When they no longer make film...

wgerrard said:
Point taken, Chris, and I certainly don't want to be seen as anti-film. It's a preference, like digital, but I have a very hard time understanding people who seem emotionally invested in the success or failure of either.
Click to expand...

Yep. I got that Bill, which is why I replied to your post, and not some of the others. I am, however "emotionally" invested in the continuation of film as a medium. I've put in an entire lifetime of learning (well, 50 years - I developed my first film in 1958 (do the math.)) with film. I understand it on an intuitive level.

But I've also studied digital - Bruce Frasier (rip) is my digi-god. I understand both film and digital on a molecular level, but I prefer to "snap away" with film rather than digital. But I do it both ways, with abandon. The thing I like about film is that I get something physical out of it. If I were a young person, I might consider a digital file more worthy. But I just don't. "Sorry."

wgerrard said:
My assessment, though, is probably gloomier than yours.

The only digital I use these days is a Ricoh GX200, 'cause it's so small. I just put it on full automatic and snap away. That's what I think digital is for.
Click to expand...

I'm very intrigued with small, high quality cameras like the EP-1, GF-1, M9, etc., but I think I'll wait a generation or two. Having been an early adopter for a long time, I'm finally out of money, so I need to be frugal.

There will be an ideal digital camera, I know, but it just hasn't been made yet. There are dozen of ideal film cameras and lenses, so, for now, that's what I use.

ps, every time I pick up my D100 digital camera, I get the "this is a great camera" feeling, even though it's many generations old. Will digital cameras ever reach a steady state? If/when they do, that'll be the time to go that way.
 
Does anyone realistically think they will stop making film anywhere in the medium term at least? it seems to me to be more likely that they will continue to make it - it just will be much more expensive with less choice due to the smaller market. Where there is a niche - there is a market for someone!
 
peterm1 said:
Does anyone realistically think they will stop making film anywhere in the medium term at least? it seems to me to be more likely that they will continue to make it - it just will be much more expensive with less choice due to the smaller market. Where there is a niche - there is a market for someone!
Click to expand...

Not in the medium term, for sure. And as you say, it'll get more expensive. But then, so does electricity and other essential services.

Hell, I'm a chemist - and I understand colloids. But you film mavens better be prepared to pay through the teeth if I need to make film for y'all.

So be sure and support those companies I mentioned that were developing a film market for the future. Hint, I am sending off a decent order (through Freestyle) to Fotokemica this weekend.

I dunno - do they observe weekends in Croatia?
 
Peter, the problem is that 35mm film as we know it is not a simple product to produce, and will be difficult and very expensive to make profitably on a small scale. I think film is going to get difficult to get and prohibitively expensive for most folks much more quickly than people think.

The example I give is process film. There are still a lot of small newspaper presses out there that desperately wanted to keep printing without the expense, which many couldn't afford, of going to CTP (Computer to Plate). The film based process involves shooting a physical photo of each newspaper page and using that negative to burn the plate that goes on the press. So, there was a good sized market for process film. But Fuji was the only film maker still producing process film, and they stopped production over a year ago. Once that happened, there was a two year supply of the product in their warehouses, which was quickly snapped up by all these small newspaper presses.

The result for our small newspaper group has been to idle our two presses. We now send everything by ftp to a larger newspaper group that has the CTP equipment and pay them to print our newspapers.

Nobody stepped into a market with demand. Fuji told us at our state convention two years ago that it was simply not profitable to produce the film anymore, regardless of the demand (and a lot of publishers tried to change their minds).
 
Pickett Wilson said:
... Fuji told us at our state convention two years ago that it was simply not profitable to produce the film anymore, regardless of the demand (and a lot of publishers tried to change their minds).
Click to expand...

Then why are they still doing it two years later? Do you suppose that a Japanese firm has no conception of how capitalism works?

I'd submit that they have discovered a rate of return that satisfies their "stockholders" with their current products.

Watch out if I become a major supplier. I'm damn expensive!
 
They are not still doing it. Fuji stopped production over a year ago. CTP is a digital process that doesn't use film.

What I am saying is that there is a tipping point when the same thing will happen with consumer film. And its disappearance won't be a long, slow decline like many people think.
 
Last edited:
Pickett Wilson said:
They are not still doing it. Fuji stopped production over a year ago. CTP is a digital process that doesn't use film.

What I am saying is that there is a tipping point when the same thing will happen with consumer film. And its disappearance won't be a long, slow decline like many people think.
Click to expand...

I completely see and understand your point, and i think your argument is an incredibly valid one, but what about other precedents, like APS film? It has been dying for nearly a decade now. If I am not mistaken, there are only two types of APS still available, one fuji and one kodak, both color. Heck, you can still get one or two types of 127 film. I think we will see the day where a roll of tri-x 35mm costs 15 bucks before we see the day that the film market disappears very rapidly. By the time either of those things happen though, I think sensors will be good enough that few people will miss it, kind of like 8 tracks and VHS tapes.
 
Merkin, in my heart, I hope it never happens (just placed another film order with Freestyle today). But you don't have to be very good at reading tealeaves to see where things are headed.

As for APS, like a lot of other things related to film, we don't know what is actual current production and how much is coming from existing stockpiles of the film.
 
When they stopped making Daguerreotypes it was the end of photography.
When they stopped making colloidion wet plates it was the end of photography.
When George Eastman made film it was the end of photography.
When they stop making film I at least shall still be a photographer.

Can we stop this whining about film.
Are you photographers or are you mice!

Hawkeye
 
Last edited:
SH*T!....now I'll have to go DIGITAL!
Dave.
3954827319_85a7717126.jpg
 
I think some company somewhere will always be making film. I'm counting on Adox Fotoimpex to always supply me with CHS 25 and some day APX 100. And Kodak and Fuji should be around for a while as well. If they only produce Velvia, Provia and Portra, that's fine by me as well.
 
"I think some company somewhere will always be making film."

O.K. Assume that is so. How much more expensive would film have to get before we quit using it? Not much, actually.

Say the cheapest we could buy 36 exposures of 400 speed black and white film were just $10. How much film would most of us actually shoot? I know in my case it would be very little. I suspect that would be the case for most folks who now enjoy using old film cameras. How many people would buy old film cameras on Ebay to shoot $10 a roll film?

It's glib to say that someone will always make film. But if few people can or will buy it at the price they have to sell it, they aren't going to make film for long.
 
Having tried colloidion wet plates in the past, I have no clue how they got such nice prints back in the day. It's a messy, difficult process that is almost impossible to keep dust and uneven coating problems away. Got to admire those old time photographers.
 
Merkin said:
IMHO, by the time no one is making film anymore, digital sensors will be so good that practically no one would want to bother with film any more.
Click to expand...

There are currently a few things film does better than digital. I guess the question is, how long will it take for digital to surpass film in those aspects?

One is sensor size. You can buy an 8x10 sheet if film. For the digital equivalent, I assure you there is no such thing as an 8x10 image sensor. It would cost a million dollars. Technology would have to progress beyond silicon wafers before 8x10 sensors appear.

Regarding full frame, the up-front cost of digital is ~ $2000. The cost of a roll of velvia is, what, $20? FF digital will have to come down quite a bit before it matches the cheapness of film.

Another aspect is ruggedness. You have to keep a digital camera within a certain temperature range for it to operate properly. With film, you have a wider range, especially if you have a mechanical camera. Not sure how long it will take for digital to match that.

Yet another aspect is the capability of zero-power operation. You can expose a frame of film for six months if you wanted to, without changing batteries or keeping it plugged in. Maybe someone will invent a digital sensor that's powered by the light hitting it, but that's probably many decades away.

I don't know, do technological advances usually result in things that are inferior in some respects? The only one I can think of (not that I've researched it much) is the old Victrola. A crank operated record player needed zero power! However, electric audio technologies caught on, and nobody bemoans the fact that we can't crank our ipods.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom