2.01.2021

The "Widow's Cart."


I heard an expression last week that I'd never heard before. My salesperson at Precision Camera was chatting with me about the differences in the way people buy photo gear; especially cameras and lenses. I'm so self-focused when it comes to buying stuff I never thought there was much of a difference between camera buyers. I presumed that we all worked the same way; we saw a new shiny object, decided it was "better" than the one currently in our hands and immediately traded in the old one, along with some cash, for the new one. Done. Case closed.

When I decide to move on to a new camera system I look at the system I already own and try to figure out its approximate trade-in value. I text the trade-in manager at the camera store and send him a list. He usually sends me an estimate for the value of the used stuff. I bring it all in, he checks to make sure it's in the condition we described, and that it works, and then issues a credit which I use as partial payment for the new system. Easy as pie. No chance of being totally screwed by some nefarious person on Ebay. Even less chance of being ripped off by a stranger responding to an ad on a forum. It's a clean, straightforward transaction that can happen in the space of minutes. 

I walk out of the store with my new, shiny camera system and the store gets near mint gear to sell in their used equipment department from a trusted "vendor." We've been doing the business this way since the beginning of time. Well, at least since the opening of the store many years ago. I know I'm leaving money on the table with each transaction but I also know that I don't have a retail mindset and would hate having to deal online with strangers, and then have to pack and box up items and send them all over the place. My biggest fear (beyond never being paid) would be to have the gear be damaged in transit and arrive to the seller in a state of non-functionality and then having to deal with returns, refunds and hard feelings; usually in both directions. 

So, when my salesperson talked about how sad it was to see, almost weekly, the "Widow's Carts" I had to ask him to explain. 

Well, apparently there are some folks in the Photography trades or the Hobby that just can't, or won't, let go of gear once they've bought it. Could be a collection of half-functioning film cameras from the 70s,80, and 90s or a melange of budget priced digital cameras from the last few decades. There might be boxes and boxes of lenses that were made for cameras with obscure mounts, as well as lenses that were once really good but which have been stored in hot attics, unprotected from humidity, and now covered with haze. Camera bodies that work only at certain shutter speeds. Cameras that must have batteries long since outlawed by the EU and the EPA. Tripods on which only two legs are functional. And filters. Pounds and pounds of filters. So many filters.

Flashes that only work with an old variant of long since discontinued Minolta cameras. Light stands that were too small and rickety to begin with that have only become worse and worse. And then, enough camera bags and cases to roof a house with. Along with the "prehistoric" gear is a smattering of modern gear, like recent Canons and Nikons or Sonys. And, in every collection of anyone past, say 60, is at least one ancient and unusable Leica, or Leica-variant, screw mount camera along with one or two battered and milky-glassed lenses. 

Like plaque on teeth, all this stuff builds up in the closets of the photo-faithful until one day the owner of the far flung and mostly random collection....expires. 

Likely, the surviving spouse (statistically, in most cases, a wife) has been told countless times by the now gone partner how wonderful and valuable (to him) each piece of gear is and, after a time of grief and then a longer time of sorting and inventorying, she is ready to divest her inheritance of a giant collection of photographic "mixed grill." The spouse remembers a camera store that her loved one frequented and brings the whole trove down to them hoping they'll figure out the value of the gear and cherish it as much as her spouse once did. 

And so, my store clerk explained to me, they walk through the store with the gear piled high on a cart, provided by the used department of the store, to meet with the "expert" who must value the gear, decide what can even be resold, and then deal with the expectations of the still grieving spouse (or designated family member). It's a tough time for the trade-in clerk as he'll usually have to inform the spouse that such and such gear is broken and can't be traded in, or it is of such low value that they can't accept it. They'll gently steer the person to Goodwill Industries with the suggestion that most of it be donated. The let down is palpable. 

I've witnessed some version of this chain of evens over the years when I played the part (convincingly) of the innocent bystander who dropped by to shop for a new fill in the blank or something else. I've seen the fitted leather cases, seen them opened to reveal an ancient Hasselblad and battered lenses. Parts covered with the mildew of neglect. Shutters frozen. Lenses iced over with fungus. And it's rarely a pretty sight. 

Over the years, at least since the end of the film age, I've wanted to clear out old gear when I bring in new gear. With the exception of an old Nikon F or a Leica M3 there is nothing in the studio, camera-wise, that's over three years old. All my stuff right now are current models. Current product. No Sears slide projectors. No Walmart film scanners. Just current cameras. 

I would hate to think of Belinda encumbered by the detritus of a photographic addiction. We've spoken about this. We've agreed that the week after I drop over dead she'll have that stuff off to the tender mercies of which ever close photographic friend has outlived me and task him or her with the disposal of the gear. 
Her practiced mantra to the person tasked: Keep whatever you want and get rid of the rest. 

The sad truth is that the older the gear (unless, of course, you've been buying rare editions of Leica M film cameras in lizard skin and platinum) the less value it has. To just about anyone. 

There is a certain emotional logic in my approach to gear acquisition and disposal. I get to play with the latest, most fun stuff while minimizing the emotional impact its disposition will cause, after I'm gone.

I guess there is a current of emotion among some photographers that their sons or daughters might cherish having one of their parent's favorite cameras and lenses. Some families are like that. In my own family my older brother is always nostalgic and prone to sentiment when it comes to the physical artifacts of my parent's lives. He'll hold onto old letters, battered books, unused ash trays and refrigerator magnets. Clearing out my parent's last large and rambling house in concert will my brother was painful. The quote I remember best from him was: "You just have a different sense of urgency than I do..." We were working to clear out the house pursuant to putting it on the market = that was my task. He was likely to stop, grab a convenient chair and spend a few hours reading through an old magazine he'd found, or a letter from someone to one of my parents.

My little nuclear family is different. We have little attachment to objects and memorabilia. I am married to one of the most Zen-like people I can imagine. She hoards nothing, collects very little and can fit her memorabilia into a small shoebox. I have a son who, as long as he's been alive, has never wanted to buy or own anything more than a small assortment of clothes and shoes and his laptop. I offered to buy him a car once and he told me cars were a waste of money and that I should not buy him a new car because he would just sell it and invest the proceeds into an index fund. That's the mindset. 

To burden them with the disposal of an accrued lifetime of battered photographic gear seems like punishment for undone crimes. My method at least spares them the pain of trying to decide what to dispose of and what to keep. Even today's collection of gear represents very small monetary value, when taken in context. It wouldn't make a difference in the lives of my loved ones. Not in the least. 

Better for me to use stuff and move on than to become a museum curator to the bad purchasing decisions I've made in my hobby and career. 

Staying true to my message I better figure out what to do (now!) with those two Leica slide projectors I have in the closet. It's been 22 year since I projected any slides. Don't want to think about those stacked on the "Widow's Cart" rolling through Precision Camera along with my old filters...



 

12 comments:

Robert Roaldi said...

Repair places used to take those items for the parts but I guess that avenue is more or less gone now. There are places that store old stuff for use by the movie industry when they need period props but they probably find what they need in the trash. Stuff usually only means something to the person who bought it and not always then either.

Anonymous said...

Hmm - good reminder to get rid of a couple of old film cameras I still have sitting around but haven't touched in years and probably never will. I envy your family's ability to avoid getting bogged down in keeping material things, but how does your son get around Austin without a car? I spent most of my teens and 20s in Texas and there was never any reliable public transportation (nor safe bike lanes, etc.) in any of the cities I lived in.
Ken

Kirk, Photographer/Writer said...

Hi Ken. The kid is able to use our 17 year old Toyota Corolla but for the most part he is working from home and gets around the parts of Austin he needs to on hike bicycle.

I don't think he's been in a car in a month. He works remotely and leaves the house to bike or run. That's about it.

I lived in Austin from 1974-1978 without a car or any motorized vehicle. I biked to work and biked to entertainment venues without issue. It was a much smaller and friendlier town back then. Easy to get around and not nearly so spread out.

The people who live next door own one car and two battery assisted bicycles. The work for Google so they can tele-commute but when they go shopping, etc. They grab the bikes and go. I've seen them use their car about three times since they moved in nearly six months ago.... It's possible. I like driving. It beats the hell out of sweating you butt off in the Summer. Also, the trip to Precision Camera via bike would be hours and hours in each direction. I guess I could have them deliver but what's the fun in that?

Kirk, Photographer/Writer said...

Should read, "His bicycle" Not "Hike" bicycle. Sorry.

David said...

The sad thing is few really know what something is worth.what are people's guesses for an Old 35mm F3.5 lens in M42 mount?

If its a Petri, or Kuribayashi, would you believe its up to $500.
Similarly odd crappy Olympus OM lenses have driven up into the thousands.

Not all know of the strange various photographic fields. That Kuribayashi is worthless to most except a UV photographer.

RayC said...

Well clearly I'm a hoarder. Sitting on our fireplace mantel is a collection of 12 camera's (and 12 cat figurines). The cameras have all been used by me or members of my family going back to the early 1900's. Worth much on a Widow's cart, obviously not, but the memories and conversations they have started is worth the dusting.

Now the two Ektagraphic projectors moldering away in the basement, that is just inertia!

seany said...

Kirk I've got to hand it to you when it comes to rationalising the acquisition of new camera gear you are in a league of your own, this latest excuse surpasses anything I've ever heard in all my years and I'm no slouch when it comes to dreaming up reasons to change equipment.

I've just got to pluck up the courage to explain to my better half that I'm actually doing her a favour by ensuring my camera gear is all up to date when I kick the bucket!!

Kirk, Photographer/Writer said...

😇

Kirk Decker said...

There was a sad version of this that happened over and over again in the 80's and 90's with small town mom and pop portrait studios. Pop was the photographer and film processor. Mom was the retoucher, office manager, and sales person. Pop would die from some horrible lung ailment brought on by spray lacquer or color chemistry. Mom would hold unto the business, scrapping by on reorders until the client base dispersed and all that was left of the business was a beat up RB67 and some Photogenic Studio Masters. I was a young photographer and could have owned any number of small town studios except that no bank would finance the purchase.

Anonymous said...

If I'm pretty restrained when it comes to new equipment acquisitions, the same cannot always be said about film cameras: I'll bet you never thought to justify equipment purchases based on the carbon footprint being decades in the past!

Jeff in Colorado

Eric Rose said...

I posted a "portrait in the mirror" on IG just for you Kirk!

JC said...

I once had a house on a hill above the Rose Bowl, in Pasadena, Ca., and once a month there'd be an enormous flea market in the parking lot. I never saw much in the way of cameras, except those hanging around photographers' necks. It was a good place to photograph (despite some paranoid sellers who had 'No Photography" signs on their tables.) There were usually a dozen or so young, attractive female art school students wandering around with Yashica twin-lens reflexes hung over their cashmere sweaters...Well, as I was saying, it's not only cameras that make up widow's carts. I was always attracted to tables and tables of actual B&Ws, quite often of WWII, pictures of unknown sailors and soldiers and occasionally a pilot, all smiling, waving good-bye, and for some of them, the good-bye was undoubtedly permanent. Some were shot overseas, usually in Europe, marching soldiers with wrecked buildings in the background. Others looked like portraits of grandparents and great-grandparents, some of them looking like new immigrants in tweed coats and slicked-back hair. This was the detritus of lives from the first half of the twentieth century. I must have thumbed through thousands of these things, and some of them were really excellent in terms of competition and exposure, but they apparently meant little or nothing to the heirs who were cleaning out inherited houses. They obviously had been dumped, and now were being sold for a nickel or a dime. I have to say that there were usually a few of the attractive art-school students thumbing through them as well, fascinated, and I suspect they were learning valuable things, if not about photography, then about the transitory quality of the life they were embarking on.