A Farewell to Film

[pop]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

- I find arguments about the competing persistence of each media totally irrelevant. Most of what we photograph probably deserves to disappear within a reasonable timespan. Anything that deserves careful preservation will probably be looked after accordingly.

 

There's a bit of a misunderstanding here. Historians value some very ancient photographs which the photographers would not have thought worth preserving for more than a century. Shots of everyday things and scenes are very valuable and sought after.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[AlexM.]

But -- even though I still have film in the freezer, all those film cameras have remained unused.

 

 

I did not read the whole thread so maybe somebody offered you already to take care of your film stock. If not, i would be happy to shoot this stuff and i would take care of your M4 either . Just send it over Vienna :-)

[plasticman]

There's a bit of a misunderstanding here. Historians value some very ancient photographs which the photographers would not have thought worth preserving for more than a century. Shots of everyday things and scenes are very valuable and sought after.

 

No misunderstanding - I'm fully aware of these issues.

My post was not really intended to encompass all of the problems that future historians will have in unentangling the paradox of 21st century society: an unrivalled torrent of information coupled with ephemeral channels of delivery and storage.

 

Still, if future researchers are curious about accurately-focussed dogs' whiskers, then we better hope that the output from this forum's photographers remains preserved for all eternity.

[jaapv]

CAT'S whiskers, Mani. You have that completely wrong! CAT'S whiskers.

[plasticman]

CAT'S whiskers, Mani. You have that completely wrong! CAT'S whiskers.

 

One thing's for sure, future generations are going to be extremely confused by the iconic worship of very, very sharp brick walls.

[giordano]

Nice thing about the M8/M9: They are built out of discrete off-the-shelf electronic parts Nothing (except of course the sensor microlenses) was designed specifically for the camera. Well, maybe we'll need some donor cameras Don't forget, we think these are very complicated and highly sophisticated machines. In 60 years time they will be regarded as simply built primitve relics, any high-school kid could service them.

 

...the same way every high school kid today can service a IIIf or a Commodore 64?

[KM-25]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

No fight picked..:-)

 

The deal with the M9 love was that in the case of those paid jobs, I *had* to shoot digital and still wanted to shoot Leica M so the client happily approved the rental. Once I got to using the M9 in that capacity, it just felt great for all the same reasons many on here love the M9. I still hope to get one next year if I actually get a book publisher and get back some sunk costs.

 

But once those jobs were done, the last of the year, I still had a sigh of relief in going back to all film for my project. In fact, unlike other legs of this journey in which I would at least bring a D700 for that just in case breaking news shot, I left it at home on the leg I am currently on and will for the rest of the year...and it feels pretty darn good.

 

One thing I want to clarify is that I don't think the digital medium is a poor one, quite the opposite, so I am not wishing it to go away. I just don't think many people are done with film yet so I really hope that it too, does not go away. I think there are a lot of young people who want to explore it and do.

 

I am just in such a good place right now with it all, no more internal strife, no more iStock hate, things like that. I have...or...I think I have just enough funds in the bank to carry me through the year for this project and I even have enough film to where when someone I meet is obviously pinning to try a roll of Kodachrome, I simply give them one or two rolls in the spirit of what I am doing.

 

I think that more than most photographers, Leica users are better placed within their own wants and desires in using both mediums for no other reason than they know they still can so why not?

 

It feels great to explore the digital medium like a child in a new toy store, but it also feels great to slip on the same old worn out pair of jeans and walk the walk we know so well.

 

I think the thing that might play a big role in my passion for film is that I was told to go digital too early in my career and I knew deep in my heart I was just not ready to do that yet, especially given how lackluster the results were with the medium in the early 90's.

 

And I do understand Alan G's statement that if the result is the priority then the medium does not matter, but it just does not apply to everyone as you still have very talented photographers who simply want a different journey in life. Both the journey and the destination matter to many and that does not make them less focused on a great image or some kind of luddite, destinations would be sterile places if there were not a journey in attaining it.

 

We are a lucky lot, we get to use both and that can only be a good thing to have those choices.

 

Not wanting to pick a fight here by any means, because I'm usually (as in this case) 100% behind what you say. But I think sometime over the summer I remember seeing a post from you about the M9 where you said something like "I really want one of these!"

 

Is this a change of heart?

 

As I've said elsewhere, I shoot both film and digital (the M8). I really love the images from the M8, but when I view them alongside my film images, they look surprisingly one-dimensional and 'artificial' (for want of a better word). When I tried the M9 I didn't feel any differently about those images (in fact I preferred the color-rendering of the M8, among other things - but that's another story).

 

I'm intrigued therefore by this statement alongside the earlier one (unless I'm mistaken - in which case I naturally apologize).

 

Mani

[stunsworth]

We are a lucky lot, we get to use both and that can only be a good thing to have those choices.

 

Amen to that!

[AlanG]

I really didn't mean to imply that the medium didn't matter. Just that if you take the view of what your end result is going to be, then you can see what process is best for you. Since so many images of mine end up being used on websites, I really can't see shooting on 4x5 or 8x10 for those projects.

 

William Wegman's 20x24 Polaroids are examples of the process helping to support the style. But once they are reduced to book form or a web gallery, only some of the 20x24 Polaroid process comes into play. I haven't followed up to see if he still shoots the same way now that 20x24 Polaroid is no more. But I bet he could get a similar look with digital technology if he tried. Likewise, if your goal is a contrasty Tri-x look and you feel you can get that via digital technology in prints (and also the less demanding web) then so be it.

 

While I don't think Ansel Adam's landscape work would look as good if he used a Leica and Tri-x, I don't think Cartier Bresson's images would be diminished if they were grain free and more detailed.

 

I did b/w printing since 1965, color including Cibachrome, dye transfer and other processes since 1970. I owned a custom printing business for a while so I've made a lot of prints in my time. I feel I now do my best printing with a 12 ink digital printer. I even took some of my best Tri-X on Agfa Brovira prints, scanned the film and made digital prints that were a virtual match.

[rosuna]

Did you know this?

 

The Online Photographer: A Grand 85 Years It Was

 

.

 

Leica ceased production of M7 and MP cameras in 2009

[40mm f/2]

not only that Leica sells only analog leftovers there is also a disappearance of film for more esoteric formats like 5x7 color. Fuji sells their last run.

[lct]

Did you know this?...

Yes see http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=91644

Bit sad if true. Doesn't mean that Leica will stop supporting film Ms of course. Would be just the end of an era.

[rosuna]

Maybe, when the market is cleared, Leica will restart the production, under demand. Who knows. The M9 and M7 share many components (viewfinder and rangefinder).

[stunsworth]

The M9 and M7 share many components (viewfinder and rangefinder).

 

Totally different as far as I can see - though they do take the same correction lenses

[redbaron]

Stopping production does not mean discontinuing it.

[chrism]

Possibly a pathetic excuse for an amateur photographer, I enjoy using film cameras more than I enjoy using digital cameras, and I enjoy developing film way more than I enjoy "ingesting" images into LR. Even if the film was ruined for some stupid reason that was, no doubt, my fault, I still enjoyed the taking and the developing. I have no beef against the M9, and I know that mine reliably produces great pictures within the limits of the operator's abilities. I just happen to enjoy the use of film whether or not there is a worthwhile image at the end of it. I must be very strange, but that's OK: it keeps me out of trouble.

 

Chris

[rosuna]

I was told it is just the same. The only difference is a piece of glass in the M9 aimed at covering a wider space in the body of that camera. It would explain the lower magnification rate of the viewfinder (0,68 versus 0,72).

[colin_d]

Well the debate is starting to wane, but I had another reminiscent thought. Moving to the digital age in photography can be likened to the recorded music scene. For those of us old enough to remember lifting a needle onto our black vinyls this is not a lot different. The technology changed, the market grew and eventually vinyls were left under the house or made their way to garage sales and second hand stores unloved.

 

No doubt film is heading the same way. Funny thing is though, when CD's first arrived, we were told they were virtually indestructable, would not scratch and had a superior output that would last forever. This of course has proven to be just marketers spin. So here is the same argument, some people point out that vinyls in fact are far superior to digital music in many ways, have their own unique aesthetic appeal and are far more engaging.

 

It seems that convenience and accessability is really the big selling point with anything digital, as it does essentially the same thing as old technology with nice little funky features you think you need but find you rarely use. Youth are derided for there reliance on the digital age, but sometimes they aslo crave for a more fulfilling quality to their life, and become very interested in film photography and vinyls and discovering their appeal.

 

Ultimately commercial viability will determine films future.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[adan]

Stopping production does not mean discontinuing it.

 

Ah! - So has Kodak "stopped" Kodachrome production, or "discontinued" it? Apparently there is a difference?

[lct]

...when CD's first arrived, we were told they were virtually indestructable, would not scratch and had a superior output that would last forever. This of course has proven to be just marketers spin...

...when CD's first arrived, we were told that they would not last more than 10 years and that digital recordings would never be on par with analogue ones. This of course has proven to be just conservatives spin...