<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>R’ AM:</span></b><br>What about an ordinary old-fashioned film camera? Without a flash, there's nothing electrical about it. In fact, when one presses the shutter, nothing at all happens except that some chemical reactions occur in the film. Even after Shabbos, there is no visible change to the film, until after it has undergone some specific chemical treatment. Yet I've never seen a shomer shabbos person use such a camera on Shabbos, nor have I ever hear it suggested that it might only be d'rabanan.<br><span style='color:#1F497D'><SNIP></span><br><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>------------------ <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>That’s a great question, I think, about the film camera. I agree that it makes sense that it should be only a d’rabanan, except for Polaroid. And the d’rabanan may well be that since its entire purpose is to be in service to that Kesivah, it’s a Kli She’melachto L’issur, and therefore muktzah. But if that’s so, then the heteirim of muktzah would therefore apply, like tiltul min hatzad, and shvus d’shvus, l’tzorech gufo, and so on?<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>But then I did some googling, and I found this, which linked back to a source sheet from (I believe listmember) R’ Mordechai Torczyner which discusses photography at length – here’s the first link: <a href="http://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/48439/operating-cameras-on-shabbat">http://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/48439/operating-cameras-on-shabbat</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>And here’s the link to the source sheet: <a href="http://cdn.yutorah.org/_materials/Source_Sheet-510279.pdf">http://cdn.yutorah.org/_materials/Source_Sheet-510279.pdf</a><o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>After reading through it, I still don’t see any reason to prohibit it besides for Muktzah… (FWIW, this ynet article says that it’s an issur d’oraysa of Rosheim: <a href="https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=iw&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ynet.co.il%2Farticles%2F0%2C7340%2CL-4611108%2C00.html&anno=2">https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=iw&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ynet.co.il%2Farticles%2F0%2C7340%2CL-4611108%2C00.html&anno=2</a>)<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Rabbi Bleich at this link (<a href="http://traditionarchive.org/news/originals/Volume%2035/No.%203/Survey%20of%20Recent.pdf">http://traditionarchive.org/news/originals/Volume%2035/No.%203/Survey%20of%20Recent.pdf</a>) quotes R’ SZA that it’s “mistaver” that taking a film photo is assur m’drabanan. Rabbi Bleich himself is not so impressed with that argument. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>KT,<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>MYG</span><span lang=HE dir=RTL style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Arial","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p></o:p></span></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></div></body></html>