Jump to content
Leica M EV1: Die erste M mit EVF statt Messssucher ×
Leica M EV1: The first M with EVF instead of Rangefinder ×

Future of Film

fotolebrocq

By fotolebrocq
in Film Forum

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 482
  • Created
  • Last Reply
plasticman

plasticman

Posted
Posted
the head of Metro Labs ( I think that was the lab ) was ask the inevitable question what is the future of film, his answer was that there was only one company (in Switzerland) making film quality gelatin and if the demand dropped too low they are a commercial business and they would simply give up producing the stuff.

 

I know this was posted in all innocence, but it's typical of the FUD surrounding the future of film.

The Metro guy had probably read some half-garbled 'factoid' on a dpreview forum, repeated it as a solid fact a few times at different meetings, after each of which two or three people repeated the Swiss-gelatin nexus on various photo-fora... and next thing you know, there's a report in a Japanese magazine saying that the Head of Swiss Photogelatin Inc has announced that the company is ceasing all production of melted cowhide forthwith.

 

Just keep taking photos, and stop worrying.

Link to post
Share on other sites
rob_x2004

rob_x2004

Posted
Posted

From Eastmangalatine dot com.

 

 

Sample product uses:

 

Ink Jet & color laser printing paper

X-ray films

Photographic papers

Consumer and professional films

 

Plus all the jelly and ice cream you suck on each year while you wait I guess, or do they use seaweed for that:rolleyes:wondering thinking smilie.

 

God, the spleen in these threads.

Link to post
Share on other sites
bill

bill

Posted
Posted
No problem using a gelatine based product?

 

I'm not being judgemental in any way, just curious, as a failed vegetarian myself.

 

I wonder what animal based products are used in digital camera production?

 

I remember years ago a magazine interview with Linda McCartney, when she was rolling out her successful range of vegetarian food. The interview mainly covered that venture, but towards the end the interviewer touched upon her photography and her family connections to Kodak, asking how she reconciled her strict vegetarian views with the use of gelatine in film production. Apparently she looked horrified and said that she had not known...

 

Regards,

 

Bill

Link to post
Share on other sites
pico

pico

Posted
Posted

Did Linda Eastman really have connections to the Kodak Eastmans? I thought it was simply a coincidence of name.

 

Anyway, I just got 200 sheets of 8x10 film. I'm going to binge!

 

--

Pico the free-range humanitarian

Link to post
Share on other sites
bocaburger

bocaburger

Posted
Posted
Scanning is a skill that takes practice and patience and perseverance.

 

So does wet darkroom work, so does digital capture post-processing. So does photography in general, along with every hobby and professional skill known to mankind. But practice is not the same thing as mere repetition. In fact it's been said that the definition of insanity is repeating the same process expecting better results. What makes perfection from practice is learning from mistakes and developing a database if you will. So anyone who has arrived at the point where he/she can make scanned film print better than digital capture has to have a host of workflow techniques discovered/learned through that "practice and patience and perseverance". All I'm asking is that these people share it, as their digital-capture colleagues do, so that those of us who aren't getting better results from scanning than digital capture can "see the light". Otherwise, and I apologize if this comes off sounding abrupt, merely singing the praises of scanned film and telling others they need more "practice and patience and perseverance" is a cop-out.

Link to post
Share on other sites
andybarton

andybarton

Posted
Posted

Sorry. I didn't realise that was my role here. Didn't mean to "cop out"...

 

When I get back from Annual Leave and have a free Sunday, I will scan some stuff and do screen shots of all my process. And I'll post it here.

 

But, I'm not an expert. You're better off buying a book, I expect.

Link to post
Share on other sites
jacarape

jacarape

Posted
Posted
Are you saying you'll be pounding nails with the M7 in a few years? ;)

 

Seriously, most construction is done with heavy duty powered nailers today. And finish nailers have also taken over from the old finish hammer and nail-set method. I did all the window trim in my house remodel with a finish hammer and nail-set about 5 years ago. When I built a new kitchen last year, I bought an air compressor and finish nail guns. Much easier, faster, and better. (No dents in the trim and very tiny holes to fill.) For fun, just try hand nailing toe kicks and trim under kitchen cabinets. Most drywall is screwed in these days. Yes a hammer is still used for some things.

 

As I said, if you are happy with film and don't think you'll ever need the features that digital cameras can do, then you are set. But the gap between what a digital camera can do and what a film camera can do will continue to widen.

 

If film cameras are not becoming obsolete, why are there so many of them sitting at low low prices on dealer's shelves?

 

You dented trim with a hammer? Come on man that is a laughable reply. How about a nail set? It's a little punch that costs a couple of bucks, but compared to an air compressor I guess it's obsolete?

 

I push the shutter, the image is taken, where exactly is the obsolescence?

 

You drive the nail with a hammer, tap it below the level of the wood with a nail set, fill the hole and save the 1500 bucks you spent on the equipment that made it "obsolete".

 

So if you are market driven, that's fine. But I spend my money on what I what, not what the market "speaks".

Link to post
Share on other sites
dickgrafixstop

dickgrafixstop

Posted
Posted

I'm convinced that film will outlast me, and maybe my grandchildren. Besides, so many

of the old cameras are just so much fun.

 

By coincidence I happened to be reading this thread when my postman delivered by latest

order of 127 film for my baby Rollei. It also included several rolls of 110 for an old Asahi

SLR that's a particular favorite of my wife. Now, if I can just find a source for Kodak disc

film...............

Link to post
Share on other sites
bocaburger

bocaburger

Posted
Posted

When I get back from Annual Leave and have a free Sunday, I will scan some stuff and do screen shots of all my process. And I'll post it here.

 

But, I'm not an expert. You're better off buying a book, I expect.

 

I've got a few books, perused a bunch of websites. My prints from scans still look like digital captures of film vs digital captures of subjects. If yours look like enlarger prints, then you're an expert in my estimation, and I will be most grateful for your expertise.

Link to post
Share on other sites
holmes

holmes

Posted
Posted

9.3.10. Excuse me for putting the of this message at the start but I wanted to reassure the member who initiated this thread. Within the past month I spent over $225.00 USD just on film. Fuji, and Ilford. The ISOs go all the way down to ISO 25 for some serious fine art work in B&W. Fuji film is my film of choice for chromes and color prints. I ordered three rolls of Fuji Neopan at ISO 1600, to play with at night. Another thing, all the film boxes have expiration dates in 2011 and 2012. Also got 5 rolls of Ilford B&W for my medium format work. Don't be fooled by the people who say, "digital is the only way, film is dead". I get the impression that they are mainly trying to convince themselves for laying out the bucks for digital. How many of these are actual photographers. (that will stir up a bucket of worms)

Link to post
Share on other sites
pico

pico

Posted
Posted
I know this was posted in all innocence, but it's typical of the FUD surrounding the future of film.

The Metro guy had probably read some half-garbled 'factoid' on a dpreview forum, repeated it as a solid fact a few times at different meetings, after each of which two or three people repeated the Swiss-gelatin nexus on various photo-fora... and next thing you know, there's a report in a Japanese magazine saying that the Head of Swiss Photogelatin Inc has announced that the company is ceasing all production of melted cowhide forthwith.

 

Just keep taking photos, and stop worrying.

 

Eastman Gelatin

Link to post
Share on other sites
AlanG

AlanG

Posted
Posted
You dented trim with a hammer? Come on man that is a laughable reply. How about a nail set? It's a little punch that costs a couple of bucks, but compared to an air compressor I guess it's obsolete?

 

I push the shutter, the image is taken, where exactly is the obsolescence?

 

You drive the nail with a hammer, tap it below the level of the wood with a nail set, fill the hole and save the 1500 bucks you spent on the equipment that made it "obsolete".

 

So if you are market driven, that's fine. But I spend my money on what I what, not what the market "speaks".

 

I clearly said that I did all the earlier work with a nail set. (I have about 5 of them.) It makes a much bigger hole than a finish nail gun does. Try nailing trim under a cabinet or floor molding and holding that nail set and hammer while lying sideways on the floor for a while. It's easy to slip off the small nail and make a dent from the nail set. A Porter Cable compressor and two nail guns cost me $200. Once you use a nail gun, you'll never go back. Plus the compressor has a lot of other uses.

 

When I say that film is functionally obsolete, I mean that it is not the latest technology. Not that it is unusable. A manual typewriter is also obsolete, but you could still write a novel on one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...