| Author |
Message |
    
WernerJB
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, April 30, 2006 - 05:03 am: | 
|
Hi everybody, I hope you do not consider this new thread off-topic.
For quite a while now I have been watching the ebay photo/camera section and I have the impression that classic cameras are really selling out in the most literal sense of the words one can think of, as more and more junk and garbage ("collectors' items", as if those collectors were imbeciles or psychos) is being offered, usually advertised as "found in the attic" or "reappeared during a clean-up of the cellar". When I use my RFs out in the wild I cannot help feeling I am the only one doing so, as everybody else, while very pathetically praising the old Hi-Matics and stuff, uses a pixelcam instead and would never again touch or even USE one of those, as if this was obscene or weird.
All this boils down to one single question: (when) will 35mm be off?
But there is a whole buch of closely related points. How do you rate the future of 35mm film and equipment: will it survive or vanish? Will it sooner than later be considered a minority interest or even be banned from the scene? Will it be possible one day that slides projectors are replaced by beamers? All this reminds me of the fate of 8mm film which was instantly superceded by a so-called demand for video which became antiquated not a very long time ago when a more elaborated way of electronic storage of data was pushily introduced by interest groups.
How do you read the situation? |
Roy Randall
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, April 30, 2006 - 05:46 am: |
|
Hi Werner.
The future situation depends on us! If sufficient people continue to buy film stock, manufacturers somewhere will continue to produce it. Just as photography didn't kill traditional oil on canvas so I doubt that electronics will finish silver halide. There's nothing like the profit motive to ensure supplies of anything. The major crunch will come when new investment in production and processing equipment is required.
But don't comdemn digital out of hand, I use it regularly, to obtain images of the mechanical camera I'm currently repairing!
Roy. |
charlie
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, April 30, 2006 - 07:39 am: |
|
I think 35mm film will be supported by enough existing P&S cameras to keep it viable for a long time. 120 and other sizes I'm not so confident. |
rick
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, April 30, 2006 - 09:33 am: |
|
i'm not real optimistic. with asian and east european sources, i expect to be able to get film for as long as i need it, and developing chemistry can be made profitably in small runs so that's probably okay. but film is imploding at a MUCH faster rate than had been anticipated by people like eastman kodak, who are (1) in a better position than you and i to read the market trends and (2) in a position to accelerate the implosion if their economics so dictate.
there are still applications for color print 35mm, especially in disposables, which were still growing last i heard; and carl zeiss have enough confidence to be launching new lens lines for existing 35mm manual focus mounts. but look at some precedents: vinyl records, apple computers, glass plate negatives.... they have merits over their more ascendant alternatives, and a dedicated following, but the force of the marketplace overwhelms them, small market share becomes microscopic, and it doesn't pay to manufacture the stuff to support them. you can still play your old records but you can't find new ones because there isn't enough of a critical mass of buyers to make it viable. unlike glass plates, 35mm film has to be made in substantial volume in order to make it at all, and at some point the bottom will fall out. i don't think anyone knows when that will be, but i think within 10 years we'll be reading our film labels in chinese and croatian. |
Roy Randall
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, April 30, 2006 - 10:30 am: |
|
I agree with Rick. But E-Bay has altered the way some things can be marketed. When it was a village economy the local wheelwright doubled as coffin maker. When the wheelwright business collapsed coffins started to be made in the towns and then distributed to the villages, this is market forces in operation. I live in west Wales and my nearest photo shop is nearly thirty miles away, or my keyboard away. Here in rural Wales, apparently it is E-Bay transactions that are keeping some village Post Offices open. The world was never more truly our oyster than now.
Roy. |
Glenn Middleton
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, April 30, 2006 - 06:51 pm: |
|
As a user and collector of vinyl records I have no problems adding new items to my collection. In fact it appears that the industry has risen above the mass market crap and is now providing the collector and other users of vinyl with a superior product. From this side of the pond the market looks vibrant and stable.
My feeling is film will go through a similar sorting out. Anyway I have no problems using Chinese or Croatian film, in fact the Chinese do some cracking infra-red stock. However I shall now be doing my bit to keep the reformed Ilford Company turning a profit. A recent press article indicates that in Japan, the price of secondhand semi professional film kit has risen steeply. This is due to a lack of items in the market place because people are not selling, and this is all due to Nikon's announcement that they were stopping production of these cameras.
Perhaps it would be no bad thing if Eastman Kodak did withdraw from film coating completely. This would allow the two or three companies that are producing far superior emulsions, to plan a long term future in the present climate. |
Michael Linn
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Sunday, April 30, 2006 - 08:19 pm: |
|
Film will be around for a while yet.
I can still get color and B&W film in 127 for my Yashica 44. So I am not worried about the future availability of more popular formats, such as 35mm. If the 35mm market craters down to say 10% of the historic level, that will still be a multi-million dollar market for someone.
And for Glenn, I hope that you have some good Scottish equipment such as a Sondek to play your excellent vinyl. |
Glenn Middleton
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, May 01, 2006 - 06:55 am: |
|
Michael,
Way, way off topic I know! I do have a Linn / LP21 based system, but my latest baby is Gyrodec Orbe / Musical Fidelity / Rega / B&W 802 based. I seem to collect tone-arms as I do cameras, the engineering and aesthetics appeal.
I agree with your reading of the future film market, I also feel that standards will increase in some of the coating plants as their sales to the serious amateur/ semi professional increase.
Is the surname a coincidence?
Glenn |
rick
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, May 01, 2006 - 09:33 am: |
|
Well, at any rate, I think I'm old enough not to have anything to worry about. Looking for a roll of 120 film in my fridge last night, I only found one... but was a bit surprised to find that I still have 2 rolls of 620 Verichrome Pan, about 10 rolls of 127 Efke and enough bulk 16mm stock to keep my minoltas running forever.... and a spool of regular-8 kodachrome that i don't recall buying. So I'm not too concerned.
Still, it has not escaped my notice that almost the only topic of discussion on the Internet Directory of Camera Collectors for the past week has been "Going Digital".... |
Henry
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, May 01, 2006 - 09:54 am: |
|
"Going digital" is inevitable. The economics of the medium alone will make it happen. And this is to say nothing of the convenience factor. But I don't see digital killing our old cameras. I see it helping them. Not at the present, but soon someone will invent a chip that "likes" our old lenses. This is actually the reason there hasn't been digital film already.
I see a bright future for our hobby. Imagine how much more we'll use our old cameras when we can have the same advantages of our digital nemesis. It'll happen. If not a bonafide company then one of use will do it, albeit in a one off design. I've seen the beginings of more than one of these projects on the net already.
There just needs to be a wider angled chip invented...it'll happen.
Henry |
charlie
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, May 01, 2006 - 10:30 am: |
|
My Retina will live on. |
Glenn Middleton
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, May 01, 2006 - 05:10 pm: |
|
Oops! Read LP 12 for LP21 - getting sloppy in my dotage.
I think you are correct in your thinking on digital inserts Henry, especially if they are kept basic ie electronic film and nothing else. I have my ideal specification and whilst I can do the engineering bits, my electronics ability stops at A1 and T90 circuitry.
As for the wider angled sensor; if optical designers had not been so successful at bringing out ultra wide angle zooms, they would be in use now.
On the film front; I am informed by an acquaintance who lives in the town, that the Efke coating line in Samobor Croatia has closed down. Sad really as the Samobor produced films were the last of the truly 40s/50s B & W emulsions - unless anybody knows of any other high silver content single layer poured emulsion lines. China perhaps? |
Will
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, May 01, 2006 - 06:14 pm: |
|
Hi all - It's great to see some analog hi-fi fans on the board! (but I'm not surprised :-))I too collect vinyl and am a collector of vintage 70's hi-fi. I and other enthusiasts had a big scare recently when Quantegy went bankrupt. They were a manufacturer of high quality analog tape. For awhile getting 1/4" tape for my reel to reel decks was difficult. A couple other tape manufacturers stepped in - one upstart, and one older company. I think the film industry will go thru the similar gyrations. Companies will fold and others will fill the void. Enthusiasts like us will keep film around.
Will |
Alex
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, May 02, 2006 - 04:20 am: |
|
The comparison with vinyl is interesting but I'm not sure its relevance can be pushed that far. Vinyl was always a playback-only medium rather than a recording medium, whereas film & digital are recording/playback media. Perhaps it's more appropriate to describe film as a record-once medium. Tape, however, was a recording and playback medium, and cassette tapes are still readily available, even in a world of hi-tech digital recording formats, albeit generally just in 90 minute size. Although I'd have to search it out, I can still get 127 film at affordable prices, and when was the last 127 film camera made? I'm therefore more optimistic about the continued availability of 135/120 film, and it is interesting to note the article in the recent issue of Amateur Photographer (6 May 2006) reporting a return by many dSLR owners to film, partly fuelled, I guess, by the discovery that high-quality film kit is available rather cheaply, and also because there's been a renaissance of interest in silver halide itself. Film is not going to return to its heyday in terms of buying and use, but perhaps more people are coming round to the idea that it's not 'either-or', it's whatever is fit for purpose. I will not be the only person on this forum who has a hefty dSLR in the inventory, and I use it when it makes the best sense (such as photographing sports), but I prefer film because I just like it. I like the different characteristics of different films. Photography is a recreation for me, not a living, so I can afford the time to take my time, and I think almost all photographers in the world are recreation photographers. My personal use of film has rocketed in the last couple of years, partly through the interest I've found in older and classic cameras (for which this forum must take a large part of the blame), and also because the easy availability of digital images for playing with on my computer has helped me think more about what I'm doing when I'm using film.
I have a friend who's notorious as a gadget freak. He must have the latest of everything, and he really does use the gadgets he buys, it's not mere faddism (he runs a photo studio). A couple of years ago, he went 'all-digital', and announced he'd given up film for ever. He'd use Photoshop to take images from his Nikon D70 and then manipulate them to monochrome then put 'grain' effect on them to make them look like they'd been taken using push-processed Tri-X. I'd tell him I just use Tri-X for that.... One day a few months ago, Ben discovered the old Zenith he started with decades ago, in a storage box. Intrigued, he put a roll of Tri-X through it just for old time's sake, and had it processed in Rodinal (I did that for him), and discovered he really preferred the effect of real Tri-X. A Nikon film camera followed to partner the D70, then a Fed from an eastern European Ebay seller, and I had to point out with a wry grin that 'digital-only' Ben now owned more film cameras than digital. That's the sort of thing that makes me optimistic. |
Steve Roberts
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, May 02, 2006 - 06:34 am: |
|
When cheap colour prints became widely available on the high street the word was that black and white would soon be no more. Thirty years later and b/w now has a very healthy and, indeed, elitist following.
Steve |
Ezio
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, May 02, 2006 - 01:57 pm: |
|
And incidentally, not only there still are people doing target shooting and hunting with bow and arrows, but there is a whole industry supporting them. You want a left-handed hunting bow and arrows to put down a kodiak bear or an elephant? Just order from your catalogue. |
Michael Linn
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, May 02, 2006 - 07:11 pm: |
|
For my friend Glenn-
As you may have surmised by my spelling of "color" some of us Linns left Ayreshire many years ago!
For those who use black and white film, play vinyl records, and hunt with bows and arrows, I would say to you that I understand that is not always the end result but the EXPERIENCE which is most important.
Mike |
Glenn Middleton
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, May 02, 2006 - 07:33 pm: |
|
Mike,
Spot on!
Glenn |
charlie
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Wednesday, May 03, 2006 - 06:12 pm: |
|
Great thread, interesting views. I hope the coffin reference isn't significant. |
Olympfix
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Saturday, May 06, 2006 - 06:24 pm: |
|
Gee, Rick, where will you get your std8 Kodachrome processed if you ever use it?? The other B&w is Ok, but Kodachrome is obsolete, sadly. Of course film will always be available for the mechanical cameras which are taken on expeditions where no batteries are available/ rechargeable/too cold/ too hot/too wet/"I won't take my digital there..."/I'll get great shots on my Olympus Trip, and it won't matter if it gets damaged cos I've got another six at home.... Battery dependence is the bane of expeditioners. The Mk 1 thimb is much more reliable!!! . P.S I haven't taken a film photo for a year now, except for a series of 2 hour exposures one night in very cold temps. Bruce. Australia |
WernerJB
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, May 08, 2006 - 10:40 am: |
|
Thank you so far for your ideas and opinion on the matter. Now I know for sure I am not alone, W. |
Brian
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Monday, May 15, 2006 - 09:44 am: |
|
Neat thread with some great info! Well, I may be self defeating. I take the photograph with either my Autocord in 120 or Contaflex III or PenEE in 35mm then have them developed at a nearby pro lab. I then scan the negs,review, process with photoshop, send the files to the same pro lab and have prints and enlargements made.
This has reduced my costs by a signifigant amount over the last couple of years. The quality of prints from scanners such as my Epson 4870 miss very little from emulsion prints. If I feel it does, I have the neg to go back to.
When I find a digital that will match the Autocord and vintage Zeiss Ikon Tessar eqipped units for under $1K I will consider going digital. Just for those who think I'm a nut, I own a late model Sony 6MP camera.
Also, a large part of the world is still considered " developing " with a lack of computer resources and funds to purchase these . Film is still their principle means of capturing image. It doesn't take a lot to set up a rudimentary dark room, and get passable images.
I don't think we'll have to look very far for a roll or cartridge for the next 25 years.
Oh, I also have a huge collection of Vinyl records, I listen to on a Marantz tube amp. But the rack also includes an MP3 player with 6G worth of CD's and downloaded tunes. I hunt deer with bow, black powder( primitive, no scope for me! ) and modern rifle. |
Rocktron
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, May 16, 2006 - 07:21 am: |
|
Roy Randall quote: "The major crunch will come when new investment in production and processing equipment is required."
This is one of my concerns - manufacturers of photo processing laboraties may also discontinue their machines.
Okay, there must be thousands of photo processing labs in the UK for people who don't do their own processing, but what happens when the equipment is in need of major maintenance. The spares will just not be available. Also, companies may not see a return on their investment and close their film processing departments.
Further, whereas research and development will continue for digital imaging, film development technology may grind to a halt.
I was looking into buying a used Minolta Dynax 7 35mm SLR, but I am thinking it may be wiser to spend the money on a Nikon D70s D-SLR.
The fact is that a 6 megapixel digital camera can produce prints in 6x4 size (the most popular size), that is of no discernable difference to that produced by a 35mm camera.
I agree that film and digital imaging should coexist happily side-by-side but what future proofing is there ? I guess it is pure speculation, but how many years down the line can we expect to get 35mm processing done in photo labs ?
Minolta selling out to Sony, and Nikon announcing that they will only make a profesional 35mm camera will only serve to turn away those who want to purchase 35mm equipment.
I have a Minolta 700Si with zoom lenses and want to keep my equipment, but I need some reassurance that I will be able to get my films developed for the forseeable future. |
WernerJB
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, May 16, 2006 - 12:07 pm: |
|
All the nice people's postings have taught me a lot, this is to say not so very suddenly it dawned on me that no matter from what angle you look at any historical major technical breakthrough or technological development (not considering whether someone justifiably calls it "necessary", "inevitable", etc. or not): one day (in the case of state-of-the-art pixelcams: sooner than later) markets will be saturated again and/or no longer be profitable. Then out of the blue, as always, there will be the notorious call for a "demand" for something more modern, and all those glamorous high resolution pixelcams will inescapably end up going down the drain like their predecessors. I am not saying that everybody has to turn their back on progress, but I am worried by the insatiable speed by which this accelerating pace of modern "needs" or "must haves" is eradicating people's identity and experience.
For me, as long as I can choose, it is 35mm. If for some reason I am given the advice to switch I'll quit.
Would anybody please kindly tell me who or what "Minolta" is or was? |
Glenn Middleton
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Tuesday, May 16, 2006 - 07:50 pm: |
|
It is a fact of life that the world progresses at an accelerating pace, but to state that it is eradicating ones identity and experience is not how I perceive the situation. Also it is pointless worrying about the inevitable, Life's too short! In the 45 years that I have been looking at dealers secondhand shelves, I have always seen plenty of part-ex bargains. We have always traded up, those of us who trade via the secondhand cabinet inevitably getting the better bargain.
My 22 year old son is studying photography, and the D-SLR/Mac/Printer combination is as familiar to him as the Camera/Film/Darkroom was to me at his age. The difference being that his portfolio is approx 3 times larger than mine was at his age. Without doubt, a proper digital set up is the best way to learn and practise photography. I have used film for most of my professional career and for my personal use I still do. However the darkroom is gone, replaced by a scanner and professional A3+ printer. I can easily hire in digital equipment, should a commission require digital files for publication. I cannot justify spending £20K on a digital back for personal use, even if I could afford it, because film still produces saleable images.
It will not matter if film/emulsion research halts today, present day films are good enough for amateur use as they are. As a hobby, very few of use make full use of present day emulsion characteristics - so why alter what is adequate.
As to the demise of the mini-lab:In the UK somebody will be able to turn a profit from developing film for many years to come. You may have to post your film to Unst, but it will get developed. However why get hot and bothered, purchase a developing tank, chemicals, changing bag and a scanner/PC/printer. You will produce better results than any High Street mini-lab does. |
Cliff
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, June 09, 2006 - 10:42 pm: |
|
We're lucky in having a group of people like this. film isn't going to be gone overnight, and film chemistry will hang on too as long as there are people around that are interest in the craft of photography and not necessarily the result. These individuals are more interested in getting their hands wet, and when they reach the highlight of the perfect print they recognize satisfaction. Photography is a craft with almost limitless boundaries; you never really reach the end of things.
Digital photography is just a way of arriving at a print without getting your hand wet. I don't mean to berate digital work, some of it is beautiful, but from film to print has so many facets, how could one even imagine it going. |
Ed
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, July 06, 2006 - 01:04 pm: |
|
If 135 film is in danger what about me, my film cameras all take 126 film!
I work at a high street photography shop and the number of film cameras we sell has collapsed faster than even we expected. The last analogue camera in the shop, some fixed lens Canon thing, has sat alone and unsold in a display cabinet for months attracting not the slightest interest despite being reduced to £15.99. Several years ago the range of film we stocked was drastically cut as much of it sat on the shelves until it expired and had to be sold half price or thrown away.
However the number of analogue cameras in circulation still excedes the number of digitals ever produced. The amount of D&P we get has declined too, but not so dramatically. With so many analogue cameras still in circulation I don't think 135 is going to be going anywhere soon, but I do think it is going to become a minority interest. I expect the range of films available will decline and the service time will decrease too.
I don't know how long it will take til 135 reaches the point 126 is at but it will surely come; just think how many million 126 cameras were produced. Now one can only buy 200 ISO colour negative film from a choice of two manufacturers, usually only online, in 126 format. It makes me sad to think that someday I might no longer be able to use my Kodak Instamatic 500. |
Glenn Middleton
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Thursday, July 06, 2006 - 09:24 pm: |
|
35mm will never go down the road that 126,110 or rapid has done, for the simple reason that there are so many high end cameras in use. Cosina is actually stepping up production because discerning Asian photographers are now demanding high quality 35mm kit.
Even if 35mm becomes a minority or cult interest the turnover still represents a very large amount of money. My local processor - Peak Imaging of Sheffield - has just recently completely renewed all it's processing lines. Hardly the action of a company that thinks film is dead.
As for range of film available; world production capacity is too large at the moment, my personal hope is that Kodak get out of the film coating market - they certainly do not want to support their UK/EU customer base, closing the EU Kodachrome processing lab and the UK photo chemicals factory. Let's hope the likes of Ilford and other small specialised coaters/film producers in China etc, weather the period of rationalisation. If they do, then 35mm/120 film has a continuing future. These companies deserve to survive because they care about their customers and not just about their bottom line. |
Michael Linn
Rating: N/A
Votes: 0 (Vote!) | | Posted on Friday, July 07, 2006 - 08:21 pm: |
|
This has been an interesting thread which seems to have acquired a life of it's own.
I personally plan to use film and digital cameras for the rest of my life, however long that may be, and I am not worried about the continued availability of either method. Film in 35mm and 120 format will be around long after I am gone. I can still get 127 film for my Yashica 44 so what could you be worried about?
If the demand for 35mm film drops to 4 or 5 percent of it's recent market, someone will still be making a product for a market far larger than Eastman Kodak's market for film a hundred years ago.
No one except you yourself has the power to force you away from film. |
|
