Godfrey
somewhat colored
Hey, I resemble that remark!
But in a more rational frame of mind ...
...Saying "film is dead" has been a calling card of the idiotic "film vs digital" meme for over a decade. I only mean it humorously.
Photographic capture on film has its unique and beautiful qualities that are different from digital capture; having both enriches the art form that we enjoy.
I do hope that enough people keep using film—and producing profit for film manufacturers—for long enough that I will not see the end of film production in my lifetime. I'm getting old so that isn't going to be for more than another few decades at most.
New products like the Lab Box make using film more accessible up and down the spectrum and, hopefully, help support keeping film profitable enough to keep making it.
G
Huss
Veteran
While out and about in Los Angeles over the weekend, I saw quite a few film camera users. A Yashica 124, a Canon T70, a Nikkormat were the ones that I was close enough to recognize. And they all were carried by young people (oldest was maybe 25). My nephews are into it, as are their friends.
It really is the old farts that are claiming the death of film. I think maybe because they are done with it, so don't want anyone else to use it either. Cuz they are grumpy old men.
:angel:
HHPhoto
Well-known
It really is the old farts that are claiming the death of film. I think maybe because they are done with it, so don't want anyone else to use it either. Cuz they are grumpy old men.
:angel:
+1.
And for about 15 years the "film is dead" mantra has been an essential part of the digital camera marketing:
"You have to buy digital cameras because soon there will be no film anymore for you".
The masses were totally brainwashed by this.
And this is still in the minds of lots of members here. They have believed and are still believing these marketing lies.
Cheers, Jan
roscoetuff
Well-known
Last week I had the temerity on Luminous Landscape to query whether they might consolidate some of the low traffic forum discussion folders into "FILM". Of course the rather strident reaction considered my antediluvian insanity and lots of "Film is dead" original reactions. Best responses were: "Film's simple. Take pictures. Go away and have fun." Okay. Added: "With film, the film companies have done so much of the work for you... building in lattitude and dynamic range, that you don't have to jigger it yourself." Maybe. At anyrate... I get what they're about. "Done".
Many there are old an great film photographer's but the market has indeed moved on, and I imagine if you're a working photographer it's all digital 'cause that's the demand, and what's expected. Selling's hard enough without making yourself out as a lunatic fighting the last war. Yes, understood, and I'm an amateur without that handcuff. Yes, I'm keeping my digital btw, and love digital especially for color where the post adjustments are relatively simpler for me than it would be to try to manage (for me at least) in a wet darkroom. Fairly, I haven't run any color film yet, but I'm not really after that with film - yet... so that may be a premature thought on my part.
So FWIW, during the few days my post played out, an article was posted on the future of photography with quite a fair number of very positive things said about film, and its revival - especially for Fine Art. Of course this followed an earlier article on scanning film negatives with cameras rather than scanners. So their subject matter in their articles is beginning to work an edge in... yet when asked to follow-up... the decision to ignore film was swift, decisive and firmly, "Not gonna happen." Put that in the category of Kevin Brownlow's intro to his book on the Silent Film era, "The parade's gone by, pops" as a tech once put it to the hand crank camera men from back in the day. Sure seems the case here, too. "Sic Transit, Gloria Mundi".
For my part, I'm working out a film-to-digital workflow for my B&W shots using: 1) light table, 2) old englarger ($35 on eBay), 3) Sony A7II, and prototype negative holder using cardboard and fiberboard that I'll shortly upgrade to brass and glass soon enough. Busy debugging my design's kinks at the moment, so Mod-Two should be better. Trial conversions are encouraging: Faster and easier than flatbed scanners, with better quality files - RAW rather than JPEGs... and adjustments in post are pretty quick. Sure, there's a learning curve, but if you're thinking about it, Capture One is doggone simple for B&W, and color doesn't look that much more difficult.
So if film really is all this simple as it is and cuts post production time - at least for B&W, then I'm loving it! Maybe Fuji will give us (back?) some high speed B&W?
Many there are old an great film photographer's but the market has indeed moved on, and I imagine if you're a working photographer it's all digital 'cause that's the demand, and what's expected. Selling's hard enough without making yourself out as a lunatic fighting the last war. Yes, understood, and I'm an amateur without that handcuff. Yes, I'm keeping my digital btw, and love digital especially for color where the post adjustments are relatively simpler for me than it would be to try to manage (for me at least) in a wet darkroom. Fairly, I haven't run any color film yet, but I'm not really after that with film - yet... so that may be a premature thought on my part.
So FWIW, during the few days my post played out, an article was posted on the future of photography with quite a fair number of very positive things said about film, and its revival - especially for Fine Art. Of course this followed an earlier article on scanning film negatives with cameras rather than scanners. So their subject matter in their articles is beginning to work an edge in... yet when asked to follow-up... the decision to ignore film was swift, decisive and firmly, "Not gonna happen." Put that in the category of Kevin Brownlow's intro to his book on the Silent Film era, "The parade's gone by, pops" as a tech once put it to the hand crank camera men from back in the day. Sure seems the case here, too. "Sic Transit, Gloria Mundi".
For my part, I'm working out a film-to-digital workflow for my B&W shots using: 1) light table, 2) old englarger ($35 on eBay), 3) Sony A7II, and prototype negative holder using cardboard and fiberboard that I'll shortly upgrade to brass and glass soon enough. Busy debugging my design's kinks at the moment, so Mod-Two should be better. Trial conversions are encouraging: Faster and easier than flatbed scanners, with better quality files - RAW rather than JPEGs... and adjustments in post are pretty quick. Sure, there's a learning curve, but if you're thinking about it, Capture One is doggone simple for B&W, and color doesn't look that much more difficult.
So if film really is all this simple as it is and cuts post production time - at least for B&W, then I'm loving it! Maybe Fuji will give us (back?) some high speed B&W?
pepeguitarra
Well-known
I see no reason for the two media NOT to coexist.
I see no reason for the two media NOT to coexist.
One of the reasons I enjoy film is the time elapsed between taking the shot and seeing the image. Somehow, it may take days or weeks. So, when you see the imagen for the first time, you have fresh eyes and can tell if the image is good or not. In the digital camera, I make the decision two seconds after the shot, then take another and another just in case. Film makes me be more thoughtful about that photography is about ( artistically speaking.) I enjoy photography as an art. If I need to take a shot to a dent on my car because an accident, I will use the cell phone.
It is curious that younger generation are interested in film, maybe not the millennial. We have been told that millennial are used to instant gratification, which is what digital point and shoot offers.
I see no reason for the two media NOT to coexist.
One of the reasons I enjoy film is the time elapsed between taking the shot and seeing the image. Somehow, it may take days or weeks. So, when you see the imagen for the first time, you have fresh eyes and can tell if the image is good or not. In the digital camera, I make the decision two seconds after the shot, then take another and another just in case. Film makes me be more thoughtful about that photography is about ( artistically speaking.) I enjoy photography as an art. If I need to take a shot to a dent on my car because an accident, I will use the cell phone.
It is curious that younger generation are interested in film, maybe not the millennial. We have been told that millennial are used to instant gratification, which is what digital point and shoot offers.
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
What's with all the negativity? I think this is a great incentive for getting young people into film shooting. Also, millennials are not substantively different from us old folks. I work with them all day long. They're fine.
This system isn't really for me, but the "Monobath" developer caught my attention. I don't have a ton of experience outside of HC110 and Diafine...are single-bath B&W developers a thing?
This system isn't really for me, but the "Monobath" developer caught my attention. I don't have a ton of experience outside of HC110 and Diafine...are single-bath B&W developers a thing?
roscoetuff
Well-known
Just in case you're referring to my post as "negativity"... I think we're simply noting what's out there WITHOUT trying to do more than make the case for co-existence.
Worth a read on the monobath. As a non-chemist, can't evaluate whether the cell-level nano-tech claims real or simply sales buzz... but like to think new tech will help improve film's ability to thrive in the contemporary era.
Worth a read on the monobath. As a non-chemist, can't evaluate whether the cell-level nano-tech claims real or simply sales buzz... but like to think new tech will help improve film's ability to thrive in the contemporary era.
Solinar
Analog Preferred
I haven't reached the age of 70 yet. So, I may be a bit younger than you all.
Way before stepping foot in a proper darkroom - as a beginning photographer, I used a Rondinax 35 developing tank and it worked well.
Way before stepping foot in a proper darkroom - as a beginning photographer, I used a Rondinax 35 developing tank and it worked well.
Larry Cloetta
Veteran
I had backed this for the tank and both size modules, and just got an email from kickstarter an hour ago stating that, due to the success of the project so far, they would be sending an extra reel with the kit as a "freebie".
That's a nice surprise.
That's a nice surprise.
AND you can use it outside! like the one guy appears to be doing...
like the one guy appears to be doing...
No negativity here, but how so?
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
If I were just starting out, I'd watch that video and think, "Huh, this looks easier than I thought." Maybe more people will try their own developing with simplified tools available...
roscoetuff
Well-known
Film is alive. Has a pulse. Most aren't paying attention, but for those of us with the freedom and interest to pursue it, there's something sweet about the Lab Box... kind of like Ferrania's / Ektar / Adox / Ilford revivals. The industry has painfully downsized, and some may yet quit altogether, but those who remain should do quite well. The real trick is someone coming up with a new, photographer-enthusiast level camera. The Leica MP is appealing... but not very widely at the current price point. And yet our hardware ages...
I guess that could be... not as intimidating. But those of us that had to do it the old fashioned way figured out that it wasn't that hard once you tried. I think I started with a blank roll of film and went into the dark and just rolled it on and off the reel for awhile until I was confident. Or maybe it was in a changing bag.
Mr_Flibble
In Tabulas Argenteas Refero
I've been trying to wrap my head around how the 120 can be loaded in daylight when I first saw it. Apparently you still need a dark room or a changebag to get it started.
Not being negative, mind. just inquisitive. At the moment I'm fine with my workflow, but I might just jump in and back the 35mm set.
Not being negative, mind. just inquisitive. At the moment I'm fine with my workflow, but I might just jump in and back the 35mm set.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
No ... It works just like the Rondinax 60 does:
- insert exposed film, leave backing end sticking out slot
- Put top on
- pull out backing ... film curls into light-tight section
- close light trap and remove top
- remove backing end
- attach film to reel
- put top on and open light trip
- roll film onto reel
- process
Easy.
G
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
bucs
Well-known
I agree
This kind of product will make the film developing process more easier for new film users and also encourage others to process their own film
Exciting times!!!
Skiff
Well-known
Exactly.
It is a good project.
And the product is not replacing, but just supplementing the standard JOBO, Paterson and AP tanks. Horses for courses.
I wish them the best.
Huss
Veteran
The negativity can be broken down to the old fart classification. There are two types: standard cheerful old farts (most of us here), and the curmudgeonly old farts who don't want others - i.e. young people - to discover film photography so they can lord over them how they are not real photographers cuz they shoot iphones/digital. It's almost like they want film to die with them.
:angel: