bmattock
Veteran
Walgreens had some terrific sales on Studio 35, their repackaged Agfa Vista, right before they quit carrying it, which was slightly before Agfa stopped making film. Funny how that works.
wgerrard
Veteran
I gotta start looking at the ads in the Sunday paper instead of tossing them. I can see a Walgreen's from my kitchen window, and a CVS is just down the street.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
I bought all of the Studio 35 I could find in Roch. I may still have some left (gotta check the beer, er, film, fridge), plus I have some Shur-Fine (Ferrania) 200 left. Thank the deities the most colour stock I still have is Kodachrome, including two rolls of K25.
Mcary
Well-known
While cruising the net, I found this page (from a fellow Dutchman, in English) that very thoroughly explains why film should be around for years to come.
The guys at Gandolfi will love this, but I'm a bit sad with my Leicas and 3200 dpi scanner
Nonetheless, its a very good read and it proves the existence rights of film!
WOW an M6 with a 35mm Summicron can produce higher quality images then then a 300D with a crappy consumer zoom!
Sorry but not really impressed.
Some how I think the results would be very different if the DLSR used was a 5D or even one of the current generation of APS-C bodies and the lens used was a prime.
Ohh and for the test to truly be apples vs apples a drum scanner needs to be used to digitize the film.
Last edited:
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
Well thank you for your kind answer. I'm very interested to read that your scale stops at Leica M6 vs Canon 5D. With my scale, a Leica is at the beginning, LF is at the end. Now read the comparison again and see what i meant.
Oh, and a drum scanner is beside the point when all shots were made on the same film and developed the same way, while all were scanned with the same scanner. The apples are apples already.
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
You're so right Bill. That's why I wrote film should be around for years to come. Fact is, it probably won't be.
NickTrop
Veteran
Disagree with those who say film will die. Color film, perhaps... Do you really think the arrival of digital impacted people who process and print (or scan) Tri-X dropped their film cameras and said, "Ooooh... I don't have to go shaking my Jobo tank anymore, there's this new technology called "digital"..." Apparently, there's enough of those folks to keep the 3 major manufacturers - Fuji, Ilford, and Kodak still producing multiple lines of black and white film product in both 135 and 120 "roll film". Film has, for the most, part ceased being a consumer product and took that hit years ago at this point. All film will be like roll film and black and white - around, you can't get it at a consumer retailer or drug store, but you can get it and with not too much difficulty. On-line, pro shops... etc. I have no worries in the regard whatsoever. One of the big three may go but at least one will survive well into the future to fill the demand of the amateur, fine arts, and pro market. As far as price - as always, they will try to find the "sweet spot". Price too high? Less demand, lower overall revenue. Manufacturers will not price themselves out of the market even if there's only one left.
bmattock
Veteran
Gotcha. My bad, thought you meant it would be. Yes, given that it is still superior to digital in many ways, it 'should be' but unfortunately, consumers make the market and consumers don't want film.
arseniii
Well-known
As far as Toronto is concerned, film is still being bought here quite a lot I'd say. I talked with Downtown Camera manager for several times this summer and he said that film is sold on profitable level. Two weeks ago I went there to refill my stock of Tri-X and there were none in stock, SOLD OUT!
bmattock
Veteran
Quite possible. The real questions are where the floor is located and if we've reached it yet. I'm not sure there is much more than speculation possible at this point, except that based on film sales numbers. For Kodak at least, they continue to decline. Ilford is seeing a bump, they say. Fuji, we don't know. If we see sales start to level off at some point, then perhaps an estimate can be made.
When I originally started ticking people off by saying that 'film is dead', I gave color slide film less than two years, color print film about two years, and B&W film about a decade. I was off by a bit; both color print and color slide film have lasted about three years since I said that (as I recall).
However, most who said I was nuts (and evil and mean) now say that yes, slide film is going down for the last time; some admit that color print film is also going to die out. Most agree that B&W is the last remnant of film photography. Whether it has the ability to remain in the market as a viable product for the long haul is a question I am not sure anyone can really answer.
bmattock
Veteran
My grocery store was out of the cereal I like yesterday. It has nothing to do with sales of cereal, that brand of cereal, or the general availability of cereal. Just a random anecdote. Same for local availability of film at retail counters.
Turtle
Veteran
if film ends up dead in general terms but alive enough to supply the niche market then I will be happy because I will be in that niche. It does not matter whether the average consumer wants it or not because there are plenty of 'cottage industries' out there and if film is another one then so be it.
Ilford's bump could have been caused by other suppliers folding as bill says, but which have done so in the last 12 months? Agfa was a while back (and is now kind back). Forte went down about 2 years back, but would that really have accounted for the change as users of forte film were few and far between.
Sales of specialist film cameras have rocketed lately. Ask Mike walker how many 5x4-8x10s he has on order. There is a certain upsurge in interest for sure, but it remains to be seen how significant this will be in the grand scheme. I don't feel that negative about the monochrome market because so many people love original silver prints and although the market is now small, how much of a market would be required to maintain the last company standing? If Kodak sinks its no great loss as Ilford materials are great and although slightly different, nobody could complain they cannot work with them. MGWT is IMO one the the finest papers ever made - period. I just spent some time in London with a top printer and my jaw was on the floor at some prints he was making.
There is another market too: Archives. The printer I went to see was busy printing Brandt, Berry, Haas all for the various archives and trustees. Other printers seem to spend a lot of time doing the same. I am not suggesting the market for monochrome materials is big - it is tiny - but it may well remain stable for some time. I don't want to change to digital just yet and I am sure other like me are in the same position and like me get thru a fair amount of film and paper.
Ilford's bump could have been caused by other suppliers folding as bill says, but which have done so in the last 12 months? Agfa was a while back (and is now kind back). Forte went down about 2 years back, but would that really have accounted for the change as users of forte film were few and far between.
Sales of specialist film cameras have rocketed lately. Ask Mike walker how many 5x4-8x10s he has on order. There is a certain upsurge in interest for sure, but it remains to be seen how significant this will be in the grand scheme. I don't feel that negative about the monochrome market because so many people love original silver prints and although the market is now small, how much of a market would be required to maintain the last company standing? If Kodak sinks its no great loss as Ilford materials are great and although slightly different, nobody could complain they cannot work with them. MGWT is IMO one the the finest papers ever made - period. I just spent some time in London with a top printer and my jaw was on the floor at some prints he was making.
There is another market too: Archives. The printer I went to see was busy printing Brandt, Berry, Haas all for the various archives and trustees. Other printers seem to spend a lot of time doing the same. I am not suggesting the market for monochrome materials is big - it is tiny - but it may well remain stable for some time. I don't want to change to digital just yet and I am sure other like me are in the same position and like me get thru a fair amount of film and paper.
emraphoto
Veteran
i wouldn't read to far into that. after speaking with a few outlets it is my understanding that the kodak supply line in Canada is a pain in the arse to say the least. "unpredictable and unreliable" was the common thread.
i wish it was otherwise, trust me.
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
In the end, the future of film won't be determined by you and me, but by accountants and stock holders, who have no particular interest in how many LF cameras are on order. There is a tipping point beyond which a company like Kodak or Fuji will not continue to make film, even if they are still selling some. Kodak was still selling B&W paper before they stopped producing it.
Mcary
Well-known
I never said anything about a scale I simple meant that when making a comparison between 35mm film and digital, equipment of similar if not equal quality should be used.
Example M6 vs M9, F100 vs D700 or EOS-1 vs 1DsmrkIII mounting the same lens.
Same thing with MF film vs digital; same body same lens, simply change backs from film to digital, again eliminating or reducing as many variables as possible.
I see the test on the link you post as being about as scientific as shooting a roll of Tri-X with my Bronica SQ and a roll of HP-5 with a Holga and using that to come to the conclusion that Tri-X is better then HP-5.
Gradskater
Well-known
I know color film is going to eventually get harder to find, but around here (Boston), there doesn't seem to be a shortage at any CVS or Walgreens. Not all of them will still process the film, but I would guess that 75% of the stores will.
Also, am I the only person who actually prefers color film to color digital images?
Also, am I the only person who actually prefers color film to color digital images?
Lilserenity
Well-known
I'm sure not by a long shot, I much prefer colour film results, there's just something about it, particularly colour neg actually. I don't know what it is, but any time I look at some Portra or Reala prints I just smile. There's a certain warmth or appearance I don't see in digital pictures.
It could be a placebo effect thing, but I'm pretty sure it's not. It's one of the big reasons why I have a great deal of respect for digital technology but does nothing for me.
Vicky
Last edited: