digital users...what would entice you back to film?

jsrockit said:
Not everyone thinks the same as you.
Click to expand...

Clearly, and that is perfectly fine with me.

I was just remarking that I personally don't see any good reason to develop or produce something like that Re35 concept. I also have a fascination with old cameras, but my desire is to use them as closely as possible to the way they were used in the past, which means using them with film, or in some cases, with glass plates. If I just want the look imparted by a particular lens, I can probably find a way to adapt it to a modern digital camera.

I don't think anything like Re35 could ever be produced, even if the technology were developed. There'd be no profit in it for the big manufacturers who need to sell new bodies to stay afloat. So they wouldn't support it. They won't want to encourage anyone to keep using old bodies when they could buy something new that increases their profits.

My guess is that most people who have old film cameras would much rather have a modern digital camera than a jury-rigged recycled camera. The masses prefer the newest and latest gear, and many of them would be embarrassed to be seen using an old camera, whether capable of digital capture or not. RE35 would be a niche product for sure, not enough sales potential to repay the R&D.

Also, a product like that won't be priced inexpensively enough to outweigh the advantages of a fully modern digital camera for most people. And they won't be able to chimp.
 
loquax ludens said:
I don't think anything like Re35 could ever be produced, even if the technology were developed. There'd be no profit in it for the big manufacturers who need to sell new bodies to stay afloat. So they wouldn't support it. They won't want to encourage anyone to keep using old bodies when they could buy something new that increases their profits.
Click to expand...

I don't think it'll be produced either, but not because of a lack of people wanting it but more from a design implementation standpoint. Big manufacturers would not need to be involved in this industry... there are enough old cameras in the world to last a long, long time.

My guess is that most people who have old film cameras would much rather have a modern digital camera than a jury-rigged recycled camera. The masses prefer the newest and latest gear, and many of them would be embarrassed to be seen using an old camera, whether capable of digital capture or not. RE35 would be a niche product for sure, not enough sales potential to repay the R&D.
Click to expand...

I think you'd be surprised by how many people would like this item. Sure, it would be niche, but it would be the first digital to perform exactly like a film camera. That is the holy grail to some people.
 
Only two things bring me back to film: nostalgia for a gear I own and tonal range. Tonal range, especially if coming from a large sheet of film, is very hard to duplicate using digital.
 
loquax ludens said:
I can't really see the point of a product like the fictional re35. The main reason for using film is because it is film, not because you can use it in your "vintage analog" camera. If you want to shoot digital, then use a digital camera.
Click to expand...

Well, the simplicity of a Pentax K1000 or even a Nikon F4 over any modern offering from either company is one reason to shoot something like RE35. Another company tried this years ago, e-film, but never managed it. Sadly should something like this come to pass it would probably be insanely pricey, and make an M9 seem like a bargain.
 
If I could:
Step 1 - put exposed film in a postage paid mailer
Step 2 - received by lab next day ( like Netflix seems to receive my movies)
Step 3 - same day process, high res scan, upload to cloud based service for viewing, download or online photoshop
Step 4 - receive my negs by return mail along with another mailer
Step 5 - automatically charge my PP for $10 or prepay 12 rolls for $100.

I think this could be a viable business model if there was sufficient demand.
 
Traut said:
If I could:
Step 1 - put exposed film in a postage paid mailer
Step 2 - received by lab next day ( like Netflix seems to receive my movies)
Step 3 - same day process, high res scan, upload to cloud based service for viewing, download or online photoshop
Step 4 - receive my negs by return mail along with another mailer
Step 5 - automatically charge my PP for $10 or prepay 12 rolls for $100.

I think this could be a viable business model if there was sufficient demand.
Click to expand...

With B+W film, just develop it yourself. It would be faster, cheaper, and much more satisfying. I was a hardcore slide shooter but switched to B+W film due to economic reasons. Now I love B+W and stick with it due to aesthetic reasons.
 
Traut said:
If I could:
Step 1 - put exposed film in a postage paid mailer
Step 2 - received by lab next day ( like Netflix seems to receive my movies)
Step 3 - same day process, high res scan, upload to cloud based service for viewing, download or online photoshop
Step 4 - receive my negs by return mail along with another mailer
Step 5 - automatically charge my PP for $10 or prepay 12 rolls for $100.

I think this could be a viable business model if there was sufficient demand.
Click to expand...

+1

The Netflix hardcopy DVD model is exactly what is necessary. A few labs are into this already, though there is market room for improvements.

I cannot get over the silliness of film marketing. Who advertises "low-res" and thinks this will keep people interested?

For whoever is left shooting film, it should all be high-res at a flat rate.
 
The elimination of the odious task of scanning, a higher income to afford film and development, and a steady supply of the filmstocks I enjoy (which keep getting discontinued).

Scanning is a chore, and a scanner that will produce top notch files costs a mint. There are send-out services, sure, but your choices are either 8-bit jpegs or paying $50 a frame for drum scans. Optical printing and not scanning is a complete non-starter since I can't build my own darkroom, much less afford to keep it running.
A few months ago I decided to stop shooting 35 and 120, and only shoot 4x5 Fuji Instant and 35mm digital on a first gen. 5d. Since, Fuji has discontinued fp-100c45, dashing that plan, and I am still trying to come to grips with the 5d. It's quite like shooting slides without the depth in the shadows.

e: I especially would like to shoot medium format again, but there is no way I would ever print something scanned on my flatbed, and a dedicated scanner for "good enough" quality comparable to the ScanDual IV I have for 35 is far too expensive.
 
well, scanning with VueScan + ColorPerfect is not a chore at all. It is pretty fast, as ColorPerfects presets are great and with a few sliders the image always comes out as I want it. Actually, editing the image is so fast, that I am often waiting for my LS-40 to spit out the next frame.

And after that, my images are already edited and IPTC tagged with meaningful stuff.

That new Plustek 120 looks decent...that will most likely be my next purchase 🙂
 
Scanning never bothers me.
I read books or RFF when I scan.
You want your images online, you do what you have to do.

If you're frustrated because you scanned 36 only to discover 2 keepers, improve your skills. Read more photo books, train your eyes and brain.
If you really hate scanning, get some slow contact print papers, developer, stop bath, and fixer, and 3 trays. Learn how to contact print in your bathroom.

If you are too lazy to do any of those, use digital.

I'm sorry, excuses don't get you where you want to be.
Thinking and start removing hurdles, does.
 
I sometimes wonder how I would get by in a non digital environment ... what would happen to my photography ... without a computer, scanner, internet access to this forum etc what would I do and how would I manage?

I'd have only film cameras ... I'd have a darkroom and learn to use it where I would produce prints having taught myself how to actually make a physical print successfully. If I wanted other people to see and enjoy my images I would have to get off my arse and take my photographs out into the real world to show them. My own walls would be covered in my images and they would change constantly as my moods and aspirations influenced and guided the type of photographs I took. People visiting me would actually see all these photographs because they are real and not 140 gigs of data stored on a hard drive. These same people may be interested in seeing more of my photographs so maybe when I visited them I could take some albums along for them to browse through over a coffee ... some may ask me to take their photographs and I'd do them some prints so they could adorn their own walls with something real! Maybe I would meet other photographers and we would exchange ideas and images over an evening meal occasionally where our common interest would feed and encourage a healthy social interaction.

"I have a dream!"
 
Well said, Keith. Digital and the internet makes marketing more convenient but also provides so much choice to the consumer that successful marketing of one's images becomes a lottery. I'm not a pro but I am guilty of being too reliant on the web as a tool to let my friends see what I'm up to. However, I subscribe to a fantastic film-only site and many of the participants (mostly UK but members from USA to New Zealand) regularly hold postcard exchanges and those who can, meet up for a few days out shooting - and a few beers afterwards.
 
Keith said:
I sometimes wonder how I would get by in a non digital environment ... what would happen to my photography ... without a computer, scanner, internet access to this forum etc what would I do and how would I manage?

I'd have only film cameras ... I'd have a darkroom and learn to use it where I would produce prints having taught myself how to actually make a physical print successfully. If I wanted other people to see and enjoy my images I would have to get off my arse and take my photographs out into the real world to show them. My own walls would be covered in my images and they would change constantly as my moods and aspirations influenced and guided the type of photographs I took. People visiting me would actually see all these photographs because they are real and not 140 gigs of data stored on a hard drive. These same people may be interested in seeing more of my photographs so maybe when I visited them I could take some albums along for them to browse through over a coffee ... some may ask me to take their photographs and I'd do them some prints so they could adorn their own walls with something real! Maybe I would meet other photographers and we would exchange ideas and images over an evening meal occasionally where our common interest would feed and encourage a healthy social interaction.

"I have a dream!"
Click to expand...

that is how it used to be...for me and all others involved in photography on anything more than a surface level.
it was fun.

now, it's the same, only different. now, i get to chat with some bloke in oz, a fine fellow in new york and some great shooters from asia...we get to share our images and our experiences but no in house discussion or refreshments...
 
shadowfox said:
Scanning never bothers me.
I read books or RFF when I scan.
You want your images online, you do what you have to do.

If you're frustrated because you scanned 36 only to discover 2 keepers, improve your skills. Read more photo books, train your eyes and brain.
If you really hate scanning, get some slow contact print papers, developer, stop bath, and fixer, and 3 trays. Learn how to contact print in your bathroom.

If you are too lazy to do any of those, use digital.

I'm sorry, excuses don't get you where you want to be.
Thinking and start removing hurdles, does.
Click to expand...

Very well said and couldn't agree more. Too many just plain lazy people complaining. Why should I care to look at someone's photographs who harbors the attitude of "film is too much work?" Looking at mediocre mind-numbing digital photography is too much work.

Photography is extremely diluted now with too few a gem and way too much noise.
 
Having my first roll from my Zorki developed with an XP2 roll from my F2 developed and scanned right now. If it goes well I might have to try more.
 
Looking at the big negs from a 6x9 medium format Fuji, and the quality from that great lens in a 30-year old camera, and the prints I can make - yes that will keep me shooting film for a while (alongside digital when I feel like it).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom