February 18, 2008
I once purchased lunch with a local columnist at a charity auction, and I was shocked when she walked down the newspaper hallway towards me. It was clear that the photo that sat at the top of her column had been taken at least a decade before. It took me the whole lunch to get over it.
Since that defining moment, I decided that I would have a new professional photo taken at least every five years. I'm coming up on needing one in the next year or two. I'll try not to shock you with all kinds of jiggles and jowlies, but I must warn you that the other day when I was plucking my eyebrows without my glasses on, I tried to pluck a wrinkle.
I thought about picture-taking as my family from Illinois came to Seattle for a wedding, all of them armed with digital cameras. I think that The Sainted One and I are the only family members – perhaps the only people of means in the western hemisphere – who have not purchased a digital camera.
I'm not a Luddite. In fact, I'm fairly tech-savvy. I am by default the Information Technology Manager of our company, and I even create The Quincy Group website and my personal one as well. I can't imagine composing longhand on a sheet of paper, and I carry a Blackberry and text message on it.
But because I hate picture-taking, the digital camera irks me. Here's why: You can never take just one picture of anything. Unfortunately, one has the ability to immediately critique a picture, making multiple takes a necessity. So if cousin Anne has a big piece of spinach stuck on an incisor, it's a re-take. If the top of sister Susie's head has inadvertently floated out of the frame, it's a do-over. Eyes closed? Do it again. Funny chipmunk face? Yet again. For a confirmed picture-taking hater like me, it's torture.
Plus you lose the joy of finding that mystery roll of film in the back of the junk drawer and having it developed, providing you with Time Travel as Einstein never envisioned it. And some of our favorite photos from our youth are also the worst ones: Bad hair, bodies caught in motion, First Communion veils sticking straight up in the wind, the top of Dad's head missing from a family grouping, prompting a caption after he left Mom and disappeared for a while: "Later in life they would realize just how prophetic this picture was."
As much as I hate picture-taking, I can tell you now that lots and lots of champagne can weaken my aversion. I shudder when I think of the roll of film that they'll soon be developing from the wedding, the one from the 35mm throw-away camera that sat in the middle of our table. I'm can see it now as they thumb through the piles of photos: The smiling Smith family, the shot of the adorable flower girls on the dance floor, multiple shots of the bride/ father dance from different vantage points, and then they'll get to the batch with pictures of shoes, and with my sister and me in the restroom desperately trying to get the Tampax machine to work, and with me expressing anger and surprise as someone opens the door and I'm caught on the toilet.
But at least they weren't digital. And had been digital, I would have probably erased them in a more thoughtful and sober moment. And wouldn't that be a shame?
I guess I'll have to wait to hear from newlyweds Christopher and Megan for that answer ...
Comments
amazonratz (anonymous) says...
I never really thought about how we can now delete all the bad photos, the ones that bring us the most laughs later on in life...that is a pity. you must start a new revolution!
February 19, 2008 at 6:55 a.m. ( permalink | suggest removal )
Post a comment
Commenting requires registration.