Going camera-less
 

Have any of you ever done this?

One of the most wonderful trips I've taken was way back when, when I was 20 or so and circled Britain on train and than Ireland on bus.

Somehow it never dawned on me to take a camera. Yet I can remember the York Minster and Welsh castles, people, smells, tastes, sensations, bars, the look of towns, dogs in the B&Bs, all clearly. More too.

Of course, since then I've taken some great pictures on other trips. Also, I do love to look at other's photos. Nevertheless, something in me doesn't always like to "capture" things.

Do you think ALL trips require a camera? I'm thinking about going camera-less again. It is less cumbersome.

I mostly agree with you, but other family members really want to see my pictures (despite my lack of photography skills). That seems the least I can do for them.

But I don't take a camera with me every moment. I have it on me about 1/3 of the time.

On my last trip I took a digital camera, and I do enjoy looking at those pictures online whenever I feel like it. It's different than dragging out an album somehow (not to mention having to get the pictures developed, having to put them in the album, etc.).

I have to agree that if you are supposed to avoid looking like a tourist, that's pretty hard to do when you have a camera in your hand or around your neck.

I don't think I could ever go without a camera, but I do find that I am taking fewer photos when in Paris since we have been a number of times. If we visit a completely new area, then I will take some. Otherwise, I enjoy 'seeing' the sights by focusing, centering, and angling thru the viewfinder. But I don't think I take nearly as many pix as some people do - I don't want to view my vacation entirely thru a camera.

I'm a big travel geek: love to research a trip, and soak up the local culture as much as possible, and have pictures to share back home; but, I agree that enjoying the activities of a trip rather than viewing it through a lens for the best shot is way better.

I usually take my digital also, and really let the flow of the trip dictate how many pictures to take.

actually i think photos help me remember the details of the holiday.after a few years unless your memory is good you wont be able to remember all the places you visited on a trip.try it for yourself.besides taking pictures i keep all the brochures / receipts/ entrance tickets with my photos so i can remember the the details and incidents.i also write a log of the events either each night of the trip or while i am on the plane back, but even then i start forgetting what happend and mixing dates and things.

My name is Statia and I'm a photoholic. I don't take non-stop photos on trips, but I do take plenty. I like to document those wonderful moments on our trips and we thoroughly enjoy reliving them thru the photos at later dates.

I haven't totally sworn off the camera, but I did go Cold Turkey with the video camera. I would video EVERYTHING and kind of enjoyed doing it, but almost twenty years of video are still sitting in a box in the back of the closet - most never having been watched at all. One of those projects that never gets done is to edit and recopy them to DVD.

In the meantime, I am in love with my digital camera. Being able to delete the stupid or poorly shot pictures is the best thing since sliced bread. And I can download the 1% that are actually good shots on to my computer as screensavers and backgrounds.

There are a few places I will not take a camera, only because I have been there so many times and I already have all the pics I need. London is one of those places, also Las Vegas. In other cities, the more I've been there, the fewer pics I will take. The best photos are the ones in the mind.

Hi Giselle!
I always take the camera, convinced that I must not let a photo op go by, but over the years, we leave it in the hotel room more often than not. If it is a place you have not been to or will not return to, then bring a camera!!
You could always buy a little disposable if you got there and realized that you really want to take pictures.
PS- I have seen some of your photos and they are good ~

I take my camera less and less. Get photos of family and friends when they come to visit me.

I am really working on packing less and less and have so many photos that I don't want tons more.

Will probably take my camera when I go to Italy next year but not sure. May just buy a disposable camera once I am there.

Hi G,

I have a small digital camera that takes up almost no room.

I always bring it.

I can't imagine travelling without a camera. We've just returned from London and Paris and the only time a camera wasn't with us was when we went out to dinner.

We've been to both numerous times and don't take nearly as many photos as we did on our earlier visits but there are always some magical moments that speak to be recorded. I'm just reviewing the 150 shots I took over 2 weeks and 6 of them alone justify the effort. Three are a display of bird houses for sale in the flower market on the Ile de la Cite. The other three are taken from the right bank of a spectacular mackeral sky which changed from a pale apricot, to salmon, to brilliant pink while silhouetting the Eiffel Tower.

I go through phases. I used to take a lot of photos (have big fat photos albums to prove it) and occasionally take them out for a look. I'm glad I have them since time has faded some of the memories that they bring back.

I have also traveled with minimal camera support. I once traveled with only a small disposable camera for 3 weeks. I didn't even use all the exposures. But occasionally I look back on those few pictures and wish I had taken more.

I am more of a spontaneous camera user now. Only take personal, funny, or unusual, and if I'm lucky, a breath-taking view shots. I don't tend to take the usual tourist shots, e.g. various churches or monuments seen, posed shots in front of various monuments. I like the candid shots. I don't take photos just to show I've been somewhere.

I'm back to taking lots of pictures. I love my digital camera. It's small and light and requires little extraneous equipment. I can shoot away with abandon without even checking what I'm really shooting. Then delete later. I like carrying a mini-album with me on the camera too. And the pictures are already organized when downloaded to my computer. Takes a lot less time and room than photo albums. I actually print out very few pictures now.

So I actually don't mind taking pictures since it's not my main focus. It's a way to enhance the trip for later enjoyment.

Giselle: Like so many posters above, I've done the big, big documented album, a couple of trips with disposable cameras (and my pics were darn good), and one or two with almost no pictures. I do love my digital camera--I have a lovely CD of three weeks in Ireland that I'll treasure.

But something else that we've enjoyed is writing a postcard to ourselves everyday. Originally, this was just a kid activity, a substitution for the boring kiddie trip journal. They loved it--stopping to pick the perfect postcard of their day was always a highlight. They were then able to receive mail for a week or two after our trip with such wonderful reminders of the fun they had. Then they saved them in a special album (no notes needed--the postcards say all).

It wasn't until two years ago that I went "no duh!" and started doing it myself.

I often don't take my camera ..sometime because I am a tad disorganized and I plain forget :(

Sometimes I just want to savor the sensation of being in a place - my last trip to Montreal we did not do much of the tourist stuff just wandered around no camera - but I do carry back home with me metro tickets, museum passes and assorted stuff that I then stick into a book etc and they provide wonderful memories.

<SARCASM>
Yeah, leave your camera home. It weighs you down with nearly four additional ounces, and the time you waste capturing priceless images of memories you'll cherish forever will probably take ten minutes out of your two weeks.
<SARCASM>

It's not about the time it takes to take a picture. I just got back from 2 weeks in Italy and I did take plenty of pictures. However, I went out for a walk or run every morning for an hour or two without my camera. Some of my best memories are from those times. Some how being camers-less apparently makes me more approachable. I had so many great encouters and interactions then. Having nothing on you, no camera, no cash, no passport, no guide book ... nothing, is very liberating.

So, while I wouldn't go cold turkey, I would leave the camera behind in the hotel sometimes.

Although I have taken many photos while on trips I find that the memories that stay with me are the ones without a camera. The scene, the noise, the aromas, the "being right there". I have taken tons of photos but the memories bring me so much joy. I sometimes have felt that taking photos all the time takes away from the actual enjoyment of the moment.

Having said that I just took a bunch of photos of three handsome grandsons that were here this morning and know I will be glad to have these. And do love to take photos of my friends in Italy, but it is done in a more relaxed way, when we are having wine on the terrace, when everyone sits down around the table to eat etc. I do collect postcards, antique and up to date of places I want pictures of which I enjoy. And do like to take some spur of the moments photos but no longer want to just spend a lot of time photographing everything.

But that is what makes life fun, we all enjoy different activities. And sometimes we also personally change regarding what we enjoy.

Interesting timing. I'm just getting a chance to sort through some of the hundreds of digital pics we took a couple weeks ago on this last trip. Right now, I'm cropping the best of what I have from Budapest, with the Chain Bridge completely lit in deep purples for an event, and with the lanterns off. Very cool. I don't think I could fully describe it with words and it was just something we happened upon.

Actually, yeah - sometimes hauling the camera around is something we choose not to do for the night. It's a SLR, so it's not the most convenient thing, but when I feel like shooting, I really enjoy the gizmos. Got some shots I know I'll always go back to, here in front of me, and some that are complete garbage.

Still, the memories from past trips are on the wall here at home and I often pause to look at them. Always glad I had a camera when I wanted one, never remember regretting having it with me.

I'm a little behind, but am on the verge of getting a digital camera. Just back from France and Portugal....took my trusty point and shoot Cannon 105....it is SO forgiving!!! HOWEVER...it "broke", guess I got some lint or dirt on the extension and the lens wouldn't close,...bought an instant throw away camera and pictures are EXCELLENT quality and it was so lightweight. Fit in my pocket and clicked with one hand when things came up. Of course I paid 4 times the price in Lisbon. ANyway,,,my Canon "got better" for one reason or another, and I continued on with that.
Can't tell much difference in quality.
I know someone who forgot to take their camera and just bought postcards...which is a pretty good idea I think....but it won't capture those unusual and beautiful "kodak moments" that one sees on every trip.!!!

mari5, that is interesting that your disposal camera took good photos. I have wondered about that and have heard pro and cons both ways. Thanks for sharing your experience.

I know this is strange, but I like to take pictures of food. I have snapshots of restaurant meals, street vendors selling crepes and sausage sandwiches, street markets with fruits and vegetables, etc. I also like to take pictures of locals going about their daily routines (tram drivers, commuters, kids with their booksacks, the guy behind the hotel reception desk). All of the famous tourist sights, palaces, cathedrals, etc I either buy picture books, postcards or I download professionally-done images from the internet.
But the thing I enjoy the most are my tape and digital recordings of ambient sounds (church bells, clanking trams, street sounds, the little chimes they use when announcing arrivals and departures at the train stations).
If only I could digitize the smells.
Well, one day.

Platzman, it doesn't sound strange to me at all. Actually some of the favorite photos I have taken has been of food!! One of my favorite photos is a a seaside cafe in Sardegna. Ordered shrimp. Head and all was included of course. Dishes, along with grilled peppers etc. put on the table along with a bottle of wine. Seaside and water in the background. Spectacular photo!

What an interesting question! My first reaction was to say that yes, of course we always take our camera, but then I thought about it and realized that it's only the European trips that we bring it for. Other places that we'll be likely to get back to more often, well, sometimes it's a yes, other times not.

Some places also seem to 'require' a camera because they're so scenic or interesting! Charleston SC and Paris come to mind for lots of picture-taking. I can hardly keep the camera in its case. Thank goodness we've switched to digital and I don't have to worry about carrying canisters of film.

Giselle, if you haven't bought a camera in recent years, you should really take a look. They're not the least bit cumbersome anymore. They've gone teeny-weeny! And even the point and shoot varieties have really wonderful clarity. We've tossed most of our old cameras since the new ones are so advanced.

Platzman, food can be really beautiful. I don't you're nuts to take pictures of it! The only time we were without our camera in France was the night we had our best dinner. The food looked gorgeous on the plate! I really wished we had gotten a photo.

dln, yes, I have a small digital camera and enjoy it.

It's not something I'm going to worry about. I just think it's funny that on that most memorable of memorable trips I didn't have a camera; that I didn't miss any subsequent pictures one bit after over 20 years; also that I can remember the trip so clearly.

Now I'm wondering if there are any black and white disposables? :lol

My finest camera is being repaired.
My backup camera goes everywhere I go.
I have an upgrade camera in my sights for Q1, 2005.
Camera-less? No.

My suggestion would be to buy a digital..they are virtually weightless, easy to use, have a large capacity, and fit easily into a shirt pocket.

Platzman: I second the idea of taking pictures of food,street markets etc AND people going about their daily lives. (though sometimes one has to be discreet about it). And the recordings of sounds would be great.
You seem to be a VERY good and interetsing TRAVELER, as opposed to "tourist".

Giselle: In regard to your original question, I guess it's certainly not necessary to ever take a camera if one doesn't want to....It's up to you. We usually look at our pictures once or twice, and just occasionally get them in an album. We show a few to interested friends and family...and that is it. I personally enjoy seeing other people's travel pictures,,,but truly not everyone does.
If you feel comfortable about not taking pictures, then I wouldn't bother. And that is OK!

Giselle, I haven't quite made it but personally do think it is an admirable goal (going camera-less)!

I use disposable cameras & take 1 or 2 for a two/three week trip. I have done this for YEARS and get great results (for those wondering above). I supplement this by buying a few postcards.

Because I am fortunate to spend much time in Europe visiting friends and am adopted into their daily lives, it feels strange to pull out your camera and start snapping away at a nice dinner party or while shopping at the farmers market (for example).

my goal when traveling is to try to blend in and enjoy the culture...the sites are almost secondary for me. for my last trip i bought and digi elph...best purchase. get a canon specific bag and it's unnoticable when put around your belt.

but as for you question, i'd prefer not to take one...and sometimes i haven't. plus i really don't look at the photos myself anyway. i think its for others to look at. like you said i have an image stored in my brain forever...and that's what i look at. there's more to it that a photo can't capture...the feeling, sensation, mood...i can find the photo online taken by a pro anyway.

I might as well walk around nude as to go without a camera. Being an avid photographer, it is too much of the experience for me. Actually, I notice a lot of things even more because of having a camera, and taking the photos is just as much fun as looking at them later. However, I do like to have lots of time when I am not thinking about taking pictures, especially in the evening. A good blend works best for me.

Giselle- good question. There are points in my trip where I just stop clicking, nothing to do with etiquette, as in a cathedral during services, and just try to enjoy taking everything in, and imprinting what I am seeing in my mind. So that this year when I rounded the corner at the Pantheon, I remembered standing at the exact spot a year before, without camera, and what I remembered was the feeling.

I find that memory does need to be prodded. So, I would probably bring a camera. One benefit is that on my return home, just as I am still thinking a little in another language, I also tend to "see photos" all around me, changes my perspective a little for the first few days back.

Also-if there is someone at home, a friend or family member that you would like to share your trip with..

Do you find it makes a difference if you are on your own, or if you are with someone? If I'm traveling by myself, I do find it just a bit of a nuisance to juggle water, guidebook, snack, bag, and camera and get my camera into position. If there are two people traveling together, there's way less juggling involved.

It's been fun to read people's take on travel with cameras.

Scarlett, people at home have either been there or are going or I don't want them to know I'm going! (hee-hee) AND I'll go again. ALso, good remimder that one can always buy a paper camera when there.

If you're a professional, like Dan, or also adore photography this subject is meaningless.

The trip I went without the camera was special. It was a month long trip. I really do remember it without any pictures to jog my memory. I loved just living it, not documenting it. But perhaps that was a special case.

Yes, I have a small digital camera. Recently, what turned me off was when I was in Mexico at a public market and snapped a colorful stall. The proprietor sneered at me. I don't blame him. Like I was saying his business was "cutsey". It made me think even taking pictures at all had a philosophy about it.

I don't think I read anyone who said they hadn't taken a camera with them. Anyone?

Thanks for the cyberspace to discuss this, especially with none getting nasty about a subject near and dear to we traveler's heart's.

Well, since I carry a camera with me at all times, you can guess my response. One never knows when that magic moment or sky or sunset is going to happen. I cannot imagine traveling without one. I take even more now that I have a digital and don't have to worry about the cost of printing until I have the final product to view. I always mean to write a journal but never get to it, so my photos serve that purpose.