Will film ever come back?

Alex_B · Apr 28, 2007

blackdoglab said:
They had ben stored in their paper sleeves and then in a box which was filled with junk. They still look great and have scanned well.

I am just sitting in front of two boxes of slide film, both exposed about 10 years ago. both stored under the same conditions over those 10 years. one box looks horrible, even chips of the film emulsion falling off, whereas the oth box contains perfect film with perfect colours.

both AGFA.

A mistery to me ...

New Hampshire · Apr 28, 2007

Alex_B said:
Just for startup freelancers photographers it is unaffordable.

Actually he has been at it for over 15 years. I think he has such a love for film that he refuses to go that way. He really would still be shooting 35mm for all his other stuff (he just uses the MF for scenics) if not for the overwhelming need t go digital.

Brian

cosmonaut · Apr 28, 2007

It's getting a quality scan of the negative that's the problem. The department stores are used to the disposable camera crowd and not the serious landscape photogs. Slide film is awesome but also expensive.
Cosmo

Alex_B · Apr 28, 2007

cosmonaut said:
It's getting a quality scan of the negative that's the problem. The department stores are used to the disposable camera crowd and not the serious landscape photogs. Slide film is awesome but also expensive.
Cosmo

well, the nikon scanners are affordable (cheaper than many digital cameras).

of course you accumulate costs with each slide (personal experience

)

Weaving Wax · Apr 28, 2007

Wow!

Well, I'm not looking to get into photography professionally. So...for me, it doesn't really matter where the market goes, but I'm glad I'm getting all of this insight!

Torus34 · Apr 28, 2007

I've never noticed that film has gone away. I still work with the same b&w films and cameras I've used for years. Have I missed something?

Sw1tchFX · Apr 28, 2007

My film work is exclusively 4x5 in the studio. If it's small format, it's digital.

blackdoglab · Apr 28, 2007

I've simmered down since last posting on this thread and have come to a few conclusions.
1. Film is alive and well, but is headed in a different direction.
2. Digital is here to stay, so let's all hold hands in a circle and sing some old Peter Paul and Mary songs.
3. Don't panic. Digital doesn't make film obsolete and digital is another great tool at our disposal.
4. In the coming years, you will see some films disappear and new ones fill their place.
5. Digital will improve and prices are likely to come down. This just means that you will have more options.
6. As photographers and consumers, we will be the ones to keep things going. If enough people demand it, the producers will respond.
7. Hey, they're just tools. Relax and have fun.

8. Let's have a Nikon vs. Canon vs. Pentax debate. We'll meet at the saloon and have a shootout at high noon.

terri · Apr 28, 2007

:raises hand meekly to state:

I'll never "go digital". It's boring to me. Thank goodness I don't have to rely on getting shots fast for my income.

Film photography has always seemed a happy marriage of art and science. I love it that way. (I appreciate that I can afford to love it that way, because it's not overwhelmingly just about the speed with which to get results back to clients that drives the bus.) :cheer:

nealjpage · Apr 29, 2007

terri said:
:raises hand meekly to state:

I'll never "go digital". It's boring to me. Thank goodness I don't have to rely on getting shots fast for my income.

Film photography has always seemed a happy marriage of art and science. I love it that way. (I appreciate that I can afford to love it that way, because it's not overwhelmingly just about the speed with which to get results back to clients that drives the bus.) :cheer:

I like the cut of your jib, Terri. I was at a concert tonight and watched a photographer shoot hundreds of pictures, looking at each one. Instant gratification is one thing, but he was using his camera the same way a commercial fisherman uses a net to catch fish--eventually something'll come along.

I think that digi is here to stay for the average Joe, just like the Brownie camera introduced photography to the masses. It's cheap, it's easy, and you don't need to work hard to take some decent pictures. However, I wonder if the digi format is going to come to some sort of plateau for professionals and not improve much. That may give people a reason to look back to the old standby, film, and realize that it's worth the time and effort. Or so I hope :heart:

Alex_B · Apr 29, 2007

nealjpage said:
It's cheap, it's easy, and you don't need to work hard to take some decent pictures.

Here I strongly have to disagree .. it is not always cheap, it is not easy (OK, no processing, but a proper digital darkroom is just as much work as a film darkroom, just there are no toxic chemicals around

) .. and it is still hard to take a decent picture (as you easily realise when you browse through the millions of images on flickr and what all those other sites are).

I shoot 35mm slide film and 35mm digital, and I have to say to me it is equally difficult to produce decent images with both! When I first started digital, I was really amazed how similar slide film and sensors are.

Then going to negative film, exposure wise I would even say it is easier than digital, since its dynamic range is often much wider than that of todays sensors!

Oh, and composition is still as hard as it always is :mrgreen:

xfloggingkylex · Apr 29, 2007

I think its pretty silly to say that MF and LF will be around forever if you in fact think that 35mm will die. Just because those formats are moving slower doesn't mean they wont be taken over. I bet when the first digital cameras hit the market that cost and arm and a leg for a 1.3mp camera people didn't start say "well, film is done for" but rather said that film would always win over digital. The fact is that the digital movement is slow into larger formats, but it is still happening none the less.

mysteryscribe · Apr 29, 2007

It is my observation that film will not die completely. Not as long as there is a market. The life or death of all photographic formats has been market driven. The market forces did not include eastern europe and asia when 127 and 110 died. As long as it is profitable to make film or film cameras there will be product available. At what point it is no longer profitable? I don't know. But as long as Lucky in china is making film (it is my understanding they bought a lot kodak equip and technology) there will be film on the market.

Why would photographers want to use film... Well if the day ever comes that there is a higher end market for a stamp on the wedding album, "In the tradition of ansel adams and edward weston.. this album made by a true artist with the real photographic process ie film." You may always see a market for film. If a portrait is made with film and marketed as something special because it isn't from a camera your uncle eddie has,then film may have a premium...

And this may all be wishful thinking. At any rate it is just my opinon and should be taken for nothing but the ramblings of a madman.

blackdoglab · Apr 29, 2007

I think its pretty silly to say that MF and LF will be around forever if you in fact think that 35mm will die. Just because those formats are moving slower doesn't mean they wont be taken over. I bet when the first digital cameras hit the market that cost and arm and a leg for a 1.3mp camera people didn't start say "well, film is done for" but rather said that film would always win over digital. The fact is that the digital movement is slow into larger formats, but it is still happening none the less.
__________________

Hmmmmm...
I think the only major technological change in film was roll film (as opposed to glass plates), and some folks still like to use hand coated glass plates. When a new technology comes in, it doesn't make the previous one invalid. If new technology makes the old invalid, then why do some of us love and use our manual everything equipment? Certainly digital is different from film, but replace it? Why? I prefer the look of black&white film over a jpeg converted. I love the look of slide film and even cross-processed film. There is something very special about being in the darkroom that you don't get with photoshop (even if you turn on a safelight while you work).
Shall we compare hammers and nail guns as a metaphor for this debate? How about nails and screws? They're all tools, right? They all get the job done, but some are better suited for different things and people.

Alpha · Apr 29, 2007

xfloggingkylex said:
I think its pretty silly to say that MF and LF will be around forever if you in fact think that 35mm will die. Just because those formats are moving slower doesn't mean they wont be taken over. I bet when the first digital cameras hit the market that cost and arm and a leg for a 1.3mp camera people didn't start say "well, film is done for" but rather said that film would always win over digital. The fact is that the digital movement is slow into larger formats, but it is still happening none the less.

And I think you could have saved yourself the energy of writing that response had you noticed that I said "may die," not "will die."