How Long Will Film Be Around?

I saw it on CNN this morning. All film supplies are now GONE, as you should know that all films go through New Orleans, and Katrina has taken care of that. The film import warehouse for USA, Canada, and Mexico was adjacent to the Superdome, which is also now history....Please send all LF equipment to me, and I will give you pennies on the dollar.

Hi Nicholas,

asking a question about the medium before plunging into a whole system is certainly understandable. But from the way you asked the question, I am assuming you value the quality of your final image for enlargement (? and maybe a few other things like camera movement ?). If that's the case, you have little choice but to go with a film LF if you are on a budget. So the conclusion is: just go out and get a LF and shoot film. The end of the world could come before the predicted lifetime of a film so I wouldn't spend my time worrying but have fun shooting meanwhile! Take care.

What is this FILM you speak of??? ;-)

Sorry people, I take back the question.

 

Nick

'I don't like to say it because I use 4x5 and 8x10 film (scanned and printed digitally) and plan to continue using it for the foreseeable future. But IMHO for someone your age who is planning a future in photography to become heavily involved in film as opposed to digital is foolish.'.........................................but then again you can get a 'bare bones' system for not a helluva lot of money, certainly nowhere what you'll invest in digital, you can learn exposure, lighting, you'll get a tremendous amount of experience and value out of shooting film and scan your best work.

 

You could get a fairly nice 4x5/lens/tripod/meter for approx. a grand, what's that compared to the cost of some of these Dig. camera/backs?.........................$5-$8K?................$10-$25K?

 

I just don't see how you can lose in terms of the now very small cash outlay for a 4x5 system and scanning film into the digital loops as opposed to the whole Magilla, they were having these debates about the demise of film in '95 Nick, some folks then were adamant that film would be gone in 5 yrs, that due date was 5 yrs ago, the price is right for film, why not get the film gear if that's what you want.

Its not film you have to worry about, its the chemicals needed to process it. Once they are gone, it wont matter how much film you have in the freezer.

My local photo school, the New England School of Photography in Boston, saw a drop in enrollment in the zone system workshop this past winter. Enrollment surged during the spring, however. So who knows?

 

FYI, I used non-lnear forecasting methods with parametric optimization to arrive at my forecast of October 17, 2047. I also accounted for leap years by assuming that a year is, on average, 365.25000000001 days long.

 

Robert

I was talking to a colour lab owner a few days back and he mentioned that ALL his professional customers are on digital 100%. They get their images on CD or other storage devices.

However, apart from professional photographers, there are others who are still on film. Plus if we also factor in the analogue camera population, film will still be around for quite some time. No doubt, film sales are falling but then new film markets are also being added. I would hazard a guess and say that film would still be around for another 15 years....

Let's consider the last question on drum scanning.<p>

Have you any idea of the file size for a quality 4x5 scan ?<p>

eg, a quality scan from my MF 645 neg is in the order of 250 MB, so now multiply that up for a 4x5 scan, and that gets you 1 Gb or more.<p> Which leads to the next question, what size computer do you have to process that file ?<p>

Let's assume you have solved that and have a top-of-the-line PC/Mac with as much RAM (2Gb or more) and clock speed (2GHz or more) as you can/can't afford.<p>

Then instead of getting drum scans done of your favorite negs, (those scans are not cheap and the dollars will soon mount up), read some of the reviews on the latest flat-bed scanners (for example Epson 4990), and you'll realise the latest flat-beds are more than sufficient, and will soon pay for a few drum scans.<p>

That's my 2 cents worth.<p>

And BTW, I suspect MF film will be around for a lot of years to come, though I'm not so sure of 35mm.

The permanent Solution of Film

Richard A. Garcia

 

When data solutions are compromised by current trends in magnetic storage, analog film seems to be the superior winner for long-term archiving. Magnetic solutions such as CD, DVD or Hard drive peripherals cannot compete in a market that is compacted by false advertising, which perpetuates data storage as the eternal solution for saving your precious photographs or hard earned images.

 

The life expectancy of magnetic storage is about five years, at which time it must be duplicated to sustain its magnetic tolerance. This is an impractical method of storage when negatives can be printed 100 years in the future with no loss of image content.

 

The immediacy of what digital provides, has in effect, circumvented the conventional method of picture taking, by allowing us another way to take photographs. The savings of processing film is not that practical when you must invest in a computer to see the images you took on your new digital camera. If you measure the cost of $2,000.00 in film and processing it would take an average individual shooting (4) rolls of film a week approximately (1) year to make up for the cost of a computer. In effect, your cash outlay doesn?t really return itself that quickly and when it does, your still stuck with paper and ink costs, which are currently astronomical. There is no free lunch for switching. Films resolution and ?bright white forgiveness? is what makes film different than digital. Film sees more comfortably the transitions that digital abruptly captures.

 

Years ago we used to complain about how video looked so crummy and film appeared so good. We adjusted ourselves to see the soft transitions of film and dislike the cold inert images of video. Video camera engineers strived to make the cameras more film friendly by offering the capture more film like.

 

The truth is that digital cameras, in the same effect, are nothing more than high contrast video stills. We can argue than film has already approached the resolution of film, but the underlying truth is that film is a superb medium that cannot be duplicated by digital capture. The chemistries reaction to capturing light cannot be cloned by CCD?s or conventional capture electronics. The race has been on to perfect the cells so that the truest ambiance of color and resolution can be imitated by what you see in real life.

 

Film does not possess the practical possibility of rendering life as we see it, for the rendition of films available only portray, through their chemistry, the results that we enjoy. Film is a philosophy, as practical as the human mind, discerning the fragments of life that inspire our intellectual senses. We had created a palette, that by the application of familiar use, we found the medium of our creativeness.

 

Digital synthesis does not provide these degrees of satisfaction. The manipulated image, will only Photoshop ourselves into something that approaches these incredible films.

We always try to outdo ourselves by doing the same thing fancier, quicker, but not necessarily better.

 

When one walks into an art museum, you see the greatest works ever created and perhaps never duplicated. These artists used a minimal amount of primary colors in which their palettes were born.

 

Today we offer hundreds if not thousands of pre-mixed colors, which stunt the artist from learning how to mix them to get the same result. Removing the individual from the application removes the science of it all. If we proceed into the future, glazed by our perfections we will never know the truth of its creative existence.

 

Just because a button is there, and when applied the effect is given, we feel we can spend more time creating the image, but in truth, the consequence is getting from point A to point B, almost unconscious.

 

We must be responsible for our endeavors as artist and approach the artistry as a practical and simple solution. Film is photography, because it was born so. We cannot re-invent the wheel. Unless you believe a BMW or Ferrari will change the distance from where you are traveling.

 

Digital has its place in science, because it is necessary. What makes photography so captivating is in the portrayal of the idea. We can change the common saw to a chain, but the definition of the conclusion remains the same.

 

You can say, if only Leonardo had a computer, what would he have done then.

 

Leonardo would have not abandoned his creative spirit, which traveled from brain to hand, or heart to head, which ever sufficed, for the mere explanation of the self-dependent human tool, known as the inner self.

 

I believe that science can put itself on a collision course with practical simplicity. It takes and idea which is transformed by the will, to endure with the tools of our century. It is our prerogative to chase these concepts with whatever tools are available to us. Others seeking to find something of importance in an image can translate the sterility of art.

 

We should never be offended by the conclusion of our thoughts. I for one understand the creative importance of the process. It is the ladder that one must stand on to permit the obstacles to become plastic, so that we may form them. The credentials of creative freedom are different to different people.

 

Film will never disappear because the results are part of our plotting. We must teach others the value of film by comparison and through the workshop.

 

Even if we move into a millennium of 3D Holographic capture, we will still scribe our benefits in art by the very nature of its simplicity. Picasso strived to draw as if a child, searching for the naﶥ vein of his perpetual drive.

 

 

 

<p>OH MY GOD! IT'S 31/05/2010... BEEN 5 YEARS!!! AND FILM IS STILL AROUND... JUST LIKE PAINT... IT NEVER GOES AWAY... FEEL FREE TO UPDATE...</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Its not film you have to worry about, its the chemicals needed to process it. Once they are gone, it wont matter how much film you have in the freezer.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>The formulae for developer and fixer are hardly a secret.</p>

<p>I seems that the digital revolution has made information itself (news, music, images and more) very inexpensive while the delivery systems vary in quality and price. The 'mystique' of digital photography is gone, digi-photography is so much a part of society that it is no longer marketed to a specific market and is in-fact advertised at the new American standard of "lowest common denominator". The film market is an different market made for a different kind of machine that will not be going away anytime soon. Yes, the price of film is surely to rise as the digital world gets cheaper and cheaper. But because those who shoot with film, like myself are looking to create long lasting print images, the longer they stand the test of time, it makes film not only more affordable, but adds to the re-emerging mystique and other alternative photography methods. </p>

<p>One of the nicest things about using film is that the quality of my work is entirely MY responsibility. I use the same kind of materials over and over without a care or worry that "maybe I need a better printer? More plug-ins? New ink catridges? Better software? PhotoShop MCMIX ? The latest camera model? Which storage device is going to go first? Which icon (the sun? the moon? the mountain? the face? the running guy?) on the dial should I set?</p>

<p>Digital photgraphers are the best thing to come along for the computer industry since the Jpeg. Thanks for keeping the economy moving forward!</p>