Film IS DEAD and Filmophobia

[PaulBennett]

Boy that got your attention.

Technically, film is far from dead and will not die as long as photo-processing labs are abundant. Which is the case. Now then, if batteries suddenly became unavailable*, whose technique is dead then? Many amongst my thousands of Nikon F shots sell fine without a computer and my slides never suffered nor fear a hard drive crash.

OK B&W is virtually dead commercially and color could follow in a century or two. (I could be wrong but can't find b&w film or processing around here). BUT

Who cares. Digital people seem to be threatened by us who still use film. Why they are threatened is uncertain...I'm not a psychologist but the inability to accept what someone else does sure smacks of insecurity.

I feel impelled to touch on being called a 'hybrid'. Defining the use of digital in any step of the process make a person 'digital' is almost as infantile. Who cares. Does it make you a better person to use an enlarger rather than a printer? (maybe so) and (maybe not) -- repeat after me -- WHO CARES

*Some fear the upcoming magnetic pole swap and what it will do to wipe out all electronics. And some fear the 'Greenies' and there ability to kill technologies in the name of environmentalism...batteries ARE on their list.

Bottom line. I say - "Who cares". If you get agitated because someone refuses to 'go digital', I feel for you, bro.

 

[JamesD]

Tread very, very carefully. Any threads which include classification into Film and Digital, and then comparison of classes, are VERY highly frowned upon by the moderators. And they make Terri grumpy when they show up in the Alt Forum.

A grumpy Terri is a bad thing. She's ever so much more fun when she's happy. :mrgreen:

 

[Don Simon]

*Some fear the upcoming magnetic pole swap and what it will do to wipe out all electronics. And some fear the 'Greenies' and there ability to kill technologies in the name of environmentalism...

Wow, I never realised there were so many more things to be terrified of... I think I'll just hide under my bed for a few years

 

[JamesD]

Oh yeah. There's TONS of them. (Like a grumpy Terri... and I have a feeling she's gonna start a wee bit grumpy today... I know I would... but anyway).

This says nothing of sudden nucleonic bonding, turning nitrogen into granite, causing the atmosphere to suddenly drop to the surface of the earth. There are theories which explain exactly how this could happen. I believe the theory was first propagated by the infamous Mr. Little.

Don't forget Battlefield Earth and Waterworld. 'Nuff said, I think.

And then, there's always the... thing that's been lurking in the back of the fridge since October of '98....

Talk about scary... Or are these just my phobias?

 

[Stillwater]

Oh man Battlefield Earth.

I always fear the things in the back of my fridge.

 

[terri]

Don't forget Battlefield Earth and Waterworld. 'Nuff said, I think.

And then, there's always the... thing that's been lurking in the back of the fridge since October of '98....

That was good.

It's the back of my closet for me.

Paul, I appreciate what I presume is the intent behind this thread. I don't want it to turn into another battleground, though. I agree there sometimes seems to be more odd hostility directed at analog photographers from digital users than vice-versa. The debates are pointless and do nothing to promote our supposed mutual enjoyment of photography. I don't think I'll ever get it - nor will I care, as long as I'm being left alone in my stinky little darkroom. Why we can't just enjoy the craft amongst ourselves without these occasional defensive posts is beyond me.

Feeling threatened? Go spend some time on APUG - an even larger membership than TPF and strictly analog - you get reminded quickly you are far from alone in your passion!

I shoot film because I want to.

I shoot film because I need transparencies for certain alternative processes.

I shoot film because these older cameras (particularly MF) are incredibly well-made, beautiful, durable, and just a joy to hold and use.

I shoot film because I love working in the darkroom.

That's MY choice. I don't have to justify it to anyone. Everyone else has the privilege to make their own.

a grumpy Terri... and I have a feeling she's gonna start a wee bit grumpy today... I know I would... but anyway

No worries, babe, I feel fine.

 

[sabbath999]

Film is neither dead nor alive... it isn't animal, vegetable or whatever that weird stuff virus strains are made out of...

 

[Paul Ron]

Film will always be a choice in a digital world where electronics tend to change faster than my underwear. you'll chase the digital dragon and I'll cruise in my convertable as long as gas is still available.

Right now I'm enjoying the low prices of professional dumpers getting rid of very expensive equipment at rock bottom prices. It doesn't get any better when shooting a $6000 camera I picked up for $400 with extra lenses n backs. So cheap I buy em broken for even less and fix em. So I have a complete inventory of a camera system I picked up for $100 that created a new hobby for me... camera repairs... and that actually makes me extra cash to buy more. I've become so good, and so busy, I colect n fix collector cameras and old classics.

Now I shoot 75-40 year old cameras that are so much fun to use and get so much more experiance with darkroom techniques... I'm having a blast with it. I could never afford any of this stuff before digital came along.

So thank you digiheads for making the film market so cheap anyone on a fixed income can afford it.

Oh did I mention now that "film is dead"... my silver gelatin photos are selling for $500/ea instead of what I use to get, a meer $25/ea. It seems more in demad now as "collectable art." Try selling a compter printout for that much.

How much is that digital SLR selling for nowadayz?

 

[jwkwd]

But, one thing that I have seen with a lot of newer people entering photography, They get the camera bug with digital, then want to see how it was done in the old days and try film. In a out of the box kind of way, it self sustains.

 

[EllaBites]

But, one thing that I have seen with a lot of newer people entering photography, They get the camera bug with digital, then want to see how it was done in the old days and try film. In a out of the box kind of way, it self sustains.

This is me all the way. Except, I was less curious about how it was done "in the olden days" and more curious about how it it is done period. We have had a very nice film camera for quite some time but I still continued to shoot on my less than ideal digital until about a week ago. Now I can't quite remember why I like digital in the first place, except for the convenience.

 

[PaulBennett]

Interesting ...
...digital photography proves to be the entry level to film photography for many.

Life is great...and filled with choices.

 

[Keith Gebhardt]

I personally think.. a true photographer must master the elements of film photography way before he/she advances into digital for film being a whole diffrent concept and more complicated art.

Same as medium format, large format, and pinhole photography. Master these skills, and your a true professional. Shooting digital is all nice and dandy.. but to a limit. How good is your work truely? without the camera or computer editing it while being transfered? or you personally editing it yourself.

Ive shot film for 4 years before i ever considered buying a digital camera. and to this day i will still shoot my canon eos rebel and nikon f100 for any landscape or portrait shot i take.. as far as doing weddings, sports etc.. digital is definately quicker and the results 9/10 times please the customer.

There will always be arguments leading to whether or not film or digital is better. But if anyone goes to school for PHOTOGRAPHY.. youll be started off with a plain and simple 35mm slr camera and then move up to digital. Unless your school is for DIGITAL PHOTOGRAPHY, youll obviously touch nothing but digital

 

[Mike Jordan]

I thought the olden days was shooting with only 1.5 megapixles?







Mike

 

[RacePhoto]

I thought the olden days was shooting with only 1.5 megapixles?



Mike

I don't think my Mavica 7 is even 1.5, more like .9 megapixles 640 x 480. Now that's the old days! I printed one of those photos, once. Almost good enough for a fuzzy bookmark. But wonderful for websites and eBay. $700 toy camera.

Digital people seem to be threatened by us who still use film. Why they are threatened is uncertain...I'm not a psychologist but the inability to accept what someone else does sure smacks of insecurity.

I find this the funniest part of the entire original message. It's just the opposite! In fact why is PaulBennett being so defensive and protective of his film interests? :meh: What is there to say about people who have the inability to change?

My take. Shoot film if you like it. I think the prices on used equipment are just fantastic, and low. Shoot digital if you want to sell your product in the modern world. Warning... any grain kills sales most of the time. Scans to digital, from film, just don't cut it, unless you use very expensive equipment.

Neither one is any less photography, than the other. They are just different mediums and methods.

Stop telling me that if I shoot film on Monday and digital on Tuesday, I'm not still taking photographs. Because I still shoot both!

As for B&W processing being dead. Really? I still have a changing bag and some tanks. (a dark closet will do just fine) Haven't taken a roll to the lab in 40 years. It's inexpensive and hands on fun. Nothing better than the satisfaction of taking, developing, and printing your own B&W photos.

I know that my Beta machines are much better than VHS, but I don't use them anymore. I don't sit around and whine over and over, about how VHS is crap and Beta is better.

Attention film shooters who have a persecution complex. Get over it! :mrgreen: Have fun, shoot your film, enjoy all that top grade equipment for bargain prices. But you might as well admit that things have changed and photography has changed. Digital is every bit as good and in most cases better than film!

There are some things that film does better and that digital may not do for another 20 years, except if someone has thousands or millions of dollars for state of the art digital equipment.

Each has it's place, benefits, features and special value.

 

[Antithesis]

I'm new to the photography thing and I'm headed into the dark room for the first time next week. I'm actually far more excited than the first time I uploaded a photo from my digital. I think both processes are fun for different reasons. I don't think film has nearly the advantages for someone just starting out like me, but learning the process and understanding exposure on that next level might actually make me a better photographer.

I like digital because I can take a picture and see instantly what it looks like and what I might need to change. Film never did it for me when I was younger shooting around with my dad's old nikon because it took a long time to find out what I was doing or doing wrong.

Regardless, to each his own.