Will film ever come back?

terri · Apr 29, 2007

This is slowly descending into a film v. digital debate, which is why I grimaced when I saw the title.

You guys just can't seem to help yourselves.

The question the OP posed is "Will film ever come back?" Ambiguous enough, since it never left the market, and new films continue to come onto the market.

So what is the real point of the question? Will it "come back" in a way where mass-produced cheap film P&S cams reign supreme over mass-produced cheap digital P&S cams? Will film as a medium win back the hearts and minds of the masses? The answer to both questions is unquestionably a resounding "No", particularly the second one. How to lure in the crowd who has grown up on digital and cut their teeth on the idea that photography is only another McGadget (makes a *job* go faster, easier & with a cool new high-tech slant)?

But no one seems to be satisfied with this conclusion; you all want to continue to hammer away the merits of each, the costs of each, or even the environmental soundness of each. Both have pros and cons; each will clearly win over the other in certain categoies, and it's all been argued, ad nauseam - and really, who gives a crap? :razz:

If you want to shoot film, you're going to shoot film. Go for it! If you want to shoot digital, you're going to shoot digital. Go for it! There is no wrong choice, for it is a subjective one based upon your own needs, your wallet, your preferred method of giving your artistic voice an outlet, earning some extra money - or just showing pics of the family vacation or new baby to old Aunt Sally across the country.

And you don't have to defend your choice in a photography forum that supports both.

Now really. Everyone should run out and start using glass plates exclusively again (astonishing, isn't it, that the supplies are still so readily available for so obsolete a process)

so these film v.digi debates can DIE! Forever! :hail:

Alex_B · Apr 29, 2007

come on terri, this is a very civilised conversation

no one is claiming one or the other was "better", it is just about the future perspective, also th fear of some people who use film, if it will always be affordable to buy it.

terri · Apr 29, 2007

Alex_B said:
come on terri, this is a very civilised conversation no one is claiming one or the other was "better", it is just about the future perspective, also th fear of some people who use film, if it will always be affordable to buy it.

Really? That was what the OP had in mind? See, my interpretation was different. And there's the rub.

They all start as civilized conversations. And then the annoyance creeps in when someone or other doesn't budge in their opinion, even after being clearly shown "the facts". There have been so many of these kinds of threads over the years... I promise you, there is a reason we made it part of the forum rules to ban these debates.

Now here is another one that has to be monitored to make sure the swords don't come out. Make me proud, then. G'wan.

fmw · Apr 29, 2007

Film hasn't gone anywhere. It has merely declined in market share. Will it regain market share? No. It will continue to lose market share. Film cameras and film will become increasingly difficult to find. I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to see that. Even venerable old Nikon has stopped making film cameras. I've shot film for 1/2 a century and I still do. But I understand clearly that it is a dying technology and, while it is dying slowly, it will eventually die completely.

I still have a couple of old slide rules from years ago. I still know how to use them. But I can't buy a new one if I want one. Or at least I think I can't. Is K&E still in business? Film will finally go the same way.

nealjpage · Apr 29, 2007

Alex_B said:
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).

Fair. I was meaning for the average user--if given the choice between a P&S digi and a P&S film, most people are going to take the digi. Now, I'm no economist, but I can't help but wonder if the (what market do you call people like my parents, who just take snapshots? every day users??) make up a larger share of the photography market then do avid amatures and professionals that use high-end gear. IF the everyday users drive the market, and I think they do, film (esp 35mm) will start to decline, as recent events have shown. And no, I don't ever see that part of the market resurging.

But I think Max is right--MF and LF will probably always have a niche and probably never dissapear.

ksmattfish · Apr 29, 2007

Weaving Wax said:
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?

I think that there are plenty of people who thought of film photography as too inconvenient, but picked up a digital camera, found themselves hooked on photography, and then became more willing to explore film photography. I am under the impression that BW darkroom materials and supplies sales are up.

Unfortunately the big profits in the film industry have been centered around color film and the uniform, automated processing and printing industry that has dominated the last 50 years of film photography. The big companies will probably get out of film photography, but as long as people want to buy film and the supplies neccessary to process and print it, film will be available. Maybe not at the grocery store, but from art supply stores for sure.

Film photography was/is immensely more popular than colloidian photography ever was, yet you can still go out and get the materials to do colloidian photography (and many even older processes) over 100 years after the introduction of film "killed" it.

blackdoglab · Apr 29, 2007

Film cameras and film will become increasingly difficult to find. I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to see that. Even venerable old Nikon has stopped making film cameras. I've shot film for 1/2 a century and I still do. But I understand clearly that it is a dying technology and, while it is dying slowly, it will eventually die completely

Film will only die if you let it or want it to die. And what about Nikon? Well, too bad for them. This thread has had the feel of "the sky is falling... The sky is falling" since it began.

Alex_B · Apr 29, 2007

blackdoglab said:
Film will only die if you let it or want it to die. And what about Nikon? Well, too bad for them. This thread has had the feel of "the sky is falling... The sky is falling" since it began.

I also think it will not die totally, but the market segment might become very tiny, hence it will be more expensive than today.

blackdoglab · Apr 29, 2007

I also think it will not die totally, but the market segment might become very tiny, hence it will be more expensive than today.

true, very true. I also think companies will become more specialized in what they produce. Likewise companies that have dedicated themselves exclusively to digital will cater more and more to specialized needs. I see film and digital as two very different animals. I only understand the basics of how digital works, but I'm fine with that. Besides, who knows what we'll be shooting with in twenty years from now. Both digital and film may have new competition.

cigrainger · Apr 29, 2007

Pentax makes me happy. My lenses work for both digital and film. No digital can reproduce the effect of natural grain. You simply cannot make a digital image properly look like a silver gelatin print with, say, Ilford Delta 3200 enlarged to 24"x16".

On the other hand, the post processing possibilities with a natively digital raw file are simply impossible with scanned film.

I shoot both.

To answer the initial question -- no, I don't think there will be a renaissance of film, any more than there already is. Among high school and college students, it's cool and trendy to shoot film. Retro and more "organic" things always retain a coolness and earthiness. Among the pros (and advanced amateurs) I know, having a fully metal, mechanical, manual camera as a backup is favorable as well.

I think prices may have bottomed out though.

And no, film won't go the way of the dinosaur. If anything I think nano particle film will take the reigns in the color film world.

If they stop producing Tri-X and the like, they'll have a lot of very angry $5000 Leica owners.

Alpha · Apr 29, 2007

Alex_B said:
I also think it will not die totally, but the market segment might become very tiny, hence it will be more expensive than today.

I think that this is empirically false. I'm not sure what will happen with color reversal film, but Fuji will make slide film forever. Consider that Fuji produces a once-a-year batch of 30,000 rolls of Fortia, which is specifically designed for photographing cherry blossoms (lol). If they were really worried about their broader market share, they wouldn't bother. Furthermore, so long as they can make enough money off the digital revolution, as they do and will continue to do, they'll have the extra cash to fund film production.

On the black and white side of things, Fuji certainly must have anticipated the digital revolution around the time that they were developing Acros. Additionally, there has been an enormous explosion in recent years of black and white film sales outside the three large houses, mainly due to Fotokemika (which produces the films that become rebranded as Efke/Adox/Maco/Rollei). There has also been a surge in sales of the films produced by Bergger and Foma (French and Czeck, respectively IIRC). Fotokemika basically bought the rights to Agfa's emulsions as it was dying, which certainly cut down on some of their R&D costs. Most notably, the costs of the Fotokemika films are generally lower than those produced by the big three. Ilford will have a large impact in the future, as they have insisted that they are in it for the long haul. But financially speaking, even if film production goes down from the big three, that leaves a greater market share to Fotokemika. While this might put them in a position to be able to raise film prices, it doesn't necessarily provide an impetus to do so.

GYFÄP · Apr 29, 2007

I definitely do not hope that Digital will take over completely. Yeah, it's easier and less expensive and you can get your results faster but in my oppinion there's just someting about film...
I think it makes each picture better because you know it's something special when you shoot your pictures.

I think many people just forget about film and all its quality because of the new quicker and easier digital.

That's just my oppinion. I'm kinda new at photography so I'm not that experienced I guess :roll:
Sorry if my English is bad .

jwkwd · May 2, 2007

FMW, I thought the slide rule analogy was funny, now, how many people don't know what a slide rule is? Back to the subject, myself I think that eventually film will die. Just not in my lifetime.