why won't film just die already?!

[chuasam]

My biggest issue with film is the minuscule profit margins and the amount of support required.

So you avoid grocery stores as well?

I usually shop at Costco

Are you overly concerned about Costco's miniscule margins and support infrastructure as well?

Costco's staff are amply well paid.
I'm speaking about film from an industry perspective. It's currently running as a loss leader to get new customers into the stores.

 

[480sparky]

My biggest issue with film is the minuscule profit margins and the amount of support required.

So you avoid grocery stores as well?

I usually shop at Costco

Are you overly concerned about Costco's miniscule margins and support infrastructure as well?

Costco's staff are amply well paid.
I'm speaking about film from an industry perspective. It's currently running as a loss leader to get new customers into the stores.

And it concerns you.............. why?

 

[davholla]

Darkroom work is MUCH more relaxing (to me) than editing on the computer.

It takes up a lot more space though, which for some of us is a big factor.

 

[480sparky]

You don't need a 'real' darkroom just to develop film.

 

[ac12]

Darkroom work is MUCH more relaxing (to me) than editing on the computer.

It takes up a lot more space though, which for some of us is a big factor.

Ha, more than a big factor, a major factor. Because you also need plumbing for a darkroom. OK you don't NEED plumbing, a bucket and some care will work.
As for space, in my current house, I use a small half bath, about 3ft x 6ft. Tricky but it works.
I have discovered, where there is a will, there is a way. I've make temp darkrooms in all of the apartments, flats and houses that I've lived in. Some more convenient than others.

 

[480sparky]

I converted a spare bedroom to a darkroom. I just use buckets instead of plumbing. Archaic, but it works for making wet prints.

 

[Jeff G]

I worked in a large format darkroom for a long time, I hand developed negatives and prints that varied in sizes from 8"x10" up to 36"x60". Sometimes one end of my print would be developed before the other end would even be in the developer yet, it did have it's own sense of satisfaction being able to pull it off.

I totally get the enjoyment of film, I liked hand developing and the time spent in the dark room, but I can't spend time in the darkroom now, the fixer really irritates my throat. (Maybe too much time spent with chemicals when I was younger) doesn't seem to matter how good the ventilation is. I DRIVE MY WIFE NUTS because household cleaners, perfume, or any chemical odors get me to coughing.

Now days my time is limited so digital works for me, I like being able to see a shot right away to see if I need to re-shoot it. Sure it's made me a little lazy composition wise, but I am trying to pay more attention now that I have joined this forum.

 

[pitchblack]

Why are people still clinging on to film in the age of far better digital technology?

Same reason people drive classic cars.

 

[ftw1952]

I was casually browsing the eBay and noticed that old film cameras are commanding ridiculous prices.
an old Olympus Muji II going for $200, Yashica T4 (zeiss) trading for $400...and the Contax T4 (my old love) going for $1500 to $2000.

Why are people still clinging on to film in the age of far better digital technology?

It will be here for a long long time since the law enforcement agencies need to use film on practically all homicide cases. You can not change or alter film negatives. Older cameras are better built before plastic was invented too. Take the early Leica cameras All machined out from brass and all of mine are very useable today. One is 85 years old now

 

[Grandpa Ron]

I build and shoot muzzle loading long rifles, paddle a wood and canvas canoe, use a bamboo fly rod, and like B&W film. Yes I have modern guns, a light weight Kevlar canoe, a carbon fiber fly rod and a super convenient digital camera.

But, there is a certain grace, charm and delight in well crafted products and techniques of the past. If you do not understand, I probably could not explain it to you anyway. It just is.

 

[Bubba Jones]

Here is an annology from Star Trek: their food comes from replicators not real cooking. That to me is the digital vs film issue. The replicator can make a stunning meal, however a truly cooked meal with real food, smelling the myriad aromas produced, have its pluses. True, the replicator is fast, as is digital, anyone can push a button then immediately see the food, same with digital.

Yes, digital images can be stunning in its clarity, sharpness most often better than film (a sharp image never wins a contest). As Ansel Adams is quoted as saying “There’s nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept”.

Digital shooters have every right to brag about their image quality, speed of turn around and the like. Yet they forget about the gazillion beautiful film images produced the past 150 years. It is as though they cannot come to grips with photography prior to digital. Often I have heard digital shooters say something as “I cannot shoot my images on film...”. Again, over 150 years prior to digital film photographers produced stunning images, from world events, weddings, political, family, commercial work, why today are digital shooters thinking they cannot do the same with film?

A big plus digital shooters comment on is “I can shoot many images then immediately delete the ones I do not like, they do not cost me anything”; that is very true they can delete images as can film shooters discard their images. As for cost, look at the cost of pro digital cameras, in the thousands of dollars. A pro 35mm film camera can be had for $100-$200. To equal the price of the digital camera will take much film and processing. Okay, the digital shooter will say “I can shoot hundreds of images at a time”, to me that means they are shutter actuators. Digital shooters talk about all the post processing software they use; they are more proud of their computer skills than photography skills.

We hear of digitial only wedding photographers bragging they shoot a few thousand images per wedding. My thought, purchase a video camera not a still camera. Back-in-the-day if we shot ten rolls of film at a wedding that would be a lot; that was 120 or 220 film, in many situations 4x5 sheet film as well.

Film photographers are much more selective of their shots than digital shooters. Digital shooter as a group are more spray and pray than film shooters. At events and weddings their cameras sound like machine guns. Can you imagine going through thousands of digital images for presenting to the client and having them also cull through those thousands of images?

Yes, I am strongly in the camp that digital images can be amazing, produces gorgious images, work flow having many pluses over film. For close to ten years I was a digital chest thumper. Now, for the past ten years my photography is 99% film; the other 1% is when I use my iPhone.

Another thought, digital cameras are computers that capture images, they are disposable. When they stop working it is usually the electronics that go bad and if that camera is a few years old it is better to throw it out. Some of the film cameras I use are sixty years plus years old, and can still be CLA’d. Also, something digital shooters do not care to think about is their raw files. Those raw files are not a standard, thus they are different with each manufacture, camera, sometimes even with firmware updates change raw files. Worse, some older raw files are not supported by today’s newer software. How will you open your raw files in five-ten and more years?

With digital we have moved into the digital dark ages. HHD crash, CD/DVD rot, some cloud storage services shutdown, etc, thus folks are losing untold number of important files. Digital shooters become annoyed having to copy files to newer formats and devices. What will digital shooters pass on to their family, most likely devices that newer computers cannot read nor connect to; the digital dark ages.

Shooting film, at the end of the year we print all our keepers. Film is safely stored and everyone knows where they are. As scanners become better we again scan film achieving better images than in the past; our image quality improves with the same negative.

There is much more that can be said, I will leave it to others more eloquent than I am.

 

[denimadept]

If you've never printed an image through an enlarger, then put that exposed paper through the chemical process to finish it, you've got an incredible experience ahead of you. Watching, using a safelight, the image come up in the developer, and smelling that fixer, is wonderful.

 

[Steve Anchell]

Bubba Jones, your response is the most eloquent response to this question I have yet read. You've said it all and said it well. Thank you.

Steve Anchell
Author:
The Darkroom Cookbook
Digital Photo Assignments

 

[Jenny Mehlenbeck]

I SO miss my good old canon AE1. Had a nice collection of lenses too. And without spending hundreds or more on digital, I have yet to find a way to take long time exposures like star trails with anything other than good old slide film.
BUT.... good luck even FINDING film anymore. Let alone finding a place to take it to be developed. It's not like every grocery store has a drop off anymore. Two camera shops within reach and both are almost an hour drive.

I miss it. Digital is fun, instant results, free. But.... just not always the same.

 

[denimadept]

With digital we have moved into the digital dark ages. HHD crash, CD/DVD rot, some cloud storage services shutdown, etc, thus folks are losing untold number of important files. Digital shooters become annoyed having to copy files to newer formats and devices. What will digital shooters pass on to their family, most likely devices that newer computers cannot read nor connect to; the digital dark ages.

Shooting film, at the end of the year we print all our keepers. Film is safely stored and everyone knows where they are. As scanners become better we again scan film achieving better images than in the past; our image quality improves with the same negative.

Backups are critical. Even my film negatives are ultimate backups of their scans. It might be best to keep some things as TIFFs or similar.