Are you willing to let film die off? How do you really feel?

Started Aug 14, 2012 | Discussions
jack69 Forum Member • Posts: 92
Re: Are you willing to let film die of

PerL wrote:

PHOTOJOE55 wrote:

Keh, and other Camera Brokers are just about begging for our film cameras and other gear, but they are paying peanuts! For me, there is no question. I'm using the gear. Many people are demanding film. We've got people that have come in every year, to Document in Portraits, the growth and changes in their families and they want it done with film. They even ask to see the negatives on the light table!

But even if there was no demand for it, I would still shoot Film, even if it's a small percentage of our work. I think, if we all just forget about it, it will continue to fade away. I don't know who keeps those kind of records, but I want to keep Film alive.

If we don't shoot film, they will soon slow or halt production, and I'm sure the prices will quickly rise. I often wonder what Keh and the others are doing with the gear. Are they sending it to Japan? Any ideas?

I'd like to find out how many people are still shooting film. If not, will it bother you if film fades away completely? If you have a minute to spare, maybe you could voice your opinion. I know of a few that agree with me, but I'd like to hear from people actively shooting every day or at least every week. When Fuji took the full name Fujifilm, I thought that meant their commitment to the medium.

It would be tragic if film disappeared.

Tragic? Don't you think that you use a too strong term? Tragic to whom? to you? The photographic community moved on and embraced digital.

I have a full DSLR set and a few digicams, but also bought a Nikon F100 and a FE some months ago to shot film again.
--
http://dslr-video.com/blogmag/

ulto Forum Member • Posts: 68
Film will continue to be used for decades...

People will continue to shoot film for decades, younger generation do shoot film and and it will continue that way for a while.

The same way people are using bow and arrows not because it is better thant a gun, they use it because it is fun.

I have a full frame DSLR that no 35mm camera can compete with but I do enjoy using film! It feal great and give different images than digital.

trueview Regular Member • Posts: 180
Re: Are you willing to let film die off? How do you really feel?

If you look at my gallery, you will see a lot of file with no exit info, they are all film scans. I still have a fully functioning wet lab, and I have no intention to stop using film, especially B&W, although I also shoot digital. In my opinion, choosing between film or digital for a given subject has to do with the mood I want to obtain and/or the kind of print I want (silver based print or digital print)

As for the survival of film, B&W will almost certainly continue as it requires relatively small investment and it can be a valid business model for companies serving a niche market.

Color film is more uncertain. It requires much much bigger investment, thus it lends itself less to a niche market. A good chunk of the volume produced by color film producers was absorbed by the film industry. With that industry turning to digital technology, it will become more difficult to turn out a profit with color film.

pixseal
pixseal Veteran Member • Posts: 3,234
Re: Digital copies are easy

rattymouse wrote:

If you find photos on digital storage from 10-15 years ago, good luck trying to get those files back.

My oldest digital image files are just over 10 years old - back to my very first digital image. Somehow they made their way onto redundant 2TB HDDs! I have some DOC and TXT files dating back to 1986 (still readable) and they somehow found their way onto my windows 7 laptop!
--
-Dave
http://pixseal.com

 pixseal's gear list:pixseal's gear list
Canon EOS 7D Canon EOS Rebel SL1 Canon EOS 7D Mark II Canon EF-S 10-22mm f/3.5-4.5 USM Canon EF-S 17-55mm f/2.8 IS USM +18 more
OP PHOTOJOE55 Contributing Member • Posts: 527
Re: Are you willing to let film die of

I didn't say tragic, but I wouldn't exactly be happy. I still have the MAMIYA 645PRO with many accessories. At the time, the Meter Prism and Motor drive Grip were quite an advancement for a 645. I still also use my NIKON F4s and FM2 (that can work without any type of battery) but it's got the MD4 Motor Drive Grip too. I still like using the gear, and still get a call for the 645 FILM.

But one part of my post, I haven't seen an answer to. I'm in NEW YORK and the High Schools and Colleges are teaching with FILM. SHOOTING, PROCESSING, PRINTING. Can anyone say what their schools are teaching? This is Fact, in NEW YORK, in fact there's a big demand for the Pentax K1000 I know, I donated that part of my collection. You can call the schools, I kid you not! Also, Fujifilm only cut two popular films last week. As far as I know, they're still making every other film in their line.

Also, where is KEH and the other brokers selling their gear. I get their email everyday!

(nothing to do with this, but the only mail I get is Magazines, the Post office is near the end too)

 PHOTOJOE55's gear list:PHOTOJOE55's gear list
Nikon D700 Nikon D7100 Nikon D810 Panasonic G85 Panasonic GH5 +22 more
OP PHOTOJOE55 Contributing Member • Posts: 527
Re: Are you willing to let film die of

OH YEAH, When ever I get arrested they use film for the mug shot

 PHOTOJOE55's gear list:PHOTOJOE55's gear list
Nikon D700 Nikon D7100 Nikon D810 Panasonic G85 Panasonic GH5 +22 more
jack69 Forum Member • Posts: 92
Re: Are you willing to let film die of

PHOTOJOE55 wrote:

I didn't say tragic,

No you didn't.
I had reacted to PERL'S post, "It would be tragic if film disappeared."

but I wouldn't exactly be happy. I still have the MAMIYA 645PRO with many accessories. At the time, the Meter Prism and Motor drive Grip were quite an advancement for a 645. I still also use my NIKON F4s and FM2 (that can work without any type of battery) but it's got the MD4 Motor Drive Grip too. I still like using the gear, and still get a call for the 645 FILM.

But one part of my post, I haven't seen an answer to. I'm in NEW YORK and the High Schools and Colleges are teaching with FILM. SHOOTING, PROCESSING, PRINTING. Can anyone say what their schools are teaching? This is Fact, in NEW YORK, in fact there's a big demand for the Pentax K1000 I know, I donated that part of my collection. You can call the schools, I kid you not! Also, Fujifilm only cut two popular films last week. As far as I know, they're still making every other film in their line.

Also, where is KEH and the other brokers selling their gear. I get their email everyday!

(nothing to do with this, but the only mail I get is Magazines, the Post office is near the end too)

edu T Senior Member • Posts: 1,174
Are digital copies easy?

dherzstein wrote:

rattymouse wrote:

If you find photos on digital storage from 10-15 years ago, good luck trying to get those files back.

My oldest digital image files are just over 10 years old - back to my very first digital image. Somehow they made their way onto redundant 2TB HDDs! I have some DOC and TXT files dating back to 1986 (still readable) and they somehow found their way onto my windows 7 laptop!

That's because you've been constantly very diligent with your files for 26 years. But let's just suppose tonight you discover, inside a shoebox in the basement, a nice bunch of letters and poetry from 1986 that your late and beloved grandfather left recorded, unbeknownst to the family, on the removable media of choice back then… 5.25" floppy disks. THEN you'd need luck!

And that's only about the physical survival of the (already then) precarious magnetic medium and the present availability/connectivity of reading devices. You'd still need to worry about information encoding/formatting: hopefully your grandfather was writing using at least Word for DOS, not WordStar for CP/M or WordPerfect for Atari TOS.

Now, would this situation be worse than how your own posterity may yet have to cope with the current (2012) infestation of proprietary/partially encrypted (and sometimes sensor/model-specific) RAW formats?

(For a more convincing reading: http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/raw-flaw.shtml , 2005, is still very pertinent.)

 edu T's gear list:edu T's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F550 EXR
Faintandfuzzy Veteran Member • Posts: 3,328
Re: commonality

dannybgoode wrote:

I love digital. I think it is convenient, accessible and versatile. However, due to cost constraints I own an APS-C DSLR and to be fair for 99% of what I do its more than adequate.

However, I would like to dabble in FF and even medium format but to buy into such a digital system(s) is way, way beyond my budget and this is where film really comes in. A nice cheap Canon AE-1 and some Ilford film and I'm in FF heaven for just a few £. It would take an awful lot of shooting before I've spent as much on film and processing than I would on a nice FF digital camera - given how infrequently I would be using it.

Same goes for medium format - £20 for a nice condition Lubitel - plenty to get me started. Haven't seen a Phase 1 back for £20, not even on ebay.

I grabbed a Minolta X700 with 35, 50, 85 and 13d lens for approx $200. Slapped in some Ilford FP4 and voila...who says FF need be expensive. And it's nice pulling out a view camera that takes a photograph that puts a lot of digital gear 15 to 20 times the cost to shame.

Seeing as its been mentioned, I am a vinyl fan. If it is released on vinyl I will buy that over the CD any day, any week.

Same here. I could not even begin to count how many people have compared vinyl to CD at my house and prefer th LP.

The part that confuses me is why some people seem to get almost angry that film is still around. Comments like 'it can't die soon enough" are simply ridiculous. Why do they care what some people use? Are they insecure? Do they think being at the forefront of tech makes them more important?

I'll tell ya this...when I'm out in public with a huge DSLR, no one cares. Take out my Mamiya RB67 or 4x5 gear and a lot of eople come up and ask questions, tell me it's cool, etc. Let the odd narrowminded person here worship their Nikon D3...nobody real takes notice of them anyway.

Cheers

Danny B
--
Shoot lots...

http://www.dannybowerphotography.co.uk

 Faintandfuzzy's gear list:Faintandfuzzy's gear list
Canon PowerShot G3 Nikon Coolpix 950 Olympus E-10 Canon PowerShot SX150 IS Canon EOS D30 +10 more
Mako2011
Mako2011 Forum Pro • Posts: 23,405
Why

edu T wrote:

dherzstein wrote:

rattymouse wrote:

If you find photos on digital storage from 10-15 years ago, good luck trying to get those files back.

My oldest digital image files are just over 10 years old - back to my very first digital image. Somehow they made their way onto redundant 2TB HDDs! I have some DOC and TXT files dating back to 1986 (still readable) and they somehow found their way onto my windows 7 laptop!

That's because you've been constantly very diligent with your files for 26 years. But let's just suppose tonight you discover, inside a shoebox in the basement, a nice bunch of letters and poetry from 1986 that your late and beloved grandfather left recorded, unbeknownst to the family, on the removable media of choice back then… 5.25" floppy disks. THEN you'd need luck!

Why, there are a number of sites that do this and I can do it at work.

http://www.datarecoverymasters.com/floppydiskcopy.php

And that's only about the physical survival of the (already then) precarious magnetic medium and the present availability/connectivity of reading devices.

Very easy to retrieve still.

You'd still need to worry about information encoding/formatting: hopefully your grandfather was writing using at least Word for DOS, not WordStar for CP/M or WordPerfect for Atari TOS.

Not required as you can simply go at it with a hexadecimal editor or machine language compiler...yes?

Now, would this situation be worse than how your own posterity may yet have to cope with the current (2012) infestation of proprietary/partially encrypted (and sometimes sensor/model-specific) RAW formats?

I don't it a real issue as the standards have evolved and archive standards are for more usable now. Best way to preserve film...lock it away where few can see it.

I lost all my old photos in a flood....My digital work won't suffer from that...it's even fire proof.

Deleted1929 Forum Pro • Posts: 13,050
Read what you type before you post

You have a very simple mind. Hardly a technical person

My educational qualifications and work experience would say otherwise.

Occam's Razor is a guiding principle of science and it has been expressed as suggesting that the simplest solution is the one most likely to be correct. So presumably a technical person requires a simple mind.

You can take your hate and stuff it.

When you had finished typing this, did it occur to you at all to read it, as I get the impression you simply vomited out the first thing that wandered through, what I shall generously refer to as, your brain.

I don't like film, I never particularly did and I never will. As you buy the stuff it's just as well you don't share that viewpoint. I am, however, at a loss as to why you find it necessary to make such an extreme comment. Are people not allowed disagree with you ? Were you particularly badly spoiled as a child ? Or are you just one of the sorry excuses for human who like to type things online you'd never have the nerve to say to someone's face ?

-- hide signature --

StephenG

(unknown member) Forum Pro • Posts: 13,144
Re: Read what you type before you post

sjgcit wrote:

You have a very simple mind. Hardly a technical person

Keep believing that if it makes you feel better. There are no words available to express my contempt for the likes of you, people with less than zero class.

-- hide signature --

Help Fight Disease! http://folding.stanford.edu/English/HomePage
Please join and be part of the solution! Lives can be saved.

I fold under the name RattyM. > 77 Work units completed, BILLIONS of calculations done, all from a Dell laptop. Everyone can be part of the solution. You just have to get started.

(unknown member) Forum Pro • Posts: 13,144
Re: commonality

Mako2011 wrote:

Faintandfuzzy wrote:

rattymouse wrote:

sjgcit wrote:

Because the sooner film goes the sooner I can stop seeing drivel from people who romanticize film and see all sorts of magical qualities to it that just are not there.

It's dead. Digital works. It's easier, it's cleaner, it's faster, it's cheaper ( when you add those developing costs ) and it provides features that a film camera could not do.

Only the other day one of my older relatives was expressing how great it was that she could view all the photos of her extended family so easily on a simple digital photo frame. She could never do the same thing with film. People use their phones to take nice shots they'd never manage with film. They can send them to other people easily, they can share easily.

Film is nothing but a dead technology, and I'm a technical person. Sure, past technologies are interesting to me, but not for practical use. All things have a time. Film is dead, let it die. Embrace the future.

-- hide signature --

StephenG

You have a very simple mind. Hardly a technical person.

Today I bought 2 boxes of Fujifilm Reala and 2 boxes of Kodak Porta, both in 120 film size. I LOVE it. You can take your hate and stuff it.

His response is indeed that of someone narrow and simpleminded. Using his logic, painting and scetching are dead as well and those people need to "move on.". No point in engaging in debate with him as he is simply too narrowminded.

Why is it that folks on your side of the isle (honest question here) are so vitriol with their responses regards anyone voicing their opposition opinion here. It seems one sided and uncharacteristic but surprisingly a common thread among the proponents of film. I find it amazing in that regard. It's like a shared mind set. I wonder where that commonality originates. Any insight would be appreciated.......anyone?

What are you blind??

sjgcit wrote:

Because the sooner film goes the sooner I can stop seeing drivel from people > who romanticize film and see all sorts of magical qualities to it that just are not > there.

Comments like this are designed to inflame and incite.

-- hide signature --

Help Fight Disease! http://folding.stanford.edu/English/HomePage
Please join and be part of the solution! Lives can be saved.

I fold under the name RattyM. > 77 Work units completed, BILLIONS of calculations done, all from a Dell laptop. Everyone can be part of the solution. You just have to get started.

(unknown member) Forum Pro • Posts: 13,144
Re: Glad it's going

Please try not to confuse drooling morons with facts.

trueview wrote:

This is to say the least an uninformed statement. 1. The manufacturing of silicon chips uses up a lot of clean water. 2. Discarded cameras, especially lower range p&s populate by the millions waste fields in Africa. These devices are full of harmful products. Children roam the waste fields to pick up the elements in those objects which can be recycled, at their health expense, in order to make minute amounts of money. Film was not particularly environmental friendly (color a much bigger offender than B&W) but at least those who used it had to live with the environmental cost. In the digital age, we inflict the environmental cost of our hobby on those who couldn't even dream of indulging in such enjoyment. Hardly an improvement in my opinion.

InterestedParty wrote:

Digital photography certainly seems much more environmentally friendly. With ever increasing RoHS compliance and recycling it's hard to argue that digital cameras are an equal problem.

-- hide signature --

Help Fight Disease! http://folding.stanford.edu/English/HomePage
Please join and be part of the solution! Lives can be saved.

I fold under the name RattyM. > 77 Work units completed, BILLIONS of calculations done, all from a Dell laptop. Everyone can be part of the solution. You just have to get started.

Mako2011
Mako2011 Forum Pro • Posts: 23,405
Re: commonality

Faintandfuzzy wrote:

dannybgoode wrote:

I love digital. I think it is convenient, accessible and versatile. However, due to cost constraints I own an APS-C DSLR and to be fair for 99% of what I do its more than adequate.

However, I would like to dabble in FF and even medium format but to buy into such a digital system(s) is way, way beyond my budget and this is where film really comes in. A nice cheap Canon AE-1 and some Ilford film and I'm in FF heaven for just a few £. It would take an awful lot of shooting before I've spent as much on film and processing than I would on a nice FF digital camera - given how infrequently I would be using it.

Same goes for medium format - £20 for a nice condition Lubitel - plenty to get me started. Haven't seen a Phase 1 back for £20, not even on ebay.

I grabbed a Minolta X700 with 35, 50, 85 and 13d lens for approx $200. Slapped in some Ilford FP4 and voila...who says FF need be expensive. And it's nice pulling out a view camera that takes a photograph that puts a lot of digital gear 15 to 20 times the cost to shame.

And your exercise was very limiting. I took 1000 + pics last weekend and viewed them all in no time. What would that cost you.

The part that confuses me is why some people seem to get almost angry that film is still around.

Not as angry or verbally abusive as the few here seeing it the other way.

Comments like 'it can't die soon enough" are simply ridiculous.

Not as mean as the trolling comments or the "simple minded" remarks in an attempt to character assassinate.

Why do they care what some people use? Are they insecure? Do they think being at the forefront of tech makes them more important?

You should be able to easily answer that. Not being disrespectful but the irony in your question is hard not to notice.

I'll tell ya this...when I'm out in public with a huge DSLR, no one cares. Take out my Mamiya RB67 or 4x5 gear and a lot of eople come up and ask questions, tell me it's cool, etc.

Same when I see someone driving a model-T. It's nostalgic and interesting. Don't want to drive on far though...to inconvenient. It's still a beutiful thing and enjoyable conversation piece....the vast majority have rusted away though.

Let the odd narrowminded person here worship their Nikon D3...nobody real takes notice of them anyway.

There you go again with the anomisity. At least no one said....

" Let the odd narrowminded person here worship their Mamiya RB67...nobody real takes notice of them anyway other than to as an anomaly"

I don't actually think that but your tone is always so adversarial and neagtive that I wonder the cause. Good luck though....Not really possible to see your film examples here but I'm sure they might be nice.

Mako2011
Mako2011 Forum Pro • Posts: 23,405
Please note

rattymouse wrote:

What are you blind??

sjgcit wrote:

Because the sooner film goes the sooner I can stop seeing drivel from people > who romanticize film and see all sorts of magical qualities to it that just are not > there.

Comments like this are designed to inflame and incite.

His comment was a response to a character attack on his courage. I understand his response....it was demanded by Alanis I think

Mako2011
Mako2011 Forum Pro • Posts: 23,405
R you

rattymouse wrote:

sjgcit wrote:

You have a very simple mind. Hardly a technical person

Keep believing that if it makes you feel better. There are no words available to express my contempt for the likes of you, people with less than zero class.

Are you responding to Faintandfuzzy who made the attack or are you speaking to sjgcit who's character was first called into question. It's not clear here in your post.

Mako2011
Mako2011 Forum Pro • Posts: 23,405
few

PHOTOJOE55 wrote:

I didn't say tragic, but I wouldn't exactly be happy. I still have the MAMIYA 645PRO with many accessories. At the time, the Meter Prism and Motor drive Grip were quite an advancement for a 645. I still also use my NIKON F4s and FM2 (that can work without any type of battery) but it's got the MD4 Motor Drive Grip too. I still like using the gear, and still get a call for the 645 FILM.

And that is absolutely a great set up and fine way to approach the work. Wish you the best.

But one part of my post, I haven't seen an answer to. I'm in NEW YORK and the High Schools and Colleges are teaching with FILM. SHOOTING, PROCESSING, PRINTING. Can anyone say what their schools are teaching? This is Fact, in NEW YORK, in fact there's a big demand for the Pentax K1000 I know, I donated that part of my collection. You can call the schools, I kid you not! Also, Fujifilm only cut two popular films last week. As far as I know, they're still making every other film in their line.

In my Area, city of 400,000 plus...it is very rare and only one art college I know touches on it. None of the high shcools do that I know of and only 2 brick and mortar stores left support it. When I got my D70...it was a much different story.

edu T Senior Member • Posts: 1,174
Are digital copies easy?

Mako2011 wrote:

edu T wrote:

dherzstein wrote:

rattymouse wrote:

If you find photos on digital storage from 10-15 years ago, good luck trying to get those files back.

My oldest digital image files are just over 10 years old - back to my very first digital image. Somehow they made their way onto redundant 2TB HDDs! I have some DOC and TXT files dating back to 1986 (still readable) and they somehow found their way onto my windows 7 laptop!

That's because you've been constantly very diligent with your files for 26 years. But let's just suppose tonight you discover, inside a shoebox in the basement, a nice bunch of letters and poetry from 1986 that your late and beloved grandfather left recorded, unbeknownst to the family, on the removable media of choice back then… 5.25" floppy disks. THEN you'd need luck!

Why, there are a number of sites that do this and I can do it at work.

http://www.datarecoverymasters.com/floppydiskcopy.php

And that's only about the physical survival of the (already then) precarious magnetic medium and the present availability/connectivity of reading devices.

Very easy to retrieve still.

You'd still need to worry about information encoding/formatting: hopefully your grandfather was writing using at least Word for DOS, not WordStar for CP/M or WordPerfect for Atari TOS.

Not required as you can simply go at it with a hexadecimal editor or machine language compiler...yes?

Now, would this situation be worse than how your own posterity may yet have to cope with the current (2012) infestation of proprietary/partially encrypted (and sometimes sensor/model-specific) RAW formats?

I don't it a real issue as the standards have evolved and archive standards are for more usable now. Best way to preserve film...lock it away where few can see it.

I lost all my old photos in a flood....My digital work won't suffer from that...it's even fire proof.

That would be a leap of faith compared to "Please be aware that your floppy discs are very old now and that we therefore cannot guarantee that your old disks will be technically readable at all." ( http://www.datarecoverymasters.com/floppydiskcopy.php , a transcribing service.)

Anyway, you can see what I was talking about above was data preservation across biological --not technological-- generations.

 edu T's gear list:edu T's gear list
Fujifilm FinePix F550 EXR
Mako2011
Mako2011 Forum Pro • Posts: 23,405
Easy

edu T wrote:

That would be a leap of faith compared to "Please be aware that your floppy discs are very old now and that we therefore cannot guarantee that your old disks will be technically readable at all." ( http://www.datarecoverymasters.com/floppydiskcopy.php , a transcribing service.)

Yes there is always a risk but not an impossibility and if you take care of your floppy as well as your photos...most likely an easy recovery. The photos on them would be very small JPEGs or bitmaps after all.

Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum MMy threads