Is film dead ?

courtney said:
I just checked in with my local lab (a PRO Lab) and they informed me that they are ceasing all film proccessing !!!!!!!!
Yet another lab in my city either closing or ceasing all film work. This is in Brisbane Australia, let me know whats going on with labs in your part of the world???
After just buying my Mamiya 6 .......im getting nervous now !!!!
Click to expand...
I think film (as you can tell from the response) is far from dead. It's far from the dominant format but I don't think it'll ever completely die. It'll just become more and more inconvenient to use as time moves on. I think it'll also offer a unique look that will keep it a strong niche for the remainder of my lifetime atleast.

Keep in mind that I'm not committed to medium format. As it became (in North Carolina) increasingly inconvenient for me to buy film or get it processed I just gave up on it. I'll never give up on my 35mm SLR's or rangefinder (just bought my second rangefinder as a matter of fact) but if I ever figure out how to get the same look with B&W that I can get with film then they may just be nostalgia items I use once or twice a year.
 
keithwms said:
Thanks to digimania, the value of good, old-fashioned enlargements is increasing, not declining. Last year was an all-time record for auction sales of traditional prints. Not that I am a Steichen or an Adams, but I do find it very comforting to know that what I do is becoming a rarer skill.

I have absolutely no intention of joining the digital throng. What value is a technique that everyone else has? I had a DSLR- been there done that. Raw capture, photoshop.... yawn.
Click to expand...
Each new year will see new all-time records set though. Keep in mind that if Ansel Adams were making prints now he'd probably be using MF with a digital back.

As far as the digital "throng" vs. having "technique" that no one else has, I'd say the work output by the best of the digital "throng" speaks for itself. One doesn't have to search hard for it. There are people out there that can "process" for any look they desire. I'm not one of them but there's no denying they exist and are growing in number. There really is no other technique involved. DOF, exposure, composition, none of these things change other than by format. This year we've even seen the first affordable (for the average advanced enthusiast or pro in my opinion) full frame DSLR.

No offense meant by any of this. Keep in mind that I'll probably shoot film for fun till I die. There's no denying though, that in all conceivable ways film will be surpassed in quality very shortly.
 
oy vas mir!! aye carumba, dude!! why can't i pass on this thread?? :bang: es macht nicht aus.

...not dead. no matter how many times/ways i shoot it. aps/35mm/127/120/4x5. or how i shot it: .17hmr, .22wmr, .40 s&w, 10mm, .45acp, .45gap, 5.56mm, 7.62mm short/long, .475 h&h, 20mm...squirt gun, spud gun, air gun, blow gun, shogun (aye,aye, taipei - enough of this indulgent taifun of mine).

...and still film lives on. "...the road goes on forever and the party never ends..."

pssst, man go : if you get too much film sent to you i will be glad to "handle " the overflow...hehehe 😛

take care, have fun, and enjoy....ne vous inquitez pas...bye, y'all 😛

kenneth
_____________________

"...patience and shuffle the cards..." miguel cervantes
 
Last edited:
There's not room for many film labs any longer. But a few will stay and have a large bit of the cake. In Sweden many labs are cutting down on film but there's still a lot of labs left. So what I think is that a few good labs will be left because there will always be a market for film. Most people who are going over to digital have already made the conversion. Of course there's a few left but not that many. I also believe that there will be some going to back to film as well.
 
I don't see labs as a problem, thanks do digital we have more labs than we used to have here. IMHO a minilab operated by an expert is better than the big labs used by chain stores etc. and we have several minilabs in a photo store chain now.
Scanning and ordering prints online is an option we hadn't before and which I do with my slides.

The only thing I fear is deminishing availability of film and B/W chemistry, I bought the last reasonably prized roles of Ilford FP4 and HP5 at the local drugstore in 2004, now I have to buy online in big batches to offset post and packaging costs. A roll Tri-X at 2.35 Euro is ok, but they charge 6 Euro P&P!
 
Well, I just stopped at a popular consumer electronic / camera store in the neighborhood yesterday. Lots of types of film on the shelves from 35mm to 8x10 sheet film. They even have Polaroid film.

As far as the Luminous Landscape Great digital shootout. All that proves is both film and digital cameras can take good pictures - that is hardly news. To make any other conclusion than a subjective one about sharpness is really not possible. There are too many variables in the test method. This is not really surprising as not only the guy who runs Luminous Landscape does not understand imaging science, he does not even think it works.
 
Socke said:
The only thing I fear is deminishing availability of film and B/W chemistry, I bought the last reasonably prized roles of Ilford FP4 and HP5 at the local drugstore in 2004, now I have to buy online in big batches to offset post and packaging costs. A roll Tri-X at 2.35 Euro is ok, but they charge 6 Euro P&P!
Click to expand...

Chemistry is no problem, PC-TEA is a fine developer and easy to mix from chemicals readily available. Photographers Formulary should be around a long time as well.

If you are worried I suggest you get used to buying in bulk and get yourself a loader or two. That way when you have some spare cash you can buy a few 33 meter rolls of your favorite films and stash them in a freezer.

Socke said:
... you might want to read Luminous Landscape`s test off digital backs and film with medium and large format cameras.
Click to expand...

I would love to have one of those backs. The only problem is: my car did not cost as much as one of those things. 🙂
 
kmack said:
If you are worried I suggest you get used to buying in bulk and get yourself a loader or two. That way when you have some spare cash you can buy a few 33 meter rolls of your favorite films and stash them in a freezer.
Click to expand...


That's what I do, but I can remember the times when I could pick up a roll FP4, HP5 or any Kodak C-41 from 100 to 400 at the next gasstation, now they stock CD-Rs where they had film 🙁

kmack said:
I would love to have one of those backs. The only problem is: my car did not cost as much as one of those things. 🙂
Click to expand...

I can't even afford one drumscanned 4x5 Velvia 🙂
 
I think the writing is on the wall for E-6. As for C-41 there are huge number of shooters still using it. I don't see it disappearing anytime soon -- however that being said, it remains to be seen if there will be two manufacturers of C-41 color films in the future!

What we are witnessing is CONSOLIDATION not elimination. The real answer is that the easy money in film is finally gone and only the strong (and dedicated) have survived.

J Michael Sullivan
Editor/Publisher, MAGNAchrom
www.magnachrom.com
 
Tourist film is gettin' dead. FNAC got rid of their lab in the Columbo store when I was there last, meaning that everything had to be sent.

OR, I could have stuff printed on the spot from my memory card.

Too bad the MP didn't have one of THOSE.

Film will be as dead as canvas. I think it'll die when those making daguerrian images stop (like they did for a long time in the middle of last century), or when wet platers quit dipping their hands in the cyanide to pull out another "bright" ferrotype...

It'll be different. That's all.

Fer cryin' out loud, I can still get printing out paper, if I really want it!

No worries. Have fun. Who knows, perhaps the Best Film Scanner Ever is just around the corner?

🙂
 
Well, while I too sometimes wonder about what will happen to film, I believe that it will be around for a while. Where I live we don't have many pro or serious camera stores, but the ones we do have - they still sell and process all kinds of film. And they still like seeing people like me, coming in with my rolls of 120 film. We always get into talking about my old cameras - folders, TLRs, or plain old Hassy.
Like many I tried to out digital with Canon 10D, back when it was new to the market. Good camera, but after a year or so I sold it. Why? Well, for me , the main reason to go digital was not that it was better than film, but rather more economical. And it was. But, main drawbacks were - I was shooting too much, with too many pictures to be deleted. Most of the keepers almost never got printed out, just looked at on a PC. And whenever I did film - it was so nice to hold pictures in my hand. I know, I can go to Wal-Mart and such , and have them print off from the card, but then I am back to paying for pictures. So, might as well use film. Plus the photos that come out of the old Rolleis and Blads - well, they just have different feel to them. Many here know what I'm talking about. And I like a whole experience of using manual cameras. In the office my pictures from 1937 folder are far more popular than those from other's digicams. Everyone loves the "feel" of them. I don't do photography professionally anymore (if I did, I would maybe still use digital, as my several pro photog. friends do). I take pictures for my own pleasure, and for me it's old cameras that use film. Cause I like film AND cause I love using old cameras - both reasons. Some lenses from the old days can deliver results that you just cant get from modern glass, even with photoshop. As it is for many others. People that use Blads and Rollei's usually prefer them to digitals.
And if (God firbid) we will come to a point , when film is no longer available, well, I'll go digital again, but my old cameras will still look better on the shelf than any digital camera. 😉

Sorry for the long post.

George
 
A friend working at a photostudio and advertising agency nearby gives film another two years. He thinks I'm ill advised if I buy a new film body now.

OTOH they still do E6 once a week if they get enough rolls and they put a filmholder on one of their Linhofs or Sinars once a month so the aprentices can learn how to shoot and process film. I've heard that the aprentices apreciate that.

They still have Imacon and a Heidelberg/Linotype/Hell drum scanner which are used ocasionaly to scan older negatives and slides mostly as a service for others.

The studios payed work is 100% digital, they use Hassy H1 and H2 with Phase One backs on location and Sinar and Linhof with Phase One backs in the studio. For realy demanding studio work they have two scanbacks.

They never shot 135 because the quality wasn't good enough for their work.

And now to the fun thing, one of their technicians is just going over my fathers Linhof Technica which he bought in the 60s when he was working as a subcontractor for that studio and I get some outdated B/W film and some polaroid to play with 🙂
 
Socke said:
A friend working at a photostudio and advertising agency nearby gives film another two years. He thinks I'm ill advised if I buy a new film body now.

OTOH they still do E6 once a week if they get enough rolls and they put a filmholder on one of their Linhofs or Sinars once a month so the aprentices can learn how to shoot and process film. I've heard that the aprentices apreciate that.

They still have Imacon and a Heidelberg/Linotype/Hell drum scanner which are used ocasionaly to scan older negatives and slides mostly as a service for others.

The studios payed work is 100% digital, they use Hassy H1 and H2 with Phase One backs on location and Sinar and Linhof with Phase One backs in the studio. For realy demanding studio work they have two scanbacks.

They never shot 135 because the quality wasn't good enough for their work.

And now to the fun thing, one of their technicians is just going over my fathers Linhof Technica which he bought in the 60s when he was working as a subcontractor for that studio and I get some outdated B/W film and some polaroid to play with 🙂
Click to expand...


Well, and if you read carefully - these are (at least seem to be) very high level pro photographers, who can afford these nice toys. Most of us - can't. Yet we want to have high quality photos too. And it seems to me - for us it's Med. Format now - something they used in a past. Things shift and change, but there is still lots of use for film now. And we are here to prove that. If I was making money with my camera - I'd consider H1 with Phase One back too. However, I just spend money on my cameras , hehe, so I will stick with film MF. And thats the same for majority of us - serious amatures. Isn't it?
George
 
Digital will win out as long as everyone is obsessed with resolution, which seems to me something that was very important in the early days of digital but less so now as that part of digital technolgy has reached the the point of diminishing returns. Almost every test of film v. digital involves a still life and a crop of a tiny portion of the image area. These are tests conducted by the scientist faction of photography and although technically accurate they don't really provide information regarding the aesthetics of both mediums. I prefer to look at a print and ask myself a simple question: "Do I like it?". I went digital at the beginning of the year (Eos 20D) and shot almost no film for several months, but I came back to film -why? For the most part I found digital too literal. Film is interpretive, in that is whilst records images that are demonstrably of the "real world" the choice of a particular film helps the photographer interpret the world around him in a particular way. The colourful chiaroscuro of Velvia or the gritty punch of Tri X are uniquely different artistic statements that let the photographer say different things about the world around him. No one questions the lack of resolution or graininess of Tri X, they are part of its expressive quality. Digital is different; however flexible it may be in post production it is its technical perfection, its lack of techinical quirks that mean perversely many images leave me cold and I can't really say why. I get the opposite feeling sometimes when I see images in the gallery made with vintage equipment. No, the lens may not stand up its modern equivalent, but it helps the photographer communicate an idea . I think often we forget that at the heart of photography is the communication of ideas and emotions, not the literal recording of a given subject.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom