True and it generally means these products are get alive by love and not pure profit.
charjohncarter
Veteran
Yes, that is really important. We don't want to be cubby-holed into just one look.
kb244
Well-known
I don't agree too much on the whole "forces you to think" adage, since that seems to have been regurgitated since the dawn of digital. In a nutshell, I feel like it's still around or making a 'comeback' for two reasons
1) Film being a medium of art allows it to survive. Companies like Ilford have stated that as long as film is considered a medium of art, they will continue to produce film/paper.
2) Nostalgia. Considering that the only generation I know of that has been completely digital has been the millennial and younger, there's still quite a few of us that least remember shooting film.
PS: My professor doesn't miss film one bit, and thinks I need therapy for still wanting to do it, claiming I do such good work with digital, why bother with film.
kb244
Well-known
Here in Grand Rapids, Michigan, all but one of the stores have gotten rid of their in house processors.
The one over on Alpine still has a Noristu processor, but it doesn't cost $15, but rather only $4 and you can get the negatives back within 2 hours.
Though last year that would have been $1.75, so I'm reluctant to shoot color now because of that as $4 is steep for me to just fire off on some expired color rolls I have.
Now E6 or B&W, yea most definitely would have to send that out.
Though for B&W we have three rooms like this :
The one above mainly for 35mm printing, the other one having the enlargers for 4x5, as well as the film development materials for 35/120/220/4x5, and the third room is mostly a bunch of dark closest and storage cabinets.
Skiff
Well-known
Perfect for doing color as well.
Just add a Jobo CPA / CPP or CPE film/paper processor and you can perfectly develop E6 and C41 film (and BW reversal film) and RA-4 paper for about "next to nothing" costs.
If all enlargers are only BW, just add one color enlarger, too. Used ones in excellent condition are very cheap.
kb244
Well-known
The enlargers over in the 4x5 room (i.e.: the only ones large enough to hold a 4x5 tray) all have color heads, mostly besler with independent control for 3 or 4 color knobs.
The ones in the 35mm room are all fitted with 35mm neg trays (but looks like it can go up to 6x7/6x6), with your usual condenser head and a contrast filter tray.
This is of course for the school (GRCC), so I doubt they would have very little interest in adding color chemistry/processors or dealing with color paper/film.
We do have a new safelight on order since the one hanging from the ceiling is dim as hell, and we just have the big red bulb on the wall as a work-around until the new unit comes in.
We're just using Sprint chemistry for the film and paper development, though there are a crapload of expired d76, ilfosol, hc-110, etc sitting around that they plan on chucking, though I had them keep all the un-cracked bottles of HC-110 since they haven't crystalized yet and I like using HC-110 for one-shot development which is how I did the P3200 roll (expired 2004) yesterday, since with the sprint chemistry the dev time at 68F would have been 17.5 minutes instead of 10.5 in HC-110 Dil. B.
Edit:
The 4x5 Side
Ironically this semester I'm in both PO126 (Film processing, combined with the 4x5 View camera class) and in PO230 Advanced Digital Image Processing.
Skiff
Well-known
Color (and BW) reversal films are the best photographic learning tools: Because of
- the "what you see it was you get" principle; it is the most direct and straight form of photography
- correct exposure is needed for optimal results: you get a direct feedback of your exposure skills
- it is fast and cheap: only developing of the films is needed, then you already have a perfect finished picture which can be looked at and can be analysed concerning composition, exposure, sharpness etc. = direct feedback for the students.
No (time and cost consuming) prints or scans are needed.
In my photographic education reversal film played a major role. Learned so much by using it! I am very thankful for that.
I know of several universities here which also use color reversal film in their education of photography students parallel to BW.
Teaching both is the best strategy in my opinion.
Last edited:
kb244
Well-known
Except in this case, the school only provides the chemistry (and the larger equipment), the students are responsible for procuring the film and paper, and camera/etc (though the 4x5 people just check out the calumet view cameras and accessories from the department).
Many of my classmates were already having a hard enough time procuring a 35mm camera, that I've loaned out a couple of mine such as the Argus C3, and the Kodak Pony 135 (and normally an SLR would be required, but due to the difficulty since last year, they've been allowing anything that had full manual control, hence my decision to go with a rangefinder).
I'm not sure what KCAD (Kendall College of Art and Design) across the street is using, but I know their Photo 101 class is basically 35mm B&W photography, where as our Photo 101 is strictly digital without printing (printing doesn't happen until P102/106 onward, and film is only in PO126, view camera processing, and alternative processing).
The usual recommendation for paper/film has been Ilford HP5+/FP4+ or Kodak TriX/Tmax 100/400, and paper just being Ilford multigrade RC in glossy (though I pointed out if anyone is really scraping by, the Arista EDU paper and film is a little cheaper and works well enough for the purpose).
I'm of course getting away with using my old batches of Kodak and Ilford RC paper that I've used for years... but I recently had to buy some fresh Ilford film, because to my dismay the 100 feet bulk roll of Tri-X I had was already exposed (as in had pictures on the entire roll, probably from a press/bulk camera).
Edit
I might be off the rest of the day as this just happened behind me as I'm attending the digital lab right now.
What happened?
kb244
Well-known
Apparently someone had a running start to a suicide. (shoe print on the ledge)
mich rassena
Well-known
I agree with you. My comments about film photography continuing to be a niche were directed against the assertion that any kind of comeback was taking place.
benlees
Well-known
Nothing wrong with niche. That's where I reside in most things.
kb244
Well-known
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
I'm sure they know their audience.
We have affordable film, problem is people suspect it when it's not expensive enough. Get some Foma or Kentmere. You can shoot a load of it for little money. I've been shooting Agfa Precisa since Ektachrome was axed, so you can even get affordable slide film if you look for it.
kb244
Well-known
I still need to get around to shooting the couple rolls of Foma Retropan 320 I have, I just been reluctant to load it up until I know how well it works in Sprint developer (as opposed to doing one shot with hc-110).
There's the Arista EDU brand that's pretty inexpensive, but not sure how it would be compared to foam/kentmere.
zuiko85
Veteran
In a nutshell, I feel like it's still around or making a 'comeback' for two reasons
1) Film being a medium of art allows it to survive. Companies like Ilford have stated that as long as film is considered a medium of art, they will continue to produce film/paper.
2) Nostalgia. Considering that the only generation I know of that has been completely digital has been the millennial and younger, there's still quite a few of us that least remember shooting film.
.
There is one more reason some folks like film.
Because that is what the cameras they like take.
I cannot open the back of my OM-1 and place a digital sensor where the film goes. I like my OM-1. It has;
A big bright 1-10 screen (plain matte with grid lines).
A shutter speed dial that I use to select shutter speed.
A aperture ring that I use to select the aperture.
A focusing ring that I use to focus on the big bright screen.
If it's battery dies it doesn't just sit there being a useless lump, I go right on taking pictures.
These are great features I cannot get or afford on a digital camera.
It also feels great in the hands, like a precision machine.
I've never felt that in any digital SLR I've ever picked up.
To be fair, I have not picked up either a Fuji X-1 or a Leica digital M.
Ah, but that goes to the "..or afford.." part of a previous sentence.
Full disclosure, I have a DSLR, a prehistoric Olympus E-410, purchased new but discontinued in 2009. I was stupid and left the camera on the shelf over this summer and fall and the OLY battery swelled up. I was able to finally extract the battery but it was finished. My cheap off brand battery is still working........for now. The little plastic tab catches that close the card door finally broke but I can hold it closed with masking tape. I have noticed just a few days ago the display screen is starting to act up, like a loose connection or something. When it fully dies I'll pull the lens off (not sure why, it's worth almost nothing) and toss the body in the trash. Hey, that is almost 8 years, not bad for a consumer DSLR. My two OM-1 bodies are from 1974 and 1989, both used, both serviced once, both working (but the 74 has a dead meter).
Ah well.
Disclaimer. This is the personal preference on one person.
It may not reflect the preference of any other person or indeed the preference of the vast majority of people. That is why it is personal.
HHPhoto
Well-known
Hi,
it looks like film is not only starting to make a comeback in the major film markets like Europe, Japan, China, SE Asia and North America, but also in some small international niche markets like the United Arab Emirates:
http://www.thenational.ae/arts-life...tography-making-a-comeback-in-the-digital-age
Cheers, Jan
it looks like film is not only starting to make a comeback in the major film markets like Europe, Japan, China, SE Asia and North America, but also in some small international niche markets like the United Arab Emirates:
http://www.thenational.ae/arts-life...tography-making-a-comeback-in-the-digital-age
Cheers, Jan