decent job of it. They like to take pictures and I like to see the ones they take. We don't spend too much time actually reviewing what they've taken although we should. I have a film SLR lying around that they could use too but I don't know what the point would be.
posted by any portmanteau in a storm at 3:05 PM on July 31, 2018


To me the fundamental cost in photography is opportunity cost - if you've missed your moment its gone. The cost of film and delay in getting things processed are additional costs but the main one is that I've missed/messed up my chance to take the photo that I wanted to.
posted by any portmanteau in a storm at 3:33 PM on July 31, 2018


Best answer: Photography is a great & fun hobby and would be an awesome thing to do with a kid. But as a film camera nerd and a father of a small kid trust me... 4 is a little young no matter how responsible. Give it a couple years for film or if you're in a rush track down a cheap digital. But if you're set on film photography, in the meantime (or if you want to ignore getting a cheap digital or Instax camera) I have some suggestions for you.

* Trawl eBay for film camera lots (these are filled with random cameras in various states) - look for point and shoot cameras 35mm or 120 (Medium format) cameras (don't bother with 126, 110 or disc cameras). Avoid any cameras that are too dirty looking, look for ones ideally that don't have electronics (80's & 90's electronics especially haven't aged well) and ideally don't need batteries (a lot of older ones depend on mercury batteries). There's loads that fit that description (especially from the 70's) out there being sold for cheap. Couple camera suggestion that I use - Olympus Trip 35 (35mm) or the Agfa Clack (or frankly any of the box cameras would work - these use 120 film). Don't forget to download a light metre app for your phone or tablet.

* Build a pinhole camera. Loads of plans online and apps for your devices to help you shoot with them.

* While you're on ebay, buy cheap expired film or fresh cheap film from China or 100ft bulk rolls of 35mm B&W perforated film (you'll need a gadget to roll them into cassettes - again eBay is your friend here). Load a camera and shoot.

* Next learn to develop film - yeah you can send it away but it isn't as hard as it might seem (especially B&W) - you can develop the film in instant coffee and washing soda (there's a huge supportive Cafenol community out there if you get stuck and has the bonus of being non-toxic and cheap). You'll need fixer as well here - that's the one chemical that's tricky and moderately toxic (perfectly safe though if handled with care). Colour film is a bit trickier to develop and I wouldn't do it with a young kid but it isn't that much harder though. There's kits out there that make it easy.

* After you get them developed get a dedicated film scanner or just use a DLSR or the camera on your phone (Lomography has a gadget to facilitate it) so that you can get those images into a digital format for ease of use.

If you want to go in this direction (haha!) feel free to Memail.
posted by Ashwagandha at 5:00 PM on July 31, 2018 [1 favorite]


Best answer: Oh and when you do introduce film photography approach it as a process and a different way of seeing rather than all about the final image. Because as XO mentions, we live in a image saturated world and film photography can teach you to see the world differently.
posted by Ashwagandha at 5:10 PM on July 31, 2018 [1 favorite]


Seconding the printing-out/sunlight paper suggestion, but film cameras are only cool if you like mucking with the processes. They very much get in the way of making pictures.

TLOP is the best way to learn, and film makes that slow and expensive. Don't inflict the past on your kids
posted by scruss at 7:24 AM on August 1, 2018


Response by poster: Thanks all for the responses, I'm chewing on them and will see what comes out the other end after they digest.

Ok, who took my question to Google Doodle for the day? Serendipity.


I kid, I kid...

posted by RolandOfEld at 7:29 AM on August 1, 2018


« Older How do I get over crushing post-fun blues?   |   "And that's why God gave us two ears and one... Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.