Jump to content

Most Photographers prefer film


hankg

Recommended Posts

Guest stnami

...... most that were surveyed probably grew up with film..........betcha the survey will be very different with the new breed of photographers

Link to post
Share on other sites

frc.... at least, that means that kodak still has customers ........ hahhah

 

imants....... no worries..... there will be youngs who will find the film..... i see it......... they just need some support that photo with film will be more active...... like darkooms to be rented and alike........ not that everything is in pink colours of course, but neither in dark greys :))

Link to post
Share on other sites

... probably that most people prefer duck eggs to rooster eggs....................and we all gape in amazement at the results

 

 

.........you mean they don't taste the same?........

 

I prefer film......yeah baby !!!

 

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing stands out about film. Fine art film shots are what sells. I sell some of my images in a gallery and work there occasionally. Inevitably, when someone is contemplating a photography purchase, they always ask if it is an ink-jet print or not. I find that most discerning collectors or buyers prefer a film print, Just my experience. But it does make me wonder why I'm so caught up in digital. I don't produce that many images in a year and I constantly wonder if I should give up my digital gear for medium format. (BTW, I sell plenty of images made with my 35mm M's.) I suppose that is the quandary facing many of us.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Film certainly has a role for many photographers but I question this survey.

 

Why have so many pro labs closed?

 

Chrome, a local lab that is doing well, has embraced digital but also does a good business in E6 and other conventional processes. The owner told me that business was good because so many labs closed locally and nationally that they are getting new customers whose labs have gone out of business. Many send their film quite a distance.

 

A few years ago at a Washington DC ASMP meeting that I attended, Kodak could not give away free film samples.

 

I think the pro support and sponsorship role of Kodak and Fuji is way down across the industry.

 

Kodak and Fuji reps no longer sponsor my local ASMP and APA chapters or individual events. And their reps don't come to meetings any more. The long term Fuji pro rep in this area, is no longer with the company and I don't believe there is any replacement. I used to be on a first name basis with the Kodak and Fuji reps, but it has been several years since anyone from Kodak or Fuji has called me. (And that was to loan me an SLRc to try out.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing stands out about film. Fine art film shots are what sells. I sell some of my images in a gallery and work there occasionally. Inevitably, when someone is contemplating a photography purchase, they always ask if it is an ink-jet print or not. I find that most discerning collectors or buyers prefer a film print

 

Print digital photos on RA4 paper and it's no longer an inkjet print. My DMR photos on RA4 paper sell quite well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am always a little diffident on these surveys, carried on by market-actors and with result data that are exposed in "narrative" way, instead of clearly saying WHO were the surveyed, WHAT were the questions, HOW they were answered to, and by HOW MANY: is not a correct approach, and you can easily say whatsoever you like to do:

 

- "over" 67% want to continue with film... (ALSO with, I suppose... what question was posed?); if one concludes that "about" 33% plan NOT TO USE FILM ANY MORE AT ALL, that's impressive: I'm not a pro, but i feel almost incredible that such a great number of pros decide to completely throw away film. But can one make such a statement ? ... no precise data about.

 

- 55% prefer film result : that's the only reasonably clear statement, and it says no much... as other have said, many pros have grown with film & darkroom... and they did not detailed the data about the pros interviewed (age, kind of work...)

 

- "19% use film for more than 60%..." : brr... such interrelated data are the nightmare of every statistician... a statement that, thinking right of it, simply says NOTHING SIGNIFICANT (81% use Digital for more than 60%... ? 81% use film for less than 60% but more than ....?) .

 

Sorry, I don't want to enter the issue, I'm not a pro, I do not love to discuss a lot film vs. digital... simply I love Math & Statistic, and do not appreciate these unscientifically presented (and maybe taken, too) surveys.

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMHO Kodak did this survey to investigate the future of film.

They have to decide what to do in the future with there business.

It looks as if they can keep making money with film and they told us, they will keep on producing film.

For me this is good news.

 

rgs

 

Luc

Link to post
Share on other sites

luigi......... i agree with you........

as one who is very closly related to media work and alike - i take very easily whatever is written in those cases.... and that - even if i do think that film will get its attention and use by pros/art/hoby enthusiasts, maybe more maybe a little less..........

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Metroman

Luigi: Spot on in your comments. The most telling part for me was:

 

'Almost 3,000 photographers across Europe took part in the survey" So that is less than 3,000. I imagine they targetted who they asked as well.

 

Many moons ago I had to read a coursework book called "How To Lie With Statistics" by Darrell Huff. One of his memorable quotes is:

 

'The secret language of statistics, so appealing in a fact-minded culture, is employed to sensationalize, inflate, confuse, and oversimplify. The fact is that, despite its mathematical base, statistics is as much an art as it is a science.'

Link to post
Share on other sites

Luigi: Spot on in your comments. The most telling part for me was:

 

'Almost 3,000 photographers across Europe took part in the survey" So that is less than 3,000. I imagine they targetted who they asked as well.

 

Many moons ago I had to read a coursework book called "How To Lie With Statistics" by Darrell Huff. One of his memorable quotes is:

 

'The secret language of statistics, so appealing in a fact-minded culture, is employed to sensationalize, inflate, confuse, and oversimplify. The fact is that, despite its mathematical base, statistics is as much an art as it is a science.'

 

Fine quote: I'd rather say that stat is surely a science : an ensemble of math methods to define quantities that CANNOT be mathematically computed, and can turn into an art : the art to extract conclusions from data that are inconclusive by themselves.

 

(but I tend to couple stats with probabilty, for my math mindset... really that is not totally correct).

 

Kodak BTW is still a big company with some brains... maybe I think they have acquired REAL USEFUL DATA for their own projections... trying to budget how many Kilomiles of film you have to produce for the, say, 3 next years is not an academic exercise... right budgeting of this kind has deep impact on investments, cost structure, bottom line of your Profit&Loss...

Link to post
Share on other sites

i don't think we have to worry about. kodak is trying to persuade their potential customer to keep using film. statistics, as happen for other science researches, can in some way be driven to match the desiderata of the one is funding the "research". not a big news in these times. no?

maybe the statement is not complete and we could expect something like:

...prefer film but use digital :-)

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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