Is Film Dying Again ?

[Keith]

No one can accurately predict where film will go IMO ... and how viable it's future will be in the long term. My crystal ball tells me it's doomed to a fringe existence .. but will probably survive in limited varieties for those that can pay the price as it logically rises as all niche products tend to.

 

[Sejanus.Aelianus]

Film is cheaper than it ever has been, you just have to take inflation into account, same as we do for every other product we buy.

That's a good point. In 1967, 36 exposure black & white cassettes were seven shillings and five pence, roughly 37p in decimal Sterling. Inflation equates that to £6.06. Amazon sells 5 rolls of FP4 for £21.49, or £4.30 per cassette. In other words, the price of film has dropped by 30%.

It's still more expensive than digital, if you make a lot of pictures, but one of the differences I've noticed in my own photography is that I use digital, when I want to hold my finger down on the shutter release and film, when I want to take my time over each shot.

 

[jsrockit]

I'm pretty sure it'll never be mainstream again, but I cannot see it dying completely any time soon... It's still in use too much to claim a death at all.

 

[thegman]

That's a good point. In 1967, 36 exposure black & white cassettes were seven shillings and five pence, roughly 37p in decimal Sterling. Inflation equates that to £6.06. Amazon sells 5 rolls of FP4 for £21.49, or £4.30 per cassette. In other words, the price of film has dropped by 30%.

It's still more expensive than digital, if you make a lot of pictures, but one of the differences I've noticed in my own photography is that I use digital, when I want to hold my finger down on the shutter release and film, when I want to take my time over each shot.

Film will always be more expensive than digital, I accept that. I think even with digital's depreciation, I think film works out more if you shoot more than a few rolls a month.

But then, Lagavulin costs more than Smirnoff. *

*Passive aggressive, trollish behaviour, all intentional.

 

[zuiko85]

That's a good point. In 1967, 36 exposure black & white cassettes were seven shillings and five pence, roughly 37p in decimal Sterling. Inflation equates that to £6.06. Amazon sells 5 rolls of FP4 for £21.49, or £4.30 per cassette. In other words, the price of film has dropped by 30%.

It's still more expensive than digital, if you make a lot of pictures, but one of the differences I've noticed in my own photography is that I use digital, when I want to hold my finger down on the shutter release and film, when I want to take my time over each shot.

Not my experience in the US. When I first started shooting and developing my own B&W c1971, I could walk into Altmans in Chicago and buy 100 ft. bulk of Tri-X and a box of 10 Kodak snap caps for about $10

Now TX is $70 and metal cartridges are $1 each. So that is $80 today, an 8X jump. Normal inflation would only bring that to $60 so there has been a real price increase of about 33% for that example. Back then I never bought my B&W in anything but bulk 100 ft rolls because of the savings. Nowdays there is no difference in price between bulk and preloads, or not much at any rate.

 

[Michael Markey]

I'm pretty sure it'll never be mainstream again, but I cannot see it dying completely any time soon... It's still in use too much to claim a death at all.

I agree .... it will enjoy a marginal existence for many years yet.
Just how many years and how expensive it will become is any ones guess .
Those film manufactures still in business who keep exhorting us to use it more are at the same time hiking up the costs of both purchase and development.

I can`t help thinking that they`re just raking it it whilst they can but that`s me being cynical.

 

[Scrambler]

Perhaps the first shouts of "film is dead" were akin to a criminal being sentenced to death: the end was announced but was nowhere near.

Now the appeals are all over and the Governor has declined a pardon.

OK, that's going a bit too far.

Until a few months ago people would ask me "Can you still buy film?" and I would say "I can buy it at the supermarket and get it processed next door." Now neither of those is true.

Consumer use of film is dead.

Enthusiast use continues.

Film is dead ... long live film.

 

[rbsinto]

Nobody wants my fully working IIf here and on-ebay for $175! Dead for sure!

Here is only two major camera stores in Toronto left with film supplies. I never seen anybody else buying where, just me and only. Always.
One store has some film and only few supplies left, second one has different papers, chemicals and stuff, but only consumer color film.

Picture taking on hobby level is shifting to Instagram and paid photography is mostly digital by now.

More and more people can't cook their own food, can't hand write, multiply and divide without calculators and even walk.
Film is something which is very difficult to them now.
Few and fewer of us left every day who isn't blind and willing to do analog b/w including wet prints.
Mass production, consumerism and globalization makes general public "simple minded" and incapable of many different skills more and more.
Film photography is more like one of those craft arts, now. Which used to be just common jobs. Haven't seen new doors made with carpentry and blacksmith for long time.

Film is dead?
I guess I didn't get the memo.
You can still buy film at Henry's, Vistek and Downtown Camera.
I get my slide film developed at Black's, although Toronto Image Works, and Downtown Camera are still also processing.
You don't see me buying film because I have a freezer full donated by my photobuds.
It's alive and well in my world.

 

[LeicaFoReVer]

Film is dead?
I guess I didn't get the memo.
You can still buy film at Henry's, Vistek and Downtown Camera.
I get my slide film developed at Black's, although Toronto Image Works, and Downtown Camera are still also processing.
You don't see me buying film because I have a freezer full donated by my photobuds.
It's alive and well in my world.

Slide films are the reason why I started shooting in film but it is getting so expensive and rare (especially at this part of the world). Some of the legendary slide films are disappearing too. When I was in Canada, I also didnt have troubles in getting and developing the slides.

When here not many people shooting in slides, you are also not sure about the freshness of the chemicals used even if you find a place to develop.

 

[willie_901]

Just follow the money.

 

[gb hill]

No digital is pretty much dead at my house. I bought my wife a digital camera but never uses it, thus digital is dead. OTOH I shoot film & it's very much alive.

 

[kbg32]

Film started to die when Kodak began to license Kodachrome processing to outside vendors. It's been a slippery slope since.

 

[vdonovan]

I attended a talk this week by Michael Bain, Ilford Photo's North American rep. It was a fascinating and inspiring talk about Ilford's path through the changing photographic landscape over the years. The black and white film market is a fraction of what it was, but they have restructured the company around the new realities. Interestingly, 35mm film sales are flat, but Ilford is seeing steady growth in medium and large format film. In printing paper, RC paper sales are flat, but there is growth in fiber papers, which is where they've launched new products.

He emphasized over and over that Ilford Photo is financially healthy and fully committed to black and white film photography. They are a small company facing a changing market, so they are very conservative in their operations. With sound financial management, they hope to preserve their existing product line, even the smaller-volume products, while finding new ways to grow.

 

[KM-25]

apologies if I'v offended or smacked a hornets' nest

Mr. Rosen:

It seems a diligent search on your part or if nothing else, a look at some of the better film based photographs digitized for display on this forum would have likely informed your decision to perhaps forgo the catchy headline and thread altogether.

That is...unless you were just trying to draw attention to your self which you have. I mean, congrats, you have even caused a spin-off thread that calls out how "confirmation bias refers to the tendency to selectively search for and consider information that confirms one's beliefs."

Black and white film is alive and well, strong as an ox & highly visible in the professional fine art world (see Vince's post above). It's digital in current form that you need to worry about...it's designed to self obsolete at a blistering, profit mongering pace...

 

[sig]

As long as there is a market for film and the producers can make enough profit film will live on or not. Who knows?

Ilford Photo will committed to film as long as they make enough money, when that stops their commitment will also stop.

 

[OurManInTangier]

I enjoy using both and very much hope and (dare I actually admit) expect film to be around for a very very long time yet.

I use digital a lot more than film now simply to keep my costs down, however I love going out and taking some landscapes or doing a project with my FM2, followed by some experimentation in the "darkroom" (read bathroom, changing bag and scanner for me these days.)

I see no reason for it ever to become mainstream again but then whats so bad about it being a niche area of photography? From what I can make out its also allowing us, if you think in this way, the opportunity to play around with some new emulsions; a chance to continue the experiment. It's sad when you're favourite old film stock is no longer made but this happens in all areas of life, film (and digital) are both alive and offering us great opportunities.

I hope it continues.

 

[anjoca76]

I was just in Trader Joe's. The young man, probably 22 or 23, working in the wine section asked what kind of camera I had over my shoulder. His eyes lit up when I told him a Leica M2. He said he started out shooting digital (obviously, I thought!), but in high school he was given his Dad's Nikon slr and really fell in love with film, especially b&w. He said he now has an Olympus XA that he uses a lot, and is saving up for a medium format camera.

Of course what he didn't know was that I'd spent all morning leading up to our conversation trying to convince myself that I should part with one of my M's--the aforementioned M2--to fund the purchase of my first "real" digital camera, probably a Fuji ex-1. But this is a tough sell for me. Early this morning I went out with a roll of Ektar 100 with the intention of going on a nice walk about the length of, oh, say, 37 or 38 frames. The pace of knowing I was going to shoot just those frames and nothing more was very rhythmic and relaxing--and challenging in its limitation.

There is so much more to film than image quality. If it was purely IQ, I am not sure I would struggle with this decision so much. But I enjoy everything about the film process (ok, except scanning, blah) and I truly have an emotional attachment to my M2. It's been all over the place with me, and it's beautiful to hold and make pictures with.

 

[KM-25]

I was just in Trader Joe's. The young man, probably 22 or 23, working in the wine section asked what kind of camera I had over my shoulder. His eyes lit up when I told him a Leica M2. He said he started out shooting digital (obviously, I thought!), but in high school he was given his Dad's Nikon slr and really fell in love with film, especially b&w. He said he now has an Olympus XA that he uses a lot, and is saving up for a medium format camera.

Of course what he didn't know was that I'd spent all morning leading up to our conversation trying to convince myself that I should part with one of my M's--the aforementioned M2--to fund the purchase of my first "real" digital camera, probably a Fuji ex-1. But this is a tough sell for me. Early this morning I went out with a roll of Ektar 100 with the intention of going on a nice walk about the length of, oh, say, 37 or 38 frames. The pace of knowing I was going to shoot just those frames and nothing more was very rhythmic and relaxing--and challenging in its limitation.

There is so much more to film than image quality. If it was purely IQ, I am not sure I would struggle with this decision so much. But I enjoy everything about the film process (ok, except scanning, blah) and I truly have an emotional attachment to my M2. It's been all over the place with me, and it's beautiful to hold and make pictures with.

I get out and about often for my job (life) as a photographer and I always meet lots of people, including women. Sometimes, I experience that "zing" or "Zap" of mutual attraction, it's nice. But then I quickly remember my gorgeous and brilliant wife and picture us in my mind growing wonderfully old together and all that we have...and I easily quell the electricity and make sure my wedding band is highly visible.

This is what film photography is to me, a life partnership that feels right to the very core of my being. It will never matter what digital becomes because to me, film is the only life that matters.

In my opinion and in 20+ years of using it, digital often incites the excitement of what will come next from a technological standpoint, forgoing long term partnerships. Film simply extends a warm familiar hand and offers a life long partnership...making it really easy to see what actually matters, living for today, in the moment...

 

[kbg32]

What matters is not film or digital, but the images you create by whichever process you choose. One is not better then the other. Each is a means to a similar end. Whatever road you travel, whatever makes you feel comfortable, and jives with your vision, so be it.

I for one would love to see these film versus digital, digital versus film threads self destruct.

 

[Rodchenko]

Look, is film dead yet or not? I need to know before I load my 35SP.