Future of Film

[AlanG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

What does "I enjoy using film" have to do with its future? What does "Film is better than digital" - open to debate, but let's assume it's true - have to do with its future?

 

 

I think it will come down to how much better will digital sensors and cameras need to get before this happens. At which point the last holdouts will be shooting large format film and Leicas with Tri-X (or some third world version of it) for a particular look or just because they like the process. (Some people like the look from old lenses too.) This could be 10 years or several decades from now. I can't predict. Back in 2000, few would have predicted how quickly digital cameras would have taken over in many fields. By 2007, Kodak was exploring selling its film business.

 

No matter what, you can always make your own large format glass plates and mix your own chemicals. It will eventually become a process that is only used by artists and enthusiasts.

 

Some people will also always be doing daguerreotypes. Here's how:

 

Making of Daguerreotype by Takashi Arai on Vimeo

 

If you look at the history of photography, it has several stages where materials and processes were replaced by newer ones. 120, sheet, and 35mm film - b/w, Kodachrome, E6, and C41 had long runs. Looking way ahead I ask, "What is the future of digital photography?" Is there some other technology that will replace it?

[Advertisement]

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

[redbaron]

iPhones.

[bill]

Gesundheit.

[AlanG]

Alan feels film is limiting - for his shooting - and rightly so. Mani feels film is liberating - for his shooting - and rightly so. Guys, you can keep up this discussion for the next decade without one convincing the other....

 

I don't think it is a question of convincing anyone. It is an explanation on my part of why digital has become so popular among pros, and perhaps it is an explanation from film users of why film still has legs.

 

We can't draw from this if some kind of 35mm commercially available film will be around for 10, 20, 50, or 100 years. Sales will determine what is left and for how long. On that front, the trend is not too good.

 

I was at the ballpark with a friend of mine today. He is a pretty major shooter and does most of his work digitally. He tried 3 M8s, gave them up and stuck with his Leica film cameras for some projects that he feels require the Leica and Tri-X look. He shot a project using around 20 rolls a few months ago and had it processed and scanned. That sounds good but this pro's annual film use doesn't even come close to the number of rolls of Tri-X I shot as a lowly high school newspaper photographer per year back in the 60s.

[pico]

What does "I enjoy using film" have to do with its future? [...]

 

"I like using film" is a good argument for using film. It is not a good argument for the long-term survival prospects of film, one way or the other.

 

What does "I Like Life Magazine" have to do with anything, except perhaps the volumes of publications it has left, for free, for the rest of us?

 

"I Like" refers to the moment, and is not a predictor.

[plasticman]

What does "I enjoy using film" have to do with its future? What does "Film is better than digital" - open to debate, but let's assume it's true - have to do with its future?

 

I continue to take part in these discussions because last year, when I decided to give up my (then) short-lived experiment with film on the grounds that it was:

 

- too expensive

- too difficult to scan

- too difficult to develop or have developed for me by a competent lab

- digital image quality was more than a match for film

 

there was no-one on the net (that I saw) who told me that all the above were untrue.

[StS]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Well, I guess this comes with the nature of the medium. The majority of the net-people simply tend to repeat, what they heard somewhere else. Why bother to make one's own experiences.

 

Stefan

[Nikkor AIS]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tri-X pan .

 

 

Film is not for everyone. I respect the fact that you actually tried it. At least you gave it a shot and found it was not for you. However, I really think that the wet process in making prints. especially BIG prints is when you see the value of film. Lets face it you can use iphone to make decent image on a computer screen . But when made up to 6X4 foot prints from 35 mm it's hard to be impressed with the current offerings of the digtial realm. When you see the near infinite amount of grains in large photographic prints you may be inspired to try film again. If your looking at you pictures on the "liitle screen as the end goal i can see why you would think that film isnt worth the bother.

 

As for me , there is no doubt a nostagial in maintaining a connection with with my photograophic roots is one of the reasons Im still shooting film. I ran into a pal the other day. Who was not surprised I was still shooting film. He said Oh your the one:)

It's hard to explain my first photgraphic experience in the darkroom loading film with the cute bruntte I had a crush on in juinor high. I can still remember us there standing in the dark, are arms just touching. I could hear my heart pound through my chest. My palms where sweating so bad I could barley load the film. Lets just say my first taste of film was wonderfull first experince.

 

Or the first time I saw the blacks of that girls eyes from the photo's we took early that day come up in the red glow of the darkroom. I though it was magic.... And I still do.

 

Now compare that with downloading images from your latest digital camera. It's just not the same. At least not for me.

 

 

And not saying it's better. I will say I was hooked from the first moment I saw the magic of B+W. And Iv been hooked ever since. I went kicking and screaming into the digtial realm. And I consider myself extremly lucky to find my self in a position to still shoot film after more than 20 years behind a camera.

 

"Film is cheap"

 

'There are no pictures when your loading film"

 

'when you run out of film shoot your last roll again"

 

Gregory

[bill]

Gregory, we know you love to show photos completely at random to eat up everyone's cash, but is the irony of rooting for film then "showing" your results on-screen totally lost on you?

[Nikkor AIS]

Ah Bill, my Leica forum Stalker. Your kind of creepy the way you follow me on this forum. Have you got some kind of notification that wakes you up when I make a post with photo's?

Im not even going to respond to you. I just hope you go away. Feel free to ignore me, I will make it a point, to do the same to you.

 

Gregory

[giordano]

Now in saying that there has never been a better time to shoot film.Especailly for Leica M. The used camera's prices are ripe for the picking and while there not exactly giving them away. Compared to what they want for a M9, film M camera's like a minty used Lecia MP are a great value. If you live in a large urban center it's still possible to buy film and shoot it off, dropping it off and getting a Cd made. Mean while you can be taking more pictures.And even if you lose the Cd you alway got the negatives.

 

"Never been a better time to shoot film" ... when the range of emulsions and sizes is far smaller than it used to be; chemicals are becoming harder to obtain (partly for H&S and environmental reasons); only big cities now E6 labs, let alone have places that are set up to do conventional B&W D&P at low prices; it's getting harder and harder to obtain Wratten filters for colour correction; and almost all professional markets demand digital files?

 

So the answer I guess is yes, in a restricted hobbyist and fine-art way - but for almost everyone else, no, there hasn't been a worse time to shoot film since the 1940s. Which is a shame.

[Guido]

What does "I enjoy using film" have to do with its future? What does "Film is better than digital" - open to debate, but let's assume it's true - have to do with its future?

I fully agree. And while we're at it: why does every "I enjoy using film" argument have to be supported with some personal photo of a child, pet, or landscape?

[pop]

And while we're at it: why does every "I enjoy using film" argument have to be supported with some personal photo of a child, pet, or landscape?

 

That's an easy one: it is to demonstrate that the image quality of the chain from scanner through compression software - forum up to my screen is fully up to the task to demonstrate the quality of the shown shots which originally were recorded on a negative.

 

Kind of negative proof.

[pgk]

The future of film will be dictated quite simply by the economics of producing a complex and highly sophisticated product for a potentially reducing market. At some point this might just mean its entire demise, or there again there may be a viable residue of film using photographers who keep it economically viable. I don't think that anyone on this forum is able to foretell the future, but I'd suggest that all those who want it to continue to be made for them should stop arguing about whether they like it or prefer it to digital and go and use more of it - actions speak louder than words in this case:D.

[JBA]

As a dedicated film shooter, I've devoted myself to shooting Kodachrome almost exclusively for the past year and a half. Now only a few months of processing remain. As such, I'm shooting far more film than ever before, but shooting any amount of a film already slated for extinction has no impact on the film market beyond Dwayne's bottom line.

 

At the end of March, the lab that was processing and scanning all my non-Kodachrome films and scanning my uncut Kodachromes closed. I'd been bringing in something on the order of 6 rolls per week plus a dozen rolls of Kodachrome per month for scanning. This was obviously not enough to make their business profitable. But this is Tokyo and there are other options.

 

But even in Tokyo, over the past three years of shooting film, I've seen the stock of film at the largest local vendor shrink. Fomapan became unavailable a while back because the distributor dropped it. Kodak's launching Ektar in 135 and then 120 amid this slump offered a glimmer of hope that film might be seeing a rebound. But this was before my lab closed. And Ektar is certainly no substitute for Kodachrome.

 

I consider myself first, last, and always a film photographer. The experience of using film and manual, mechanical film cameras is part of my identity, and therefore strongly emotional. Not having film available for the variety of film cameras I use would make my photographic experience the poorer.

 

Not that I don't want to get an M9 at some point, but I have yet to resonate in any significant way with digital equipment and processes, and quite frankly resent how digital technology has hollowed out the film market to the point that we even have to consider that film may someday no longer be available. Losing Kodachrome is bad enough, but losing film altogether and with it the ability to shoot both film and digital would be too great a loss to bear.

[stephen.w]

It's hard to explain my first photgraphic experience in the darkroom loading film with the cute bruntte I had a crush on in juinor high. I can still remember us there standing in the dark, are arms just touching. I could hear my heart pound through my chest. My palms where sweating so bad I could barley load the film. Lets just say my first taste of film was wonderfull first experince.

 

Nice anecdote, and nice photos

[Rolo]

You've got to give credit to the camera companies, they've done a great recovery job for the industry. Was it about 1997 when the quality of their products was so good that you'd only need to settle on a top quality camera, Leica M, Nikon F5, Canon 1v, Hasselblad V .... etc and you were set for life. Would never need to buy another body.

 

I recall they began to struggle for survival and some didn't. Until 2003 in my then marketing role, I wouldn't accept digital submissions from contract photographers. The camera companies have reversed that and instead of spending their research money to improve scanners and film, they turned us towards a completely different medium and have us spending money again. Well done for them.

 

For us, we get digital convenience and the opportunity to debate the disappearance of film and of course silver papers, and chemicals..... Film will outlast us, I have no doubt, it's just getting less convenient to buy it and process it.

 

My preferred local lab is looking at the space the processor occupies and wondering whether it's worth it with the turnover they are now doing - hundreds a day, down to 30 a week. However, there's home processing to sustain my interest in B&W. Might even search out a Jobo processor for colour if the going gets too tough.

[Jaybob]

It's hard to explain my first photgraphic experience in the darkroom loading film with the cute bruntte I had a crush on in juinor high. I can still remember us there standing in the dark, are arms just touching. I could hear my heart pound through my chest. My palms where sweating so bad I could barley load the film. Lets just say my first taste of film was wonderfull first experince.

 

 

Super story, Gregory. I think your posts and your photos (and your attitude, for that matter) are top notch.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[bill]

LoL!

 

It's very simple, Gregory. You make valid points that stand well without the need for random "illustrations". You have been asked before. Please stop dumping pretty pictures in every thread you contribute to - it's egocentric and selfish.

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[plasticman]

You've got to give credit to the camera companies, they've done a great recovery job for the industry.... The camera companies have reversed that and instead of spending their research money to improve scanners and film, they turned us towards a completely different medium and have us spending money again. Well done for them.

 

I don't talk a lot about my work here, but one of the things with which I've become somewhat disillusioned is the concentration on fostering discontent with what a person already owns. I've brainstormed ideas on how to convince people that their existing cellphone (for instance) is inadequate, and how to harness peer-pressure amongst impressionable teenagers to force them (and all their friends) to change that cell once a year as a minimum.

 

Right now I've switched from advertising to communication, and more than ever the peer-to-peer channels (such as this forum) are the central focus for companies to influence customers. One of my colleagues has recently written a series of articles for a periodical here in Sweden on how to get your brand 'fans' to spread the word, beta-test, Facebook 'Like', and generally market your product or service without being paid a cent.

 

The same pressures are on to switch us from film to digital - and frankly I'm pessimistic about the possibility to withstand those forces. But the world will be a sadder place without the expressiveness and special quality of film.