s._usary Posted February 24, 2011 Author Share Posted February 24, 2011 <p>If there's a joke there, it's about as obscure as some of W. S. Burroughs' prose scribbled when he was under the influence of hallucinogens. Or perhaps I'm just becoming too literal-minded. But then, I fail to see how body tissues and electron microscopes even begin to "fit" here. If joke it was, it must stem from your own, purely private sense of humor. Perhaps you're an aspiring coroner--they get to study body tissues and use cameras, too.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larrydressler Posted February 24, 2011 Share Posted February 24, 2011 <p>Um that rant had nothing to do with what I was talking about. It had to do with the biblical prophesies and past references in this thread all 10+ pages of it about Nostradamus, 2012 and I think even Job.<br> Sorry I was in on this thread from the beginning and I seem to remember much of it.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jens_g.r._benthien Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 <p>First post by Shane Usary on Feb 22, 2011; 01:55 p.m.<br> Last post by Larry Dressler on Feb 24, 2011; 10:34 p.m.</p> <p>And slide film and E6 labs still exist!</p> <p>2002 someone predicted that film will definitely be dead in one or two years. Today, 2011, I use more film than ever before with better emulsions than ever before. </p> <p>1993, with the rise of IT and mailboxes (and the beginning of the Internet) someone predicted that news papers will disappear in a few years. Today, 2011, I just picked up my current issue from the door step.</p> <p>1994 someone predicted that we will have paperless offices very soon. I said: no way, we won't see any paperless offices until we will see paperless toilets. Today, 2011, most of the paper is printed in offices around the world - not in newspapers or magazines!</p> <p>Film is and always will be an economic factor. It is an established, reliable medium.</p> <p>I don't know why so many people want to scare others with these weird predictions. I'm not scared, I just continue to work as usual, enjoying the fantastic new emulsions we could only dream of several years ago. And I know I am not alone! </p> <p>I'll pack my stuff for another shooting today. Kodak EliteChrome, Fuji Provia 100F. Arca Swiss. Tripod. Several Rodenstock lenses. Plus one of my Contax G2 systems for some quick shots. And I already know it will be a wonderful day.</p> ------------------------------------------ Worry is like a rocking chair. It will give you something to do, but it won't get you anywhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
larrydressler Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 <p>LOL I went out in a thunderstorm today and shot some Tri-X in a new to me Minolta Mg1 that I got for 23 bucks I rated it at 1000 and will develop it in Acufine. believe me I have more photography and humor in my little finger than most have in their whole life.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rustys pics Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 <p>"The ongoing mystery: how long will 35mm film be available?"<br> That's the title of this post. I don't see anything mentioned about E6. I like E6, as stated mostly for Super 8 movie film which I direct project.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s._usary Posted February 25, 2011 Author Share Posted February 25, 2011 <p>I gather you never read beyond the title of the posting, old boy. The specific references to E-6 and my 35mm Nikon F100 in the body of the posting established the parameters of the question. You don't acquire much information from just scanning the headlines.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s._usary Posted February 25, 2011 Author Share Posted February 25, 2011 <p>A final riposte to Mr. Dressler. I maintain that it's quite a stretch to draw some humorous parallel between the mundane subject of this thread and either the microscopic study of tissues or the occasional jocular references to fraudulent prognosticators. I couldn't resist looking at your profile here. I assume you are the subject of the displayed portrait. Come on, now. Admit it. You're really Leon Redbone travelling under a pseudonym here, aren't you? Inquiring minds want to know. If so, I'm a longtime enthusiast for your work. I also never believed you were really Frank Zappa.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s._usary Posted February 25, 2011 Author Share Posted February 25, 2011 <p>Oh, one more question for Dressler. If I'm wrong about the Redbone theory, then are you any relation to Marie, the celebrated thespian?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredonian Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 Larry, I couldn't help noticing in your photo that there seems to be quite a pile of film laying on your bed. Hhmmnn...Forgive me...but just how much further do you really go with your films beyond the "lick"??? :-p Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDMvW Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 <p>Just plain distasteful. Give it up.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff_z. Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 <blockquote> <p>... but opinions seem to change by the month and I haven't checked this out in a good while. What are current, informed opinions or facts as to how long 35mm reversal/slide film will be available?...</p> </blockquote> <p>And the inherent near-absurdity of this didn't occur to you...</p> <p> </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s._usary Posted February 25, 2011 Author Share Posted February 25, 2011 <p>I see no "inherent absurdity" in the query. I hoped I might receive a response from someone who follows the photographic press (which I seldom do) and had run across some authoritative pronouncement. That has not occurred; as usual, people just guess based on their own preferences or fervent hopes. Thanks and farewell to all.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredonian Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 Right you are JDM, and it reads more with overstepping in humor to me now than when I had first wrote it. I would love to blame it on the ice that was in my glass last night, but I usually know better regardless. It was all meant to be in good humor with Larry, and thank you for calling me on it with good candor. I may also be just a tad jealouse, as I've only been with a few films in my lifetime while so many others have tried them all. And with such ease! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fredonian Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 S. Usary, you sound young and I would advise that you not taking things too seriously. You obviously have a lot of smarts about you, but I would suggest you relax and roll with the punches. Don't give up with comming on here and you will find that some questions will draw a lot better response. I would know as I've asked a many which deserved being doused with vinegar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenPapai Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 <p><em>The Red camera is the digital movie camera of choice for some, not a Canon DSLR.</em></p> <p>Except that several FULL LENGTH movies have used Canon EOS DSLRs going back 3+ years now. So why does anyone say something they know [little] about? That italics quote was written to imply that Reds are used "over EOS DSLRs" which is not true. "For some" can mean anything, here perhaps it means 10%? 25%?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve m smith Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 <p>Digitally originated movies will be shot with Sony, Red, Panavision, Dalsa and Arriflex cameras. True, some movies have used the Canon EOS but it would not be the camera of choice for a serious cinematographer.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim_ducey Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 <p>With the movie industry and hospitals moving rapidly to digital I would guess less than 10 years film will be gone.<br> Jim</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s._usary Posted February 25, 2011 Author Share Posted February 25, 2011 <p>In response to Mr. Watkins, I am not so young, and I received my first 35mm, a little all-manual Ricoh, at age 12. Within a year a relative taught me the craft of the darkroom. I admit to being a bit flippant in some of my responses, but it's all intended to be in good humor, I assure you. I had a little fun with Mr. Dressler (I still say he's Leon Redbone), but my natural smart-assedness was limited to that, I believe. As for my original query, it was neither unreasonable nor lacking in serious intent. I was merely in a quandary as to whether to invest in a DSLR. My intention was to seek out any factual or authoritative information as to the longevity of 35mm positive film to aid me in that decision. This was implicit in the original posting. After much thought and further net research, I sadly and reluctantly concluded that the future of 35mm E-6 emulsions is bleak indeed. Look at my Delphic/Pythian "oracle" missive earlier and you'll understand, perhaps, what I concluded based upon the weight of at least halfway informed opinion. Finally, methinks people take this whole site and its subject matter a bit too seriously. After all, we're only talking about taking photographs here, not the future of Western civilization as we know it. Adieu to all, and once again, merci beaucoups for the responses. Yours, Shane Usary. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s._usary Posted February 25, 2011 Author Share Posted February 25, 2011 <p>One last note en passant. Mr. Papai's name sounds familiar. Are you by any chance a resident of Marin County in The Bear Republic?</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenPapai Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 <p>Several SERIOUS cinematographers have used Canon DSLRs in multi-million dollar feature length films--directors include Christopher Nolan and Tim Burton.</p> <p>S.U.: c'est moi!</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff_z. Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 <blockquote> <p>... I had a little fun with Mr. Dressler...</p> </blockquote> <p>No, more like we had a little fun with <em>you</em>. Larry's more knowledgeable than you could be in ten lives. And way funnier.</p> <p>Yada, yada, yada... and more!:</p> <blockquote> <p>"...Finally, methinks people take this whole site and its subject matter a bit too seriously..."</p> </blockquote> <p>The lady protests too much, <em>methinks</em>. Now, get back to your alternate universe!</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rossb Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 <p>Long Thread. I guess I don't have any idea how long anything will last. I just bought a F100 a couple months ago from KEH.com. It's a LN- and I really like it. I am so glad to have that camera. I have a D200 also for back up. It's pretty good. I like it more then the newer digital camera's becasue I do not want to much gadgetry associated with the camera. This one has ISO 100 which is good, poor dynamic range which is bad. It does not have vidio or a sensor wiggler which makes me happy. It takes expensive batteries which is real bad. I have not used it for a while but if my F100 breaks or the world runs out of film I will crack it out and do the digi snapper thing. I shoot mostly B/W film so the F100 is a good camera for my use. I am thinking about a Zeiss Ikon but they are kind of expensive. Still I might spring for it. Just waiting to see which way my wife's head moves. Up and down is yes and side to side is no. So far her beautiful head has not made the commitment but she said it will before next June.</p> <p> As far as slide film goes, I do like Elitechrome 100. Delightful film however I have settled in for the long run with B/W. I shoot B/W film and everybody else I know in the world has a digi snapper camera. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s._usary Posted February 25, 2011 Author Share Posted February 25, 2011 <p>Well, Mr. Z., you know absolutely nothing about the extent of my knowledge, my intellect, or the breadth and depth of my humor on the basis of one silly thread on an insignificant blog. Thus, you have no real basis for comparison, and thus I shall ignore your rude presumptuousness for the dreck that it is. Besides, I was not on here to display knowledge or to assume the role of comic. I can't divine why you seem to bear me ill will. I know nothing of you, nor do I care to learn anything of you. Jeez, the creeps that turn up in the streets (and on blogs) these days. You and others of like mien and mind merely furnish additional data in support of the "dumbing down of America" hypothesis. Cordially, SU. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KenPapai Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 <p>Several SERIOUS cinematographers have used Canon DSLRs -- Aranofsky's BLACK SWAN as well.</p> <p>Don't take "Jeff Z" seriously either. Were he serious, he would stand behind his words with an image portfolio, website, account, bio, etc. He revels in the anonymity. Like a trifle.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andylynn Posted February 25, 2011 Share Posted February 25, 2011 <p>Black Swan was mostly shot on Super 16 with Fuji Eterna film. The DSLRs were for the subway bits, they wanted the smallest equipment they could work with.</p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now