Film rebounding

Just found this:

"Printing and processing of black & white film has shot up 45% in a
year, signaling a resurgence of interest in traditional 'silver gelatin'
prints among photographers, according to figures released by Ilford
Photo. "

Source here.

 

This does not suprise me, I'm interested in statistics on Color processing numbers, that is where the real resurgence is going to show itself. Don't get me wrong I understand the value of BW but the common joe shmoe who picks up a film camera from Ebay is most likely shooting color because it's availibility.

 

I've yet to see a digital mono print which comes close to a film print, so no surprises here. H

 

There is bound to a continuning interest in film as a 'traditional' photography medium.
I shoot circa 1700 style flintlock rifles.
Yesterday, I saw a new made motorcycle virtually identical to a WWII model.
Sticking with the old ways is not a bad thing, it helps preserve history and an appreciation for what we now have.

 

Personally, I don't think film is rebounding. I think it simply is refusing to go away. But it's good to see the weekly resurgence thread making the rounds. Good for morale.

 

Film is now an "alternative process."

 

The only problem I see is what factor of the b&w increases, makes up for the continuing decline of color? Are we at a stale mate? Or is total film use as a whole still going down?

I wonder if black and white will outlast color film?

 

Christopher, I have to disagree. I've been reading this same stuff for a while. I use a processor in Denver, and one in Ciinncinatti, then scan them (negs) onto my computer for PP. I've asked about film, and whether it's demise is going to kill film shooting for me, and suprisingly, I was told just the opposite, that business was booming.

So, I don't think it's a weekly resurgence, as a result of wishful thinking.

You also have to consider there are still a "zillion" film camera's out there.
Then there are people like me, who can't afford to replace 4 bodies and seven or eight len's, at today's prices for quality digital equipment.

Maybe some day soon the NY Times may run the headling "Film is Dead", but I still think it's got a few if not several good years left.

J.

 

Well, someone selling film services would say something like that.

Never said it was wishful thinking as I shoot only film and process my own negs and make my own enlarged prints in a cramped downstairs half bath that requires an hour setup and and hour breakdown every session. Now that's dedication. ;p

Hence the reason for APUG.

Wouldn't dream of it myself. Not for the anti-digital that most assuming people would think. But because of the learning curve. D is a completely different creature with its own tricks that are learned over time.

Amen, Brother Ben.

Geez, people. If anyone even has an inkling of what I'm about or has the idea to read the magazine in the signature below, you would know that I am the furthest from gloom and doom of all. But let's not keep rah-rah-ing ourselves about the 'resurrgence' of film. Get off our duffs and get out there and MAKE IT HAPPEN.

Love to da peoples. Hail to the Great Yellow Father.

 

I think the initial appeal of digital for most snap-shooting consumers
was that it appeared to be more convenient (no labs to deal with) and
cheaper (no film or processing) and faster (no photo turnaround time).

But, I think many casual snap-shooters are realizing that these things
aren't necessarily true and that film makes better economic sense for
many consumers who wish to only take snapshots now and then, especially
during financially difficult times.

They can buy a very capable used P&S film camera for a few dollars (if
they don't already have one) plus a roll of film as needed and have it
processed (and scanned if desired) for not much dough and minimal brain
power expenditure.

This versus spending hundreds or more on a digital camera plus a printer
with ink & paper for prints plus requiring a computer, software, internet
connection, etc. for emailing or posting prints. Plus learning how to use
a complex camera with a half-inch thick manual and learning photo editing
software is more trouble than many people want to invest for just some
pictures of the baby or the trip to Yosemite.

And, then there is the planned obsolescense game wherein consumers are
pressured into continually upgrading with the latest digital camera, printer,
software, etc.

Before digital appeared the film point & shoot system had evolved into a
very convenient system for people who just wanted easy snapshots and
didn't want to learn anything technical or invest much money. It was
really easier for such people than digital turned out to be and I think
that at least a portion of the public is beginning to realize this.

 

Ilford sales maybe up because Kodak has stopping making some and decreasing product lines volume and Agfa being out of retail sale altogether.

 

Sales are up because of fears of availability. People are telling me that they are concerned about not being able to get it in the near future.
Overall though, it's still on the decline. We had a slight uptick when Kodak stopped making Kodachrome and this caused a panic. Also, many plants are shutting down. It's just fear IMHO.
I don't anticipate a resurgence. Even our reps feel the same.

Tom

_