The future of film

[Bill Pierce]

Some of the more recent threads on the site have set me to wondering about the future of film. We've talked about the loss of repair facilities for the cameras themselves and the disappearance of the film itself, much less vanishing darkroom supplies and equipment.

I moved to digital fairly early, but, as I have said before, I will miss the colors of Kodachrome, the brightness range of Tri-X and the sharpness of my 8x10 view if they ever disappear entirely. On a more honest level, just sheer laziness and the ease, speed and control of Photoshop over the wet darkroom often leads me to shoot digital when film might do a slightly better job.

Many of you don't have tight deadlines or the need to transmit images; so, for now, film is fine. But, have you felt the pinch of diminished support, materials, e.t.c.? What steps do you feel you have to take to prepare for the situation if it gets worse? And, do you feel digital will do the job for you if you have to make the switch?

And, for those of you who have made the switch - how does it feel?

Bill

 

[Spider67]

Until now it's a matter of price.....Now I get the great Nikon lenses I was lusting for years ago for an affordable price...until now I've experienced no shortage whatsoever. Thats the status in Austria/Europe.

 

[Glenn2]

Don't worry Bill, film's going to be around for a long time yet. As long as there are people using the stuff someone will manufacture it. We'll probably not have as many types, but it will be available.

Besides shooting with cameras I enjoy target shooting with antique firearms and black powder. Have had no problems buying powder and flints for my flintlock rifle so don't expect film to be much different. A number of companies even build replicas of early firearms as the originals have gotten too rare and expensive to actually use.

On a side note, target shooting is excellent training for holding a camera steady at slow shutter speeds. You soon learn that flinching or closing your eyes is a sure way to miss the target. Unfortunately an SLR equals closed eyes during exposure and is probably why my hand held SLR shots at slow speeds are not as sharp as with a rangefinder.

Glenn

 

[wallace]

I've tried everything with my digital pics in PS but still I can't get the tonality in b/w that I get from Plus-X or Tri-X, especially in MF. For example there's always details lost in the clouds. I print Black only with Carbon inks in the Epson R800.
Although my scanner is a cheap old Epson 1640 for MF, my Oly 5050 never beats film. It's very handy to shoot color indoors but not for "fine art" b/w printing.
And for me there seems no available but still satisfying camera on the market. I guess that many rf users like me would like to own the M8, but.....
But hey, I cannot wait to see the new Fuji folder!

Wallace

sorry for bad english

 

[slm]

If anything, it's the opposite. There probably has never been a better time to shoot film. There are still lots of film choices (just look at Freestyle), and the equipment has never been so affordable. I bought 2 enlargers in the last 2 years each for $20.00 CAD. Each time, there was a box of chemicals and misc. stuff thrown in, so you could say the enlargers were free, and I paid for the box of stuff !

I have a selection of rangefinders (all fixed lens ones, but they're all great) that at most I paid $20.00, and at the least $0.50. My Nikkor 50mm enlarger lens was $35.00

All items that cost people hundreds just a short while ago. And lets face it, film is just plain fun.

 

[gb hill]

With Kodak introducing the new Ektar 100 film at Photokina which will be in stores in Oct-Nov. Also Freestyle introducing two new B&W films available Jan 2009, Arista Premium manufactured in the USA by a major film maker....Kodak? Also Legacy Pro a new film being made in Japan, probably Fuji. I don't see film going away any time soon. I think films survival is in archival. From what I have read It cost thousands of $$"s to store a Hollywood movie in digital compared to just hundreds of $$'s per year for film. They have also found that tiny bits of data is lost with time.

 

[Pherdinand]

on one hand, the labs do a lousy job developing my (colour) film. I skipped getting prints and bought a scanner instead, to eliminate one step, but still - even the film development is sometimes less than perfect.
But, on the other hand, the "fall of film" allowed me to pick up some quite serious medium format gear, and also forced me to develop BW myself, which turned out to be a great thing.
Lately a few shops in the town started to carry film developing chemicals - again.

 

[Ronald_H]

Well, I see a definite shift towards digital, even at the advanced amateur to pro level. I might add I live in the Netherlands. Small country, densly populated. I can get a low end dSLR from maybe 10 decent stores within cycling distance. Being close to Germany, Belgium and Britain means literally hundreds of shops that will ship one within a day. Just to illustrate that it is ridiculously easy to get photgraphic equipment here.

As for analog:

My favourite shop does not have any darkroom supplies anymore. Last time I visited (last week) they did not even stock film. And the display cabinet with Leica stuff has disappeared as well. They do list film and Leica on their website though.

The only pro lab nearby has stopped doing E6. The quality of their B/W processing has dropped to such an abysmal level that I started doing it myself.

Another shop does stock some darkroom supplies (stuff like D76, some B/W papers) and can order stuff on short notice. But some of the staff admit that their knowledge is quite limited. They sent me home with the wrong type of fixer for example.

Yet another shop had a neat pile of out of date film on the counter recently. But at least they do still do stock fresh film in a few flavours. But for how long?

The HEMA department store (known for decades to offer good and affordable photographic services in my country) has stopped selling their rebranded slide film and B/W. Pity, because it was good stuff for little money. But they still offer developing and printing for all kinds of film, E6, C41 and B/W. Even rollfilm! But for how long?

Although I am not a professional, I do take on assignments. Digital is so easy and so fast. Instant feedback on your lighting, hundreds of shots in one session, the flexibility of .RAW capture for white balance and exposure. No grain, hardly any noise, colorfull and sharp... you get it.

But I never could manage the 'look' of real B/W with my digital shots. And that old Nikon FM was such an intuitive joy to use, that now most of my fun shooting is film. I'm still on that learning curve and I see a long and rewarding road ahead of me. That keeps the hobby interesting. I expect the situation for film and chemicals to get not much worse really. Everyone is digital by now, but there still is a market for analogue, happily catered for by a few specialists. Hopefully it will remain so during my lifetime...

 

[tmfabian]

while digital is certainly a necessity for shot timelines, film is still commercially viable. I know of one major national company who is now refusing to hire photographers unless they shoot 4x5 chromes and friends of mine down south still work with art directors who prefer work done with 4x5 chromes.
Digital is here to stay, and is very good at what it does, however film still has it's place and will be around for a at lest some time to come.

in my opinion, there are fields that should and often times must be shot digitally. Of course the obvious is photojournalism with the interwebs and all the need for instant news. Another that I personally feel is great for digital is portraiture(i'm probably gonna get shot for saying that.) Portraiture is great for digital...you can double check to make sure expression is good, no eyes closed, and if you were thinking of slapping on a special effects filter over that expensive piece of glass attached to your camera...why not just leave it off and add the filter later... preserving the quality of that expensive glass.

I have friends that shoot weddings on film and market themselves towards a group of people who want that little something extra special in the hand crafted unique department, however who can argue that digital is wonderful for weddings (from a business standpoint.) you can now shoot 1000's of pictures if you want to and you don't have to worry about the cost of film or developing later.

I still shoot film for many things and I shoot digital for many things. Most times I shoot both just to have a backup for the digital shots in case of file corruption. I doubt I will ever completely switch to digital only...for me it's all about redundancy, and having film backups to digital shots sets my mind at ease (i don't like having all my eggs in one basket so to speak.) Of course, I also really enjoy my time in the darkroom, printing for me is kind of like taking a hot shower...it's relaxing and enjoyable, sitting behind a computer monitor and tweaking files till the cows come home always feels like work to me.

 

[kuzano]

Film?? Just 35mm or other.....

Film?? Just 35mm or other.....

According to some recent information I have seen, Large Format increased by 15% last year. I buy and sell quite a bit on eBay. Have you seen the price rise on Large Format equipment. It's incredible. I bought a few LF cameras 3-4 years ago on eBay and recently sold most of them off on eBay. Made very good profits.

I don't think film is going anywhere. It will likely settle down into the most purchased emulsions, but I think a lot of people who are advanced hobbyists are turning back from digital. The hours spent post processing are just not readily available to many.

 

[ClaremontPhoto]

Here, in my part of Portugal, film is already scarce to non-existent. But mail order is a very viable option.

Film developing and scanning (C41) is still available, although the minilab owners tell me that when the machine needs an expensive repair they won't bother as I'm just about the last remaining client. That will mean mail order processing.

With the internet and reliable postal service there seem to be annoyances ahead, perhaps expense, but no crises.

Fuji, ilford, and Kodak are showing commitment to film, Rollei and Lomo have their own branded film already. It's only a matter of time before we hear of Leica Classic, Voigtlander Original, and Zeiss Perfection; all with optional pre-paid mailers for D+P.

 

[peter_n]

I shoot 99% black and white so it is film for me for the forseeable future. I've recently invested in a film panoramic camera and I'm looking for an enlarger for the prints. I have no interest in the RD1/M8 but if a full-frame dRF comes along I will probably buy it after a proving interval, just for color snapshots if nothing else.

The other thing is that I work in computers and the last thing I want from my hobby is more work in computers.

 

[shimo-kitasnap]

it will be just another art/hobby supply. Arista already is making what is essentially HP5+ and Arista-76, which is the same as d-76.

 

[Harry Lime]

The continuation of film production is dependent on the availability of functional and reliable analog cameras. These cameras also have to priced so that a broad section of the population can afford them. A $5,000 Leica or Linhof is not on the radar of the average consumer.

No more functional or affordable cameras, equals no more film sales.

Imagine the situation 10 years from now. Will your Nikon F still work and if it doesn't how will you get it serviced?

Ultimately this is what will make or break those of use who want to continue to use film.

I will also toss the in availability of high quality and reasonably priced film scanners. If we can't transform our analog images in to digital data, we are in trouble. In this day and age you can't distribute, if you can't get your material on the internet or to printing services.

Apparently Nikon is about to end the production of the 5000 and 9000 scanners. This is very bad news. The next best thing to a Nikon 9000ED is a Imacon starting at $8,000. If you have to rent a scanner or go to a lab, you are looking at +$50 PER scan. Economically that is a problem.

 

[GeneW]

The latest digital sensors in the higher end Canon and Nikon DSLRs are getting to be so good that there's certainly the possibility that by the time film gets to be harder to find, it'll be a non-issue, as in 'why bother with it any more?'

Gene

 

[Bill Pierce]

My concern is with the brightness range that digital can capture and successfully deliver to a printed image without undue noise in the shadows or blank highlights. It's complicated, and things are slowly getting better for digital photographers. But, right now, Tri-X is still better. And for street photographers, newsies and the rest of the world that may not always have a chance to bracket or do some intelligent metering, where that range can pay off as exposure latitude, that edge that film has can save the day every once in awhile. I'm sure the situation will improve with digital, but I sure wish it would hurry up.

Bill

 

[photogdave]

To answer your questions more directly:
I have felt the pinch probably less than others. Here in Vancouver we are fortunate to still have a number of camera stores stocking a wide variety of films and a number of pro labs still offering full service processing and printing. I get the feeling from reading on this forum that we have a proportionately high numbers of shops and services compared to other major cities.
Certainly film and developing costs have risen but it's still not expensive.
I have not really taken any steps to prepare for the filmless future as I agree with many here that I will always be able to get film in my lifetime. I am trying to take advantage of whatever good analog deals come along. Wish I had room for a darkroom!
Digital will NOT do the job for me if it comes to that. I have nothing against digital, it's that I just prefer creating photos, not files, and like many others here I prefer the pleasures of hands-on versus sitting in front of a computer. Not to mention that digital rangefinders are too expensive for me right now.

 

[Joe]

I haven't felt any pinch. In fact I just tried Efke 25, which is newly available to me. Chemicals are cheap and plentiful. I have my own darkroom. I'm not worried.

 

[rolly]

Well it's interesting that some people like this or that film, some like MF or LF or 35 or big old Nikon/Canon DSLRs. There's plenty of things in the world to shoot and the world fascinates us in differing ways. I shot pictures most of my life mainly on color film, for fun. Three years ago, by accident really, a friend showed me how to use his Leica loaded with BW and it was as if I was seeing photography anew. A new project-- shooting with Leica and BW.

There seems lots more to explore-- so I have layed up lots of film, bought a back-up body, identified reliable merchants and repair people. Leica film cameras seem like they will be around quite a while. I don't foresee switching to digital, beyond a little pocket digicam for fun stuff, other than using the film-to-scan method lots of us use-- no plans to buy an M9. I like doing this, and I think the mechanics of it can be covered for a few decades at least. Maybe one problem will be having to switch from Agfa APX to something else if that film should vanish. I'd rather learn the intricacies of shooting Kodak or Ilford than get sidetracked into a digital camera system.

 

[kevin m]

My concern is with the brightness range that digital can capture and successfully deliver to a printed image without undue noise in the shadows or blank highlights.

Not only that, but in overall tonality, too, B&W film still tops digital capture. I'd love to just be done with film, but every time I shoot a roll of BW400CN, I remember why I put up with the aggravation. 🙂