Is now the time to start stocking up on film??****

[wintoid]

I've got to say I'm really not anxious about this. Film is great fun but it won't be the end of my life if it gets a bit expensive. Besides, by the time a roll of TriX costs £10 I will probably be able to buy a Leica MP for £50 😀 I'm not holding my breath!

 

[rxmd]

The refrigerators are used anyways, so placing film in them will not significantly increase the bill.

Of course it will. A full refrigerator uses more energy than an empty one, especially since it's opened and closed a lot more often to take out film (in addition to groceries). Hence, since most of us are still going to store some milk and butter and groceries in there, the bill will be higher in the end.

But you're right, it becomes a lot more significant at the point where people buy a second fridge to keep their film in because the first one is full with foodstuff. Unfortunately I know quite a number of people who do just that. I guess for the price of a halfways efficient freezer plus a year's energy expense one could buy a *lot* of film, but somehow aggregated cost doesn't lend itself easily to the human mind.

Philipp

 

[gareth]

Sure, I can use any crappy scanner to show you that digital is better than film.

40 oz, if you had read my post you would know that that is not the conclusion that I came to!

The 5D does not record more information than a frame of 35mm - there are 8 bits per pixel, and 12 million pixels. Film has up to 22 million pixels and has about 24 bits per color per pixel - allowing for a lot more resolution.

Again it's impossible to state how many 'million pixels' film has. From what I can see with my film scanner Fuji Superior 200asas generates less mpixels than my 5D, whereas Provia 100 generates considerably more.

I agree that film has more natural sharpness. I suspect, and it's just my suspicion that film's non-linear look helps it to produce a natural sharpness. Also those who work with film will know that bigger grain means a sharper image (up to a point).

Oh I was under the impression that my 5D produced a 16 bit image.

Anyway I'll be shooting film today . The digi can stay at home for a change.

 

[Socke]

Hi,
Just wondering what people think? Is now the time to start buying film? How much longer will it be availible?

My source of cheap slide film dried out, I should have stocked up in April when Sensa 100 was available in 5 packs for 14,99 Euro incl. processing. Now they have Eletechrome 200 in 10 packs for 38,99 Euro excl. processing with development at 5.99 a roll.
All B/W is gone from the store and I bought the last three rolls BW400CN for 3,75 Euro excl. processing.

The real photo stores left have a limited choice of Tetenal chemistry only, film is around 4 to 6 Euro a roll there but they stock the "professional" films only.

The first roll of cheap Fuji C200 from the supermarket broke out of the canister after the last shot.

So yes, film procurement got much more difficult and epxensive this year and as a result I shoot much less.

 

[Socke]

Gareth, most die hard film fans argue against digital with the fine grain of Provia and the lattitude of Tri-X.
What they tend to forget is that a current dSLR in the $600 to $1000 range has about the same dynamic range as slide film with much more resolution at ISO400 and higher.

I look at this from two points of view, the first is what's in the print I can get, i.E. minilab or consumer grade big lab, and the second how the camera handles.
The high end colour print films are wasted if you give them to a normal lab and you won't see much difference between a print from cheap noname and Provia.
The handling is another story, I don't like shooting a (d)SLR and prefer a rangefinder, otherwise I would not post here 🙂
So I settle on slide film for colour and B/W is B/W is B/W.
Two years ago I had a wide choice of B/W films localy, now I have to buy online which means relativly large amounts to offset shipping and handling.

With current developments in film availability and price I'll shoot more with the dSLR I don't realy like but that'S better than not to shoot at all.

 

[gareth]

Socke,

It's one thing that did impress me, was the high ISO colour performance of the 5D.

And of course you are right, there's is little point in arguing of which format is 'best' unless you go for quality finishing.

One reason that so many people think that digital is far superior to film, is that they went from getting colour prints from the chemist, to playing around with RAW files and photoshop on a PC. It's chalk and cheese.

I've never had a good choice of b&w film locally. Also the price of film is considerably cheaper than it's ever been. For those who want to shoot film, and I'm one of them, well we've never had it so good.

 

[ZeissFan]

Epson still seems to serve the film photographer. By all accounts, the performance of their new V700 and V750 scanners actually meets the hype. Imagine that, a product that actually performs as expected. Several reviews have given the scanners very high marks.

I'm not a big fan of these "will film survive?" threads. It's also about supply and demand. If one company can't make it, another will step in as long as there is demand. We've witnessed the fall of Agfa, but we've also seen the rise of boutique makers Adox, Efke, Foma, Maco (also sold under the Rollei name) and others.

I was very sorry to see Agfapan APX 100 and 400 bite the dust. So I bought five 100-foot spools of each as soon as it was announced they were going bust. When that's gone, I'll find something else.

I've been shooting lots of Kodak Gold 200, Ektachrome, Sensia and Ilford FP4+. I think in the long run, regular buying of film is better for the marketplace than hoarding. There are still plenty of great emulsions out there. I prefer to use them rather than fret over the future (glass half-full approach).

Regarding scanning, I tend to compare it with using a condenser head enlarger and that it tends to point out every flaw. I also think that scanning emphasizes the grain in film.

And really, a master b/w print is something to behold. I've seen some very nice digital. For the home enthusiast, digital printing can be a very costly undertaking.

 

[gullevek]

"Film is going to die"? I hope not, cos' I am stilling buying film cameras these days!
I think film will go on, for at least 5 years time until film companies and labs can't afford to run their business any more due to too limited demand.

Well, I wouldn't say that. There are still normal people shooting film. Actually I was surprised how many (here in Japan) are. Plus most studios earn their money with digital development. The small shop I use for my straight forward color negatives has two PCs for ordering prints from digital shots.

So I have still hope that this won't go away all too soon.

 

[Ossifan]

I really enjoy shooting film. And I enjoy developing the film and making prints from an enlarger. I always get a little anxious when I read threads like this but then I go to the freestyle photo website and order more film and I'm happy. Digital is great for lots of reasons, but for my hobby I don't want to spend even more time in front of the computer. I'd rather spend that time in a darkroom.

 

[MoTR]

Alex Majoli

🙂
That man is an exception to the rule!!

 

[photogdave]

For everyone turning this into a digital vs film thread - get over it! That is SO 2004! 😀

 

[mdelevie]

Yes, buy film... not to stockpile it, but to shoot it and learn from your images.

I have several hundred rolls of film at home, mostly medium-format roll film. I paid $70 for a hundred rolls of 2005-dated UltraColor 400 (120 size). Paying only $0.70 per roll frees me up to take chance shots, to experiment more, and not feel like I'm spending a fortune. I also stocked up on Velvia 50, both in 35mm and 120/220. Am I sad to hear about Velvia 50 II? Heck,no! I didn't buy the film as a speculator, I bought it to shoot it!

Yes, you should stock up on film.

BTW, my answer when people want to argue film versus digital is: "please show me the 50 megapixel digital camera system (with excellent lenses) that I can buy for $1,500." That's what a decent medium format setup costs, and I can EASILY scan a good negative to 50 MP without running out of detail.

Best to you,

Mark

 

[telenous]

BTW, my answer when people want to argue film versus digital is: "please show me the 50 megapixel digital camera system (with excellent lenses) that I can buy for $1,500." That's what a decent medium format setup costs, and I can EASILY scan a good negative to 50 MP without running out of detail.

Best to you,

Mark

That's very perceptive Mark. The near demise of film has given, us, amateur photographers and mortals of all photographic persuasions, an unprecedented chance to get our hands on professional equipment - be it Leica, Hasselblad or what have you. Because of that, getting to know film has been an accident but one that has returned the investment a thousandfold.

 

[Socke]

Mark, did you factor in your scanner? 50MPixel sounds like Imacon 🙂

 

[Buze]

Nope, 50 megapixels is a frame of 6x9 scanned at 2400dpi.. easy 😀

 

[Gray Fox]

I have learned that my local Sam's Club just got an Epson 7800 printer and someone trained to use it. They can do color or the three ink B&W. They'll do a 20x30 for $11.66US, a 16x20 for $6.34 and 11x14s for $2.87. I sure can't buy a good printer and inks for what they charge based on the number of prints I'll eventually have done. I'll just have to see how good they really are, I guess.

 

[swoop]

I once posted a photo in a forum and got comments along the lines of. "omg how did you do that, it looks terrific." The answer, it was scanned film. lol.

Film will be around for awhile. But it will strictly be a specialty thing in the next two or three years. I'm sure your local drugstore will still carry the basic variety as well. As popular as digital is. Not everyone has the need or the money (camera+computer) to go digital. And I'm not talking in the pro sense. I mean the folk who live in little town across the country (even the world) that simply take photos of family get togethers and occasions and such. It's easier for them to buy a disposable film camera or a roll for a basic camera they already have.

The digital revolution has progressed a lot faster than many would have guessed. You even have Canon and Nikon halting development on consumer film camera's and the Kodak layoffs. But even still, film will be around for awhile. It might get pricy due to lack of demand. But it will always be around as long as someone is willing to buy it.

Think of floppy disks. You can still buy those everywhere. A few new computers even include them still. In an age where we have 600GB hard drives. a 1.4mb floppy. A magnetic medium. Is a joke. But it's still around (Don't bring up the 5.25's. Or music cassettes/video tape. I don't have an answer for that).

 

[Pherdinand]

I went recently to two very serious photojournalism-centered exhibitions. They were showing images made in 2005 and 1-2 years back.
Many of the images, at least 50%, were black and white with beautiful grains.
I'm not dressing up in black yet, film is doing fine.