Film sold out

[adan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

While I use and love the M9, I just thought I'd mention we've sold out of 400TX and 400TMax twice in the past month at the store where I work. I've had to persuade people to try the Ilford products instead, and we're scrambling to find more Kodak (at the moment it is 30% cheaper than imported Ilford).

 

I sold our last 6 rolls of Fuji Neopan SS 100 (R.I.P.).

 

And - I've sold 5 Nikon film bodies in the past 10 days (FTn, Nikkormat, FM, F3, F100). The store (but not me personally) has sold a M6 Titan (the famed "ostrich-skin" model) and a chrome M6ttl. Not counting the two M6s that were bought by fellow employees over the summer. Or the (Bog help us!) sale of a Mamiya RB67 to a student who probably weighed less than the camera.

 

We've also sold a couple of dozen Pentax K1000s - but those are an artifact of the start of the school year. Local colleges and high schools have introductory photo classes that require students to get totally manual film cameras. No AF, No AE. We buy 'em back at the end of the semester/year, like textbooks.

 

I doubt our sales will revive Kodak all on their own. But I do think we are reaching the plateau at the bottom of the film-sales cliff.

[Joachim123]

Thats good news!!!

[!Nomad64]

Thats good news!!!

 

+1!!!!

 

Cheers,

Bruno

[bcorton]

Good news, indeed.

 

Adan, does the film sell out for the same reason the K-1000s go: i.e., fall photography classes getting underway?

 

Brent

[bcorton]

Sorry Andy. I meant "Andy." Really, Adan, I did!

 

How does one edit a post around here anyway?

 

Brent

[adan]

1) Yes, probably partly for that reason - although we have a fair number of young film buyers who don't flash their ID to get a student discount, so are apparently shooting film on their own. People experimenting with Holgas and such.

 

However, normally we order extra film in late August to handle the student rush - for whatever reason, the demand was higher this fall than normal.

 

2) For one hour after making a post, you can edit it with a button that appears temporarily down by the "Thanks" and "Quote" buttons lower right.

[plasticman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'd just add that it seems to be getting more and more difficult to get hold of decently priced metal cameras of all sorts. There's millions of plastic point-and-shoots piling-up in the thrift stores, but if you want something like an Olympus Pen or Nikon F (never mind Leica bodies), then prices are constantly climbing.

 

Searching for a decent Pen F, I looked back over a series of auctions spanning a few years to get some idea of availability, and was bitterly disappointed to realize that just a few short years ago they were going for a song - and you could even pick up boxed cameras in new condition. Not anymore.

 

I think this is another reflection of the changing film demographic. We'll have to wait and see where it finally lands...

[Cheekyguille]

The growing adoption/return to film is a visible trend. My guess is that as digital photographers get deeper into the hobby they also become film curious, then film active. Photography after all is a rewarding endeavor, film can be very fulfilling also somewhat of a myth to break into due to perceived barriers. I too have been picking up some classic bodies for a small fraction of what the high end digital equipment goes. A few Hasselblad, a Rolleiflex TLR, an FE2, an M3 and an M2 and yes while tracking the prices over the last couple of years it is evident that there is higher demand.

 

With high quality scanners available anyone can set up to develop, scan and print B&W film at home with very good results and a lower total investment vs middle of the road digital. I can se where digital photogs are adding film to the repertoire and getting the proverbial immediate gratification as well.

 

Then of course is the charm of the old equipment and the quest to find good samples. I'm slowly getting some of these cameras and lenses CLA'd and have too been surprised by the apparent heavy work load and long turn around by the repair specialists. To CLA my working M3 I've been quoted by several close to $500 for both body and lens and a wait time of 5 months. I hear that it can take longer much longer.

[aesop]

...got my daughter an Olympus Trip 35 today. Having spent an inordinate amount of time with me (and Lee Morgan) in the darkroom, she has decided digital photography is somewhat less engaging than the darkroom experience.

 

So, HP5+ it is. Woo hoo.

[Stealth3kpl]

The guy on this advert is using a film camera.

Pete

[antistatic]

Can't think much of his bike. No lock. Would be gone by the time he got back

[StS]

As a side note, Ilford is notably more expensive compared to Kodak in Germany as well.

Black and White film from smaller makers sell below Kodak prices. Since I've got a working Kodak process, I would only change, if Kodak would go out of film making.

 

I also noticed prices for used "quality" film cameras going up recently. Currently, lenses appear to stay at a low level, though.

 

Cheers

 

Stefan

[prunelle]

The growing adoption/return to film is a visible trend. ...

I wish you were right. For what I've noticed, digital photography is either for the professional photographers or for the people who just take photos.

 

Film photography seems to be for the ones that have real interest in the thing, people who are not under pressure and are not in a hurry. It's another rhythm of life, more human size in my opinion.

[hamey]

Simply wonderful news.

 

Thank you Adan.

 

Ken.

[250swb]

After more than thirty years of using film I still buy it out of habit, depsite being primarily 'digital' for the past eight years. Which means I now have a freezer full that is never likely to be used.

 

I would say that the majority of film users nowadays are relative newbies who are still enchanted by the magic of the chemicals and process. In fact they put the process before the photograph, any photo made with film having more cache than a better photograph made digitally. For instance, an average internet discussion about a photo will rapidly descend into talk about Tri-X and its qualities than the actual content of the photograph. People who have used film for many years tend to have got over this stage and moved beyond.

 

For many photographers who have spent a serious amount of time processing vast quantities of film and making prints the novelty of still using film is diluted. If the quality and content of the image was ever important the rise of digital has meant film could take a back seat. So while I do still use some film, all this bunny hugging rubbish about the magic of the process and pace of life is for people with time on their hands. Processing film is a chore for me, but its good to know sales are now increasing, and its all fundamentally down to Lomo and their outreach to a young generation.

 

Steve

[plasticman]

I would say that the majority of film users nowadays are relative newbies who are still enchanted by the magic of the chemicals and process. In fact they put the process before the photograph, any photo made with film having more cache than a better photograph made digitally. For instance, an average internet discussion about a photo will rapidly descend into talk about Tri-X and its qualities than the actual content of the photograph. People who have used film for many years tend to have got over this stage and moved beyond...

 

I don't think any of what's said in this post is more true about film than about digital. Internet discussions - especially on fora like this - always tend to spiral into a discussion about technicalities - those technicalities may devolve upon Tri-X, or they may discuss whether the Canon 5DII has better high-ISO rendering than the M9 (or the reverse). It has nothing whatsoever to do with whether film users "put the process before the photograph" - utter generalizing rubbish, to be really frank.

 

As for romanticism about 'the process' or "pace of life" - each of us can speak for ourselves. I use film because I prefer the look. I let professionals process my negatives, so the only time I smell the chemicals is when I hand over my cash. When I'm using digital, I find I spend way more time sitting at the computer - something I do the rest of the day and would rather avoid in my spare time. When I'm taking film photographs, I'm much more 'present' with my family and companions, than when I'm using my digital cameras (where I spend an inordinate amount of time looking at the screen and feeling anxious as to whether I 'got' the shot)

[aesop]

After more than thirty years of using film I still buy it out of habit, depsite being primarily 'digital' for the past eight years. Which means I now have a freezer full that is never likely to be used.

 

I would say that the majority of film users nowadays are relative newbies who are still enchanted by the magic of the chemicals and process. In fact they put the process before the photograph, any photo made with film having more cache than a better photograph made digitally. For instance, an average internet discussion about a photo will rapidly descend into talk about Tri-X and its qualities than the actual content of the photograph. People who have used film for many years tend to have got over this stage and moved beyond.

 

For many photographers who have spent a serious amount of time processing vast quantities of film and making prints the novelty of still using film is diluted. If the quality and content of the image was ever important the rise of digital has meant film could take a back seat. So while I do still use some film, all this bunny hugging rubbish about the magic of the process and pace of life is for people with time on their hands. Processing film is a chore for me, but its good to know sales are now increasing, and its all fundamentally down to Lomo and their outreach to a young generation.

 

Steve

 

...bunny hugging rubbish, Steve? Not entirely sure why you're chomping at the bit - it has already been mentioned that film photography seems to be for "people who are not under pressure and are not in a hurry" (thanks, Anne).

 

Whilst it is clear where you stand (and I respect your position, irrespective of its relevance to me), I'm sure you recognise that others may have different prerogatives.

[250swb]

Absolutely, people can do what they want, I'm all for it. I was just saying that its a mistake to think people are taking up film because there is some fundamental truth they are discovering about it. Sure some will stick with it, thats OK, but the majority of new film users are following a trend, its fashionable, and some will continue, but more will go back to digital. Its 'The Summer of Love' for film, harking back to a simpler time, but as with the flower power era nearly all hippies converted to a normal life after they got it out of their system (and I had long hair). In any case film will reach a plateau and hover there as generations come and go, with steady sales for the right niche companies.

 

Steve

[miss_emma_jade]

...got my daughter an Olympus Trip 35 today.

 

So, HP5+ it is. Woo hoo.

 

what an awesome little camera. there IS still value for money out there.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[250swb]

It has nothing whatsoever to do with whether film users "put the process before the photograph" - utter generalizing rubbish, to be really frank.

 

I would agree with you if I hadn't made the specific point of not including all photographers in the idea. Using words like 'majority', or 'relative', and 'average', was an important strategy so as to allow any that don't 'put the process before the photograph' to flourish and enjoy their film. Of course its up to you if you want to turn a specific group of people into a generalisation by cropping a phrase to imply I meant all photographers:rolleyes:

 

Steve