Nearly a year from film shortage threat

Maybe I was way to concerned of how I started to love film and rumors saying it

will be a dead medium. As rumor turned out to be really rumors, it seems like

film production is still going on. 8 months ago I was very desperate to wish

this type of medium will survive and I still shoot film over digital. I keep

going back and forth in BHphotovideo.com hanging out in the film area very much

and found out only a few selections has been removed from the item list. I don't

know which was removed, but it feels like film will be here like it always been.

 

Any film freaks want to join my talk?

Film gives you a certain amount of freedom. I shoot both film and digital and of course continue to buy film in 35mm and medium format. Of course, naturally I don't shoot as much since I'm more careful with it.

 

Despite all the naysayers concerned that film would be eliminated, there is sufficient interest and demand to continue using it. I just don't "waste" it on things that have no importance to me, I've got digital for that. Sometimes I pre-shoot something in digital and then do it on film. Sometimes even clients prefer film and negatives over digital capture and I accomodate them. There are some die-hard wedding/portrait photographers who have a full-time continued commitment to film - we have to credit them for keeping film a viable product.

 

I do believe the demise of film has far surpassed the "one-year rumor" .. but we all know how rumors affect reality. It is clear consumers want both mediums of capture; however, trying to react to rumors has caused a lot of people to enter photography from a digital-only perspective. I believe if anyone is really interested in photography they should experience both mediums and determine their own destiny, rather than having manufactures determine it for us. Well, got to order more film, down to 30 rolls in my fridge.

 

My favorites include Fuji Reala, Astia; Kodak Elitechrome, E100s, and the Portra line for people shots.

I am doing just that. I tried to use film back in the '80s and failed to learn everything or put it all together. Having shot dSLRs for the past, 5 years? I am now moving into Medium Format and film. I'm enjoying the education it gives me and the patience I may actually learn some day.

 

I currently own an RB67 and just purchased a 645AFD - both Mamiya. No preference there really, just used to the acronyms really. I think that's been one hinderance to Medium Format, every vendor has 19 styles of the same model.

 

I am beginning to understand the range, depth, and pop that many old-timers speak of on here and other photo sites. I've come close to getting that 'pop' from digital but it just isn't the same.

Hi, I'm one of those die-hard 100% film wedding photographers, and I'll tell you, one year

is at least one year off. It was about 2-3 years ago I was Really freaking, Ilford was

'reorganizing', Kodak stopped B&W paper production (like, gone) and Agfa vaporized,

poof. I seriously thought that tops, I had maybe 10-12 years of producing work like I have

been, which was my best guess for how long I could get the best materials. Then, lo and

behold, things started to come around.

 

Maybe it was the Kodak Professional surveys I kept taking where they would ask me how

much Digital I was using, (20, 40, 60, 80%+) (Zero!) and when I was expecting to go 100%

(never) and how many rolls of film did I use a month (the survey had a ridiculous number

as the high point, like 50+ rolls, sheesh, I did that in a week 15 years ago at the

newspaper).

 

The point is that somebody somewhere was listening to my wee tiny hollering. Ilford

reorganized into a better company, Kodak still makes the finest wedding film around, and

even though Rodinal is harder to get my supply is lasting. Yeah, I'm a little bummed at the

loss of EPR in 120 but Don't get me started on the new TMY-2, a fine fine film. At least

the Kodachrome 25 brick in my freezer is aging well.

 

My advice is to get some of the emulsions that Will Not Last and shoot them NOW, while

you have a chance to actually see what they do. You can always try to emulate them later

in PS (Alienskin) but if you don't know what EPR120 looks like pushed 1/3 stop then you'll

never, ever know. Good luck.

I see a consolidation in the film production business. Kodak killed off HIE infrared early this year which was a terrible blow for film shooters....digital IR just does not look the same and never will.

But there is good news in that Kodak brought out a new TMAX 400. I never liked that film but plan on testing the new stuff. Ilford is chugging along, but the prices have risen steeply in the U.S., which probably a result of the falling dollar more than anything.

The good news is that FOMA is producing a range of budget black and white films in a variety of formats. Fuji seems very committed to film as well.

So cross your fingers and remember the more you shoot, the more they'll make!

I'm just an amateur. I record family events, my kids growing up, vacations and outings with the family; and in the past when I used to have more time, I would drive down to Big Sur or other nearby places and enjoy taking landscape shots. For that kind of work, it doesn't make any sense for me to move to digital. In fact, after having scanned 50 year old Kodachrome that my father took, I really appreciate the archival properties of film. I also like the look... a great dynamic range for recording high contrast scenes without blowing out highlights and yet at the same time maintaining shadow detail. To me, it is somewhat ironic that digital technology, in the form of scanners and scanning software, really brings out the potential of film. I think as long as there are people like us who enjoy film for their personal use, and those professionals that buck the trend and continue to use film, there hopefully will be enough demand for film for Fuji and Kodak to produce it. However, I wouldn't be surprised if, as the years go by, there is less and less product to choose from. We might even come full circle to the old days when there was only one kind of color reversal film from Kodak...Kodacolor.

Finally found it. The Kodak survey from 19 SEPT 07 entitled "Koads Kurvey Shows that Professional Photographers Remain Users of Film"

 

In typical Kodak style, they seem to remain cautionary and not fully convinced yet concede that 68% of professional photographers prefer the results of film for certain applications; and that of the 9000 professionals they surveyed, at least 75% of them will continue to use film. Essentially, what they liked about film was what digital has not achieved, namely 1) superiority of capturing more information in medium & large format; 2)48% saying a "traditional photographic look" 3)45% attesting to capturing shadow and highlight detail; 4)42% reporting "wide exposure latitude" and 5)38% for film's archival storage.

 

I would speculate that these numbers are under-reported and the population of professional film photographers which the survey is sampling, does not include film-only pros, but only those who are film-and-digital pros; those who already have a interest in digital capture because they are computer-savy, perhaps younger in their career path and more affected by digital marketing.

 

Another interesting facet of Kodak's survey was that even among this hybrid group of film-and-digital pros, photographers who consider themselves "artists" consider film an important tool which is not replaced by digital.

 

Such an observation is in direct contrast to why these pros even bother with digital photography - namely, increasing revenue and reducing costs.

 

I serously doubt that pros process all of their own film, maybe some do when they are pursuing an artistic effect, but even more would rely upon their chosen lab to tweak the photos as needed in bulk, freeing them to concentrate on taking pictures and pursuing clients, not in being chained to their darkroom for countless hours after a shooting session.

 

Bottom line: it's a "film-and-digital" environment; each has benefits and costs. That translates into pros needing both types of cameras and remaining with one foot in the film world while digital attempts to stabalize the market. Artists, of course, notwithstanding will remain a niche market and while digital cameras come and go, they most likely will not dispose of a working film camera (perhaps they will add another medium or large format for future projects).

 

I'm fairly convinced, Kodak is confused by their own survey results which conflicted with their own stated strategic marketing and the almost extinction of good film lines. Apparently Kodak is NOW listening to pro photographers with a more concerned ear. Let's hope so. I'm loving what Kodak and Fuji are doing with films and, would feel either's demise from film production to be a sad day for anyone who appreciates the look of film for its' "pop, fiz and sizzle" .. those inherent qualities that digital capture struggles so hard to achieve. Its' not simply which medium is better or cheaper ... it's about having the flexibility to match the tool to the job and task at hand, and supporting those corporations who remain committed to their customers.

I quote the infamous Chicken Little who said: "the sky is falling, the sky is falling"

I have been storing up on my film as well. I have two rolls of black and white infrared when I was mistakenly sent the black and white when I wanted the color IR slide film but learned that it was done. I wish I ordered more when I ordered a roll a year before but it was 22 dollars from adorama. Hind site is 20/20. I get all my film from unique phot in Fairfield, N.J. The cheapest prices, I have found, on prosumer film. I bought a roll of fuji color roll of 400 speed 24 exposures for a $1.85 a roll. They also have b&w chemicals and paper for doing it yourself dark room. I have bought alot of film from them and will continue to do so.

Film makes me disciplined like digital never could. For example the other day I was shooting surfing, I stood on the rocks for 3 hours manually focusing on every wave that came through, if it was not right for any reason I didn't press the shutter. Too much spray, bad turn, not barrelling enough, not a good surfer etc

 

After 3 hours I went home with 6 frames. Of those 6 all of them are gold without even seeing them I konw they will be awesome shots. A fellow next to me must have taken 500 frames in 1 hour 15 frames a wave and they all would have been binned.

 

Film to me is a discipline that many new digital photogs who have never shot film would not have the abillity to use. It is an art and a passion but more so it is a vision. Learning to see what is in the frame that detracts from your subject rather than just spraying and praying.

 

With film you make photos with digital you take photos.

Call me crazy or old fashioned but when people start thinking cell phone photos are 'really good stuff'I know I'm doing the right thing by still supporting film.

I started hanging out here in about 2003. At that time, a guy named Jay (a leicadentist, some of you will remember him) confidently decreed that 120 film would be extinct in five years time. I rest my case.

Im more concerned about getting decent pro labs to process the films the way you want then film itself going under. I suspect over time 1 hour labs will dissapear when quality control and underusage destroys any profit running the labs. And at that time we will probably go back to the send out service where you wait a week or so for your film to get done.

<i> After 3 hours I went home with 6 frames. Of those 6 all of them are gold without even seeing them I konw they will be awesome shots. A fellow next to me must have taken 500 frames in 1 hour 15 frames a wave and they all would have been binned.</i><P>

Cool. I never realized that, in addition to making all your photos better, film also gives you psychic powers. Without even seeing any of the final shots, you already know yours are all awesome and his are all crap. What kind of film you use? I gotta get me some of that . . .

Mike that film your chasing is called experience and knowledge. I been shooting surfing for 10 years, I know a good shot when I take it I don't have to look at the back of a camera to see if it will be good or not.

 

The dude firing relentlessly next to me will have garbage photos, the angle and light he was shooting into was no different to mine standing shoulder to shoulder you can generally tell what the result will be.

 

Maybe if you knew the sport your shooting inside and out, I've been surfing for 25 years and shooting it professionally for 10 you too might then know if you got a great shot or not.

 

With your response its clear you don't know the sport your shooting too well.

<i>The dude firing relentlessly next to me will have garbage photos, the angle and light he was shooting into was no different to mine standing shoulder to shoulder you can generally tell what the result will be. </i><P>

I agree, with knowledge and experience, you'll have a pretty good idea what you're getting. It still strikes me as rather odd that you know your photos will be awesome, but the guy standing right next to, shooting with the same angle and the same light, will get crap photos because he's shooting a lot more frames with digital.<P>

<i>With your response its clear you don't know the sport your shooting too well. </i><P>

I think it's clear that I don't take claims about film "making" you a better shooter very seriously, especially when someone makes that claim based on what they say someone else's photos will be like rather than comparing actual results.

Call me crazy or old fashioned but when someone needs to take 500 exposures (sorry,captures) of the same thing then I know I'm doing the right thing still supporting film.

If now there are people who think film needs 'supporting' then its end might indeed be near.

If one 'supports' their country,family, or church does that mean the end is near?Z,you digital guys really crack me up.

Right, Dr. Z. The digital is supported by fat and greedy electronic industries. Every year they are reporting of its record high profits (that's what your digital technology has been created for). So far the film is supported by dedicated artists and photographers. I don't know how many of us left, but we're still here...

I am currently indulging in a Visual Arts degree majoring in photography. That's all the out-of-focus stuff, photographs of inane objects etc etc. (think Uta Barth, Nan Goldin, Jeff Wall type stuff) I started this career path due to working with a photographer as a make-up artist. I have been fortunate enough to assist him when using large format cameras and whilst my first SLR was digital, I was taught to treat digital as just another tool in my photographic repertoire. I spend all my hard earned cash (when possible) on different film types and working exclusively in MF makes me slow down & think about what I want to achieve. Here in South Australia, it is extremely difficult to locate tungsten film, forget Agfa B & W film which I wld have loved to try. Even darkroom products are limited. Trying to purchase fibre-based papers is a nightmare. We are stuck with Ilford RC papers and chemicals and that's it! The photographic wholesalers are turning more and more to digital 'cause that's where the money lies!

I find myself agreeing with Darryn though I thought Mike's reply was a bit tongue-in-cheek sarcastic. I could be wrong.

 

That being said I had the opportunity to work some sporting events this past year and it was quite hilarious to see rows and rows of photographers with Brand New Canon 1D MKIII firing at 10 frames a second - literally sounded like machine gun fire.

 

Shooting ice hockey for a local AHL team I found my shots were as good but I feel that I know the game of hockey more than some photographer that's just in it for the paycheck, has never touched the ice except for post game photos, and doesn't really care who wins or loses. Playing ice hockey, I understand how the game flows more so than a spectator.

 

IMO a good photographer will know, regardless of digital or film, that the shot was a good one or not. On my digital I turn off the review to save on power but I don't need that to know. Plus the screen is too small to see any detail.

 

Good luck and happy shooting!

Wow, so much supporters. Anymore?