Will film ever come back?

[Weaving Wax]

Film equipment is dirt cheap and a lot of people still do it, plus, new films are coming out. Digital (from my understanding) has been around for maybe the past 10 yrs and is still fairly new. My question is, do you think that once digital has been around a bit longer people might go back to film? Like...not exclusively or that people will stop using digital, but that maybe after a bit that the film market will pick back up? Like maybe you won't see so many people giving away film gear for dirt cheap.

I mean this as a friendly discussion, not a film vs. digital debate...

 

[Sw1tchFX]

No. Digital has too much potential.

 

[Silverpenguin]

Film is too expensive and the results take too long to be seen, I think those two reasons are enough to see that film doesn not make a come back for the average consumer. I only became interested in photography in recent years and only had a film camera for about a year so I unfortunately don't appreciate 'the good old days'.

 

[panocho]

No need to wait a bit longer: some have already done it -and "confessed" here

then "the market" as such (i.e. a majority of people), I would really doubt so. But on the other hand, I definitely wouldn't be surprised seeing film equipment stop the continuous lowering of prices and start recovering a little. It is obvious that now it is the way it is because it's the moment when most of the people is moving to digital.

and finally, yes, nostalgia might easily attack many digital users after a while and make them long after some of their old cameras. not just coming back to film, though.

...and perhaps also the new and futures users, who never knew film, might also be interested in trying that?

 

[Irminsul]

...My question is, do you think that once digital has been around a bit longer people might go back to film? Like...not exclusively or that people will stop using digital, but that maybe after a bit that the film market will pick back up? Like maybe you won't see so many people giving away film gear for dirt cheap...

I agree with the first reply in that digital has too much potential v. film. Pretty soon, no doubt, we will be seeing marketing of more megapixels (16+), more (and cheaper) full frame sensors and such refinements as improved dynamic range in digital photography. But paradoxically, somehow I believe that film itself could, for a time, benefit from the development of digital technology, as the quality of scanned film will also improve. But I don't see a full comeback for film, given the awesome potential of digital. Don't get me wrong. I shoot both a Canon EOS Elan 7ne and a Rebel XTi, and will probably continue to do so for some time. But I believe the future holds much more in store for digital than for film, which still has a lot of sentimental value for me in this long transitional period.

 

[dinodan]

I see a continuing niche for film, but not a widespread renaissance in the future. As previously pointed out, digital is just too darned convenient.

I do wonder if some of these film cameras that can currently be bought for dirt cheap prices might not start appreciating in value among the cognoscenti in a few years.

After all, there are still a few people doing daguerrotypes!

 

[xfloggingkylex]

It's really sad, once pentax releases their 645D for 4 figures (instead of 5 like the hasselblads) we will slowly begin to see digital creeping into all areas. It is already dominating 35mm and medium format is slowly moving digital.

Also, companies are developing chips that utilize better dynamic range (fuji) and have less problems with dust (olympus being the only company at the moment to dented this problem in camera, I know pentax is working on a suction type dust reduction system that will basically be an internal blower bulb to remove dust). with the rise of better dynamic range and the absense of dust, as well as advancements in noise eliminating processors, film will have little to no advantages over digital.

It's still a ways off but thats the way things are moving.

 

[Alpha]

35mm may die a slow and painful death once Kodachrome goes.

MF and LF will be around forever.

 

[Alex_B]

Film equipment is dirt cheap and a lot of people still do it, plus, new films are coming out. Digital (from my understanding) has been around for maybe the past 10 yrs and is still fairly new. My question is, do you think that once digital has been around a bit longer people might go back to film? Like...not exclusively or that people will stop using digital, but that maybe after a bit that the film market will pick back up? Like maybe you won't see so many people giving away film gear for dirt cheap.

I mean this as a friendly discussion, not a film vs. digital debate...

Well, for bread and butter photography such as weddings, events, sports for papers and magazines, fashion, and all that it will be digital only. digital is getting cheaper and cheaper, agencies and magazines demand digital files.

In fine arts, film is not dead, and certainly will not die as it is an independent form of photographic art. people still paint oil on canvas even though there are pens in various colours available

in that way however, film will be used for unique individual pieces of art, of which you do not produce too many per year and which might sell at high prices (if you are good). hence good film will be more expensive as it will become a specialists product. mass production will be purely digital.

This is about my view of the future, might be wrong though

i still have film cameras and will not sell them but I only use them for special things, not for "shootings" where hundreds of images are produced. So for me personally it has started already ...

 

[blackdoglab]

35mm may die a slow and painful death once Kodachrome goes.

I doubt that 35mm will die. On the contrary, I think digital equipment will advance so quickly and so often to the point where the "latest" cameras will become redundant in six months. That's where computers have gone. And what assurance do we have that operating systems will not change completely in the near future. Your current digital files would become useless. Negatives (especiall b&w) don't crash. (granted some of your color will fade) I think film will keep going because, well, it works. As for costs, how much do you spend on ink and paper? What about your printer and computer? Lest we forget the planned obsolesence of many technologies we thought to be revolutionary, film will continue. I want to make it clear, though, that I'm not against digital. After all, I'm typing on a computer, and I do scan my negatives and create inkjet prints from them. I will fight tooth and nail to keep film alive and kicking as I'm sure many other folks will. Now is a great time to be a photographer. We have the option of film, digital, and a combination thereof (i'm talking about scanning here). Personally, I'm waiting for a camera with interchangable film and digital backs. Until then, I'll stick with my setup because it works and works well.

 

[Tangerini]

I find this an interesting discussion, I don't have anything of note to add, but it sounds like it might be a good time for me to start building my darkroom

 

[Alex_B]

On the contrary, I think digital equipment will advance so quickly and so often to the point where the "latest" cameras will become redundant in six months. That's where computers have gone.

My computers usually last 4 to 5 years. still today ...

And what assurance do we have that operating systems will not change completely in the near future. Your current digital files would become useless.

They will change, and they always have. but with every change you have the chance to transfer your data into the new formats if necessary.

you are only in trouble if you try to do that 20 years after the changes ... then it might be hard to transfer / find a converter.

but if youu keep your archives alive, backup often, then you are on the safe side. an archive requires some effort to maintain.

Negatives (especiall b&w) don't crash. (granted some of your color will fade) I think film will keep going because, well, it works.

Well, also keeping a film archive alive is not trivial and requires some effort. (temperature, humidity, ...) I already lost some of my film work which just hast degraded too much.

As for costs, how much do you spend on ink and paper?

almost nothing, I only print what I want to see on my wall in large scale.

What about your printer and computer?

much less than for my lenses ...

Personally, I'm waiting for a camera with interchangable film and digital backs.

That is very common for medium format

just had to comment

btw, I like film

 

[New Hampshire]

MF and LF will be around forever.

If my friend has anything to say about it, this statement holds true. My friend is a freelance Landscape photographer. His "bread and butter" shots come from a Pentax 645. We got to talking about digital backs and I asked if he would ever use one a) if he could afford one ($12000 is a bit much for almost ANYONE ) or b) they got cheap enough you COULD afford one. He gave me this look and replied "Noooo way will I ever shoot digital with my 645......that is staying film FOREVER." As it is, he switched to a digital camera over his 35mm only because he had very little choice. His workload pretty much dictated he needed near instant access to his work, thus the switch.

Brian

 

[blackdoglab]

O.K, those are some good points. We don't know what the future will hold for photography. Before I go, I just want to point out something. I just acquired a load of negatives my grandma took about fifty years ago. 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. We also found a dozen slides an aunt shot on anscochrome. These babies are only thirty years old but show no signs of fading.

Just like Mark Twain, the reports of the death of film have beenb greatly exaggerated.

 

[Alex_B]

($12000 is a bit much for almost ANYONE )

i disagree, for many people running non-photography businesses, $12000 for one of the central pieces of equipment is pretty cheap. Often machinery needed for your business exceeds 100 000 USDs.

Many people need one or two cars for their business, that is well beyond $12000 per car ...!

Just for startup freelancers photographers it is unaffordable.