much ado about the vintage feel: An Investigation

The initial title I had for this post was supposed to be "a response" but all it would say would be "yeah, I totally agree". So instead of responding to my friend Tata Yap's inspired post about the abuse of vintage photoshop treatments (link after the jump), I'd like to pose a question: why the hell are we all into old looking shit these days? I feel like exploring this topic since after all I'm using vintage cameras to populate the posts on this blog.
http://hellohowareyou.tumblr.com/post/2569422202/much-ado-about-the-vintage-feel

Don't get me wrong, I like the vintage look for pictures, like the ones from the Hipstamatic and Instagram iPhone apps (theres even a video version now, called 8mm http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2010/12/8mm-vintage-camera-is-hipstamatic-for-video/). Tata made a good point though that whats alarming about the trend is that its becoming a faux style. Photography enthusiasts are using it to save their worse photographs,masking (quite literally) flaws in composition or exposure. I find this incredibly ironic because it flies in the face of over a century of  photographic technology innovation. These effects are artificial flaws. Vignettes, overblown highlights, unnatural color, grain -  these were enemies of all photographers and camera manufacturers for decades and now we're adding them in on purpose. Thats what ticks me off about it naman. I know its fake. If its an automatic filter on your phone, fine. Its fun. But if you actually have to sit down and technically fuck up your RAW files from a DSLR camera developed via millions in R&D to make it produce pixel perfect images... c'mon. If you have the patience to do that, then you can wait an hour in the minilab while they save your negatives from a much cheaper old point & shoot or SLR onto a CD. Again, I'm not here to bash people who do this, do what you want. When its done well and the context isnt off, its quite good. I'm just saying though that when you look at the big picture, doing it seems like such a farce. I spoke to my sister about it and she had a good point that I believe answers the above question, at least for her and myself. She said that when we look at vintage-d pictures, we remember our own old pictures, the ones where we're young in. A subtle nostalgia tugs at our hearts, making the contemporary picture more sentimental. Thats why when its friends from a phonecam filter, its a good thing because it enhances the unseen emotional value of the picture. If its serious photography though, where the effect is purely aesthetic, I say dust off your dad's old Nikon, or go shopping in Hidalgo. It'll cost you much less than that telephoto L lens you so desperately need for portraits. Is that the reason I dusted off my lolo's Leica? Did I want a vintage feel to my pictures? Partly, yes but I had other reasons too. I'll talk about them later on. For now though, I want to hear your thoughts on this intriguing trend. Comments!

The photos in this post are from Square America, a project that collects vintage photographs, mostly in the old 6x6 format. This site came out way before this whole vintage trend. Give it a look, as it emphasizes my sister's point. http://www.squareamerica.com/

PS Here's a link to a war photographer's photo set, using the Hipstamatic app on his iPhone in Iraq. Something to chew on. http://lens.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/21/finding-the-right-tool-to-tell-a-war-story/?hp