Slide film "investment", good idea?

Joakim Målare

Established
Local time
6:33 AM
Joined
May 22, 2011
Messages
146
Location
Sweden
One of many things I have yet to try is shooting and developing slide film. So now I'm waiting for 10 rolls of medium format Velvia 50 and 100 together with a developing kit. These will go through a Rolleiflex and my new GF670W in 6x6 mode. Should be fun looking for colour for a change!

If I manage to get some decent results, my idea is to get a used 6x6 projector and see what that is all about as well. But everything comes at a cost and even if it's not a huge investment or extremely expensive, I'm a little anxious about the future of slide film. Are you?

Some say there may be less than a decade left of slide emulsion, but how would anyone know for sure? Is there any statistics of film sales available somewhere? I'd be happy to contribute on the consumer side rather than saying it's gonna die out soon, but I'm still curious of just how popular shooting slides is... What's your opinion?

...

On a related subject, is it very difficult to handle the reversal process for monochrome slides? Sounds interesting, if I can work out where to buy the extra supplies. As an alternative, is it worthwhile to transfer to a positive by contact printing my already fixed negatives?

Thanks in advance for any input.

/ joakim
 
Dear Joakim,

Yes, very anxious. A decade does not sound unrealistic.

Reversal processing monochrome is in my experience VERY disappointing unless you can find clear-base film. And when contact printing (onto FG Pos, ideally with an ELDIA) you need 'clean-room' conditions to avoid dust.

Sorry to be so negative (as it were), but I fear that's the truth.

Cheers,

R.
 
I'm not anxious, although I expect E6 has less of a lifespan left than C41 or B&W film.

But let's say you get the slide projector etc. How much will it cost, and how long will you be able to buy slide film for? Compare that to just about any purchase imaginable, and it's probably a reasonably good deal.

If you were buying an E6 processing lab, that's one thing, but buying film and a projector, I'd say just don't worry about it. I know it's trite, but why worry about what you can't change?
 
I'm not anxious, although I expect E6 has less of a lifespan left than C41 or B&W film.

But let's say you get the slide projector etc. How much will it cost, and how long will you be able to buy slide film for? Compare that to just about any purchase imaginable, and it's probably a reasonably good deal.

If you were buying an E6 processing lab, that's one thing, but buying film and a projector, I'd say just don't worry about it. I know it's trite, but why worry about what you can't change?
Absolutely!

Cheers,

R.
 
Thanks guys for your advice and reasoning! My mind is set.

I realized while walking the dog (fresh air does the trick) that if I repeatedly buy more film than I need and put those extra rolls away, I will build up my own stock and support film sales simultaneously 🙂. That should prolong the existence, if only just a tiny bit 😀. In my imagination more so than placing a huge order on rare occasion.

Which brings me to browsing for info on the longevity of frozen slide film...
 
Slide film's future is rapidly becoming history.

I've been shooting a lot of it lately, just because I know it won't be around forever. I don't have a projector though-- I figure if I ever need one I can find one on craigslist for a song.
 
Thanks for reminder. I need to use up the slide film I have in the freezer.

I agree that slide film maybe the first to go.. Look what we have left. I just hope b&w film will be the last....

Even if u stocked up and are willing to do your own slide developing (stock up on self developing chemistry for slide).. How much can u really store away vs the life expectancy of the chemistry.

Gary
 
Last edited:
I also have toyed with projector in my mind....btw do projectrors use specialty bulbs?

I need to buy more spares for enlarger while I can, incasdescent bulbs also are being phased out rapidly.....
 
There is a lot of talk about slide film's demise, but the fact is, it's still easily bought and easily processed. Kodak dropped their range, yes, but have they *ever* really been able to compete effectively against Fujifilm, even in film's heyday was it a losing battle?

I think sometimes you only have to look at Polaroid/Fujifilm Instax/Impossible Project to see that sometimes companies/products can hang in there way beyond the expiry date that the internet deems to give them.

99% of people will go in the direction that any particular industry pushes them, be it Instagram or Apple iTunes. But 1% of people who still want to use B&W or slide film, and listen to Vinyl records is still a very large market, the accessibility of products via the internet only makes it larger.
 
Slide film is why I started shooting. For me it was the meaning of photography. And imho it can produce incredibly quality images with great color resolution much much better than negatives. It is also a great joy to project your images big on the wall...

I am so sorry that slide is disappearing really fast...
 
Slide film is why I started shooting. For me it was the meaning of photography. And imho it can produce incredibly quality images with great color resolution much much better than negatives. It is also a great joy to project your images big on the wall...

I am so sorry that slide is disappearing really fast...

I suppose that is my point, right now, it isn't disappearing. Sure, there are fears about it, but the reality on the ground is that you can still get it, and get it processed.
 
Hi Joakim,

One of many things I have yet to try is shooting and developing slide film. So now I'm waiting for 10 rolls of medium format Velvia 50 and 100 together with a developing kit. These will go through a Rolleiflex and my new GF670W in 6x6 mode. Should be fun looking for colour for a change!

go for it, it is absolutely breathtaking!

If I manage to get some decent results, my idea is to get a used 6x6 projector and see what that is all about as well. But everything comes at a cost and even if it's not a huge investment or extremely expensive, I'm a little anxious about the future of slide film. Are you?

Go for the projector and enjoy your slides. Slide projection gives you the best picture quality in photography if you want big, brillant pictures.
Nothing else can compete with it!
Instead of having fear just enjoy your life and your photography now.

Some say there may be less than a decade left of slide emulsion, but how would anyone know for sure?

No one of us knows the exact future. But we know the present:
With Provia 100F, Provia 400X, Velvia 50, Velvia 100 we have the best slide films ever!
We live now.
We can shoot now this excellent stuff and can have lots of fun!
Carpe diem!

All the self-proclaimed "experts" who now say E-6 will die are the same people who have said some years ago that instant film will die.
And what happened instead?
Instant film is now making a real resurgence with increasing sales.

You should look at it in this way:

1. Imagine your father or mother would get the diagnosis of cancer. And the doctors say probably the will die of cancer in the next 4 or 5 years.
What would you do?
Would you use the time and spent as much time as possible together with your father or mother?
Or would you say 'why meet them and spending time with them, they will die nevertheless in the mid-term'?

Most probably you will spend as much time with them as possible!
And the same makes sense with slide film: Using it now as much as possible, having fun, enjoying it!
Even if some years in the future reversal film production may be stopped:
No one can take away your slides you've made from you!
All your slides will stay, and you can enjoy them for the rest of your life!

And with a projector you have the possibility to enjoy them in best quality for the rest of your life.

2. As long as we buy enough reversal film, it will be produced. It is just as simple as that.
Now is the time to shoot as much slide film as possible to keep it alive.
Let us follow the instant film photographers.

And if we all do that, creating a resurgence of reversal film,than we may be even see the re-introduction of discontinued films like Sensia, Astia or the Ektachromes.

On a related subject, is it very difficult to handle the reversal process for monochrome slides? Sounds interesting, if I can work out where to buy the extra supplies. As an alternative, is it worthwhile to transfer to a positive by contact printing my already fixed negatives?

Thanks in advance for any input.

/ joakim

Well, make your life easy. Just send your films for reversal processsing to the excellent BW reversal labs in Germany:

www.photostudio13.de
is developing
- Agfa Scala 200X
- Adox Silvermax
- Adox CMS 20 II
- Agfa Copex Rapid
- Foma R100
- Rollei Retro 80S
- Rollei Superpan 200
- Rollei Retro 400S
- Rollei IR
- Ilford Delta 100 120

Klaus Wehner from
www.schwarz-weiss-dia.de
is developing
- Agfa Scala 200X
- Adox Silvermax
- Foma R100
- Rollei Retro 80S (and Superpan 200, IR on request).

BW slides are awesome, go for it!

In general, just as a reminder:

There are lots of very good reasons for shooting (also) slides:

1. Projection: Absolutely unsurpassed quality (brillance, sharpness, resolution, fine grain, tonality) at that big enlargements.
We've compared slide projection with excellent projection lenses to the current most expensive beamers (2-4 MP; 7,000-10,000€).
The result is absolutely clear: Slide projection is a league of its own. Far superior resolution and sharpness, better brillance and tonality, much better color reproduction.
The most expensive beamers can not compete at all with slide projection.

With beamers you have the situation that you pay e.g. 7,000€ for a 24 MP Nikon D3x, or 3,000 for a D800, and then you pay another 7,000-10,000€ to smash this resolution down to the extremely low resolution of 2-4 MP with the beamer (and the 2-4 MP are only valid in horizontal direction, in vertical direction you have even 40% less resolution).
You burn more than 10,000€ to get crappy results. Digital projection is completely ridiculous in it's cost - performance relation.

For big pictures with best color brillance and detail rendition slide projection with good projection lenses deliver the best quality.

2. Slide viewing with an excellent slide loupe (e.g. from Rodenstock, Leica or Schneider): Outstanding quality, fast, convenient.
Viewing slides this way with a little, slim daylight light table is as fast as looking at prints in a photoalbum. But with better image quality.
This way you can easily show others your slides without projection.This set-up is smaller and lighter than a photoalbum or a laptop.

Viewing slides with a slide loupe and with a projector deliver
- much better quality than scanned slides
- are much faster (no time for scanning needed)
- at less cost.

3. Prints have a Dmax. of about 2,3 logD. In this range there is a physical limit which cannot be surpassed.
Slides as a transparent medium can deliver higher contrast ranges and higher Dmax. with about 4 logD with color transparency films, and with certain BW transpararency films even up to 5 logD.
This greater Dmax. and contrast range of slide films compared to prints is one reason for their higher brillance.

4. With slide film you can achieve higher resolution, better sharpness and finer grain compared to color negative films.
There have been some scientific tests (including lens manufacturer Carl Zeiss) proving that films like Ektachrome E100G, Elitechrome 100, Provia 100F, Velvia 100 and 100F, Astia 100F have about 30-40% higher resolution at medium and higher contrast details than Ektar 100 and Reala. And Provia 400X is surpassing Pro 400H and Portra 400.


http://www.aphog.de/index.php?option...d=401&Itemid=1

We've made some comparison tests, too, and can confirm that.

5. Reliability:
What you see is what you get.
Give your slide film in 5 different good labs, and you will always get identical results.
Give your CN film in five different labs and order prints from them, then you will receive five different results, because the operator at the printer does an interpretation. You get differences from the scanning (different scanners/profiles) and from the operator of the machine, who decides about contrast and colors.

6. Most authentic form of photography:
A slide is an original, the pure form, not manipulated in any form.

7. Versatility:
Slides can be viewed only with the eye, holding against the light, with a loupe, they can be projected on a screen, and you can scan and print them (and currently there is still the possibility to make a Ilfochrome, or a direct BW print with Harman Direct Positive Paper).
Color negatives can only be printed.

8. Very cost efficient:
Color negative film makes sense if you want prints.
For a quality print I have to pay here about 35 - 50 cents depending on the lab.
A 36 exp. CN film, developed and with prints cost me more than a slide film with development.

If you consider projection than there is an even much more significant price gap: With projection my huge, brillant picture of 1m x 1,5m or 2 x 3m cost me less than 1€ in total.
A print from CN film of that size cost me much more than 100€, and doesn't have the brillance, resolution, fine grain and sharpness of the projected slide.

9. BW slides:
Their tonality is unique. Yo can not get this unique look with prints.
Once you have seen BW slides, you are hooked.
BW slides are a very nice completion to BW prints.

10. You always have an original color reference for scanning and printing:
Look at your slide and you know how the real colors are.
That is impossible with color negatives: Our brain is not able to convert the color negatives to real natural colors.
Besides the superior detail rendition of slide film that has been one of the the main reasons for the popularity of slide film in professional photography.

11. Slide film is the best photography teacher:
You have to do it right at the moment you click the shutter (if you're doing the real stuff, viewing the slides on a light table and in projection; without scanning and further manipulation).
Slide film makes you a more disciplined and deliberate photographer. You think before you shoot. Less clicks, but more good shots in the end.

12. Slide film is ideal to test your camera, whether the light meter and shutter are working correct.

13. Slide film is ideal to test lenses, because of the superior resolution and finer grain compared to CN film (evaluated in the optical imaging chain with optical printing, with projection or a microscope, because even 8000 ppi drumscaners are not able to resolve all the details in slide film; we’ve done such tests, and can confirm the results of Tim Parkin and others).

13. With slides you feel like being back in the scene at the moment you shot it, it's so real.
It's a "time machine":

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suRDUFpsHus

Slides, that is where film is absolutely unique and can not be replaced by CN or digital.

It is now time to shoot as much slide film as possible to keep color slide film alive.

With slide I always have an authentic picture. I only need to hold it against light to enjoy it.
Impossible with CN and digital.
Slide film is a major part of photographic culture.
It absolutely deserves to stay alive!


The photographic world would be very poor without this unique medium reversal film!

Cheers, Jan
 
The photographic world would be very poor without this unique medium reversal film!

The whole world of art would be poorer.

The problem is cost. Not really the cost of producing the film because there is already tremendous over-capacity in emulsion output. Even as intermittent side runs E6 could still survive.

The barrier is the cost of developing and scanning (no scanning, no customers in a wired world, including RFF galleries). Prints are prints and with a "keeper" set you need only print what you want, which is one of the benefits of scanning now. Slide mount and printing are near equivalent costs.

The decline and almost total disappearance of drugstore, department store, and local lab processing has driven the cost of processing up significantly, so if you throw in mail order costs, a 36exp. roll is now looking at $15+ all cost included and the cost of the roll at another $5 (Ektar 100), and that's without optional prints or slide mounting and low-res scans in JPEG. Most people hate the low-res and PP with JPEG is awful.

And don't think for a moment that home-base developing, scanning, or darkroom printing will ensure enough volume to keep an industrial roll film manufacturing line going. The industry needs labs with high-volume, low cost, high-res scans so that economy-of-scale processing and mail-order options are brought to bear on prices.

I did a back-of-the-envelope calculation with a Fuji employee who I used to work with and we calculated that the cost of film + develop + process + mail order would have to hit about 85 cents/image to be sustainable as a long-term alternative photographic process (+taxes...we left that to get below the $1/image which is a psychological barrier). Prints extra.

As a comparison, averaging in the film + camera costs, my Instax costs me about 96 cents per shot where I give up signifiacnt IQ and camera options for instant gratification. You might see a little cost variance for E6 up, and dip/dunk, but that's about the average one should expect from a C-41 batch of 36exp. of a good film like Ektar 100. I suspect the folks at Lomo have run numbers like this as well, not to mention Kodak, Dwayne's, RPL. Large-scale lab development is the weak link in film sustainability of all types. George Eastman long ago figured out that the cost and distribution of film was easy, it was getting it processed into a usable format where the real investment occurred.

So to solve that equation, hopefully some people and capital will get behind this type of endeavour and go back to the days of the Kodak Brownie. It is a time machine.
 
The whole world of art would be poorer.

+1!!

The barrier is the cost of developing

Cost?

1. In lot's of markets E-6 processing is either only a little bit (insignificant) more expensive than C-41, or even has the same price.
E.g. here in Germany you can get E-6 processing almost for free, the drugstore chains (about 4,000 shops here) offer it for 1,85€ - 2,55€. Peanuts.

2. Color slide film is often even cheaper if you look at "the whole package":
With slide film you already have a finished picture which is ready to be viewed:
- you can hold it against the light and enjoy it
- even much better you can use a lighttable and an excellent slide loupe (e.g. from Rodenstock, Schneider-Kreuznach or Peak) and can view it enlarged in excellent quality
- or for the best enjoyment you can project it in unsurpassed quality on a big screen (and here slide film is the most cost efficient option: a projected slide cost you much less than a buck, but a quality print of the same size, e.g. 1m x 1,5m cost you much more than 100 bucks!!).

The developed slide film is a finished product to be viewed.

That is not possible with color negative film. Looking at a color negative is useless.
Color negatives have to printed, that's what they've be designed for.
But prints in very good quality do cost something.
If I look at the prices for quality prints here it is in 35 - 50 Cent range for a 10x15 cm or 13 x 18 cm print.

Adding up all these costs result in shooting slide film being cheaper than shooting color negative film with prints.

Now you may say I could use only development + scan, and viewing the pictures on a computer monitor.
But does that make sense from a quality standpoint for a film-shooter?
No, not at all.
Film is an excellent high quality high resolution medium. With scanning we loose lots of the detail of the film.
And viewing on a computer monitor further decreases the quality to a great extend: Resolution is down to a ridiculous low 1 - 2 MP, and color rendition and tonality cannot compete at all with a slide or a quality print (by the way, the same is valid for a digital shooter's workflow: paying lot of money for a 18, 24, 35 MP camera, and then only viewing the pictures on the 1-2 MP computer monitor is nonsense, too).


The decline and almost total disappearance of drugstore, department store, and local lab processing has driven the cost of processing up significantly, so if you throw in mail order costs, a 36exp. roll is now looking at $15+ all cost included and the cost of the roll at another $5 (Ektar 100), and that's without optional prints or slide mounting and low-res scans in JPEG. Most people hate the low-res and PP with JPEG is awful.

1. The decline is not a general global phenomen, it is especially a problem of the North American market with its weak lab infrastructure.
No decline for example here in middle Europe, or in Japan, China, S. Korea.

2. Even in the US you can get it cheaper than you've said. There are lots of labs doing it for less.
Even Walmart is still doing E-6 send-out service for 4,88$ (see end of the thread):
http://www.flickr.com/groups/ishootfilm/discuss/72157633221628555/

3. And of course every E-6 user can also do what almost all BW film shooters do:
Reducing the development costs significantly by doing the development by yourself at home. It is quite easy, no 'rocket-science' at all.

And don't think for a moment that home-base developing, scanning, or darkroom printing will ensure enough volume to keep an industrial roll film manufacturing line going.

Sorry, completely wrong:
The whole BW photo film market has been run for decades by home-base developing. More than 90% of all BW films are developed at home.
Professional lab based BW development is a small niche.
The BW photo film market has only survived because of home-base development by the photographers themselves.
As the BW photo film market is bigger than the E-6 film market, it is clear that when BW can survive because of home development, than the E-6 film market can at least be significantly supported by home development.

Cheers, Jan
 
Unless your sole goal for slide film is to project it and/or print it, I really can't see how in today's day and age that a solid argument can be made that E-6 is cheaper overall than negative film. Equal, perhaps, but not cheaper. And trust me, I love slide film and wish more people used it; I would be the first to back that claim if I believed that to be true. But since, like it or not, most of us scan our film these days so we can have digital versions to use in our modern world, and slide film is at least on average a couple of dollars more per roll than C-41, give or take, it's tough to make a firm argument that slide film is cheaper.

That said, for me, the extra cost is very negligible. I develop and scan my own b&w, and lately I've been sending all my E-6 and C-41 to The Darkroom to be developed and scanned. I really think they are awesome. They charge $10 a roll regardless of positive or negative film, and hi-res scans are an extra $5 a roll. I live in Boston, and yet it still only takes a week to get it back from California from the time I drop it in the mail, which is remarkable. And no extra charge to mount slides. So the only difference in price for me is the slight premium for most slide film over most color negative film. To me, it's well worth it and keeps me shooting.

Slide film as an investment? I don't really think of any of my creative tools as investments. Not my cameras, nor film, nor my guitars, etc. I use them. To me, that is an investment in my own personal gratification. I have been slowly stockpiling slide film in my freezer because I know it might not be around forever, but I wouldn't consider that an investment.

Slide film is wonderful. You just can't guess exposures and be off by a couple of stops and fix it later. You have to actually meter correctly and think about what you are doing and take everything into consideration. I try to do that even with b&w film, though, so to me it's not a big deal.
 
Resistance is futile! I took the plunge. I even bought Aerochrome Infrared film in England of all places, to be sent Costa Rica in the midst of Americas and I have to mail to the US of A to process as E-6 no longer exists where I live. Perhaps it would be better to buy a 120 mm film scanner instead of the projector?
 
Fascinating. I gave up on slide film over 25 years ago for its lack of exposure latitude, difficulty in printing, rapidly receding quality/performance vs the state of the art negative films, etc.

Nothing wrong with it if you like it, and good slides are darn pretty, but with all the fuss associated they're definitely a niche interest at best nowadays.

G
 
When I was last in Latin America this early winter there was almost no film processing at all. Just digital kiosks.

Almost all of Canada's chains (Wal-Mart included, London Drugs, Lawton's and the ubiquitous Shoppers) have also dropped all film handling and sales of any sort. Completely gone. There a res till maybe 4 or 6 store in major centres that will take the product at all.

I used to work for a major chain and still have my Fuji contacts from back then. Fuji no longer processes and what there is is all contracted out, almost totally in major centres now. Most of these chains had to scrap their mini-labs as there is no buyback process anymore (cancelled by Fuji) and zero resale value. Net loss of processing is probably approaching 100%. E6 tags C-41. Non-dry print labs are no longer sold and most are off service contract.

It's not anything about quality, No arguments there. It's about price and accessibility. Dwayne's and a few mail order places will be all that is left, and maybe a few labs in major centres. But their problem will be cost because as volumes fall, cost per unit rise

The decline is all of the Americas. Your Flickr link was actually about how the posted prices are going above US$10/roll, no scanning, and that's for all types of film. Some are not there yet, but that's already been decided. most stores no longer process at all. Huge swathes of populated areas have zero photofinishing.

Maybe a rump b/w can survive on home-based, but nothing colour. MOst home-based users switched to, or are still int he process of, switching to digital. We know this because there is also no local supply of materials and darkrooms are being give away for free on Craigslist or Kijiji.

Since E6 is so lab dependent, that's the problem. Producing film...not a problem. Developing it affordable (with scanning...problem.

+1!!

Cost?

1. In lot's of markets E-6 processing is either only a little bit (insignificant) more expensive than C-41, or even has the same price.
E.g. here in Germany you can get E-6 processing almost for free, the drugstore chains (about 4,000 shops here) offer it for 1,85€ - 2,55€. Peanuts.

2. Color slide film is often even cheaper if you look at "the whole package":
...

1. The decline is not a general global phenomen, it is especially a problem of the North American market with its weak lab infrastructure.
No decline for example here in middle Europe, or in Japan, China, S. Korea.

2. Even in the US you can get it cheaper than you've said. There are lots of labs doing it for less.
Even Walmart is still doing E-6 send-out service for 4,88$ (see end of the thread):
http://www.flickr.com/groups/ishootfilm/discuss/72157633221628555/

3. And of course every E-6 user can also do what almost all BW film shooters do:
Reducing the development costs significantly by doing the development by yourself at home. It is quite easy, no 'rocket-science' at all.

....
Sorry, completely wrong:

The whole BW photo film market has been run for decades by home-base developing. More than 90% of all BW films are developed at home.
Professional lab based BW development is a small niche.
The BW photo film market has only survived because of home-base development by the photographers themselves.
As the BW photo film market is bigger than the E-6 film market, it is clear that when BW can survive because of home development, than the E-6 film market can at least be significantly supported by home development.

Cheers, Jan
 
Back
Top Bottom