End of Film ? - BUT

Erwin Putts is again suggesting that film is dying a natural death.

 

His latest article is here :

 

 

http://www.imx.nl/

Anthony,

 

I think he?s right. While I love my M series Leicas I haven?t used them since I bought a Nikon D70. Yes, there are some Leica lenses I really miss, and I prefer the handling of a rangefinder camera to that of an SLR. But then, not all hope is lost as I?m sure we will see a full-frame digital rangefinder camera within the next two or three years.

 

BTW the name is Erwin Puts. Not really important for us, but for search engines ;-)

 

Regards

 

Carsten

Film is dying - remember the Super 8, 8 16 movie film cameras? No demand!!! It's all video & digital.

Dear Antony,

 

Mass-market film? Possibly. Film as a niche market? Not in my lifetime. I use my D-70 for snapshots and illustrative pics (how-to, step-by-step, etc.) and real cameras for real pictures. There are enough of us doing the same thing that Leicas won't vanish. Or if they do, it won't be for that reason.

 

Cheers,

 

Roger

Roger,

 

I hope you?re right. Over here in Germany Ilford films were unavailable for weeks; now that they are back you can?t buy ID-11 anymore. Fuji currently sells Sensia 100 (36 frames) for under 3 Euros per roll including processing, down 25% from a year ago.

 

IMHO the film business is fading fast.

 

Carsten

 

http://www.cabophoto.com/

I agree with you Roger. I don't see film disappearing as fast as a lot of people expect it to. I feel that someone will step up and continue to make film, especially B&W, if there is a strong demand for it. By the way, I just picked up your book on rangefinder cameras at my local camera store just the other day and it really was fascinating reading.

I just hope to have reasonably affordable B&W and Colour negatives, chemicals, printing papers and good professional labs for film photography for the rest of my life, even when digital is clearly 5 or 10 times better and cheaper than film in all respects.

 

This is just a personal choice, and if this really happens, ALL of us will benefit. Am I asking for too much?

 

The fact that I think I will be disappointed (may be very soon) makes me even treasure more the opportunity at present to use film at their very Best and most affordable IN OUR HISTORY (whether in the past or in the future).

 

I believe now is the time when film is at its cheapest and at its highest quality in history, whilst digital is in its most expensive form if we try to imagine what digital can do and how much it will cost in the future (say 5, 10, 15 years later).

 

If my son (now 1 year old) later really likes film for whatever reason, I believe he can only DREAM to be able to use film as I can now.

Film is becoming marginalised and niche, but even full frame digital won't cause it to "die" - there are more than enough of us who use cameras without batteries and need medium format quality out of requirement, not just personal preference for film - and these are two aspects digital is highly unlikely to ever satisfy.

 

Meanwhile a friend who photographs weddings reports that he is getting couples who have seen the digital portfolio's delivered to some of their friends specifically request he uses film so they can get better quality reprints (presumably hand done from negs) than their friends are getting from digital files. (Maybe this shows bad digital photography or bad digital printing both of which will improve over time, but I don't know.)

 

Finally from a totally personal perspective I spend my entire working life in front of a PC - as do a lot of other people with photography as a hobby. Speaking for myself I would rather spend my evenings doing something different - this, as much as anything else, is a reason for me not to have gone digital. :-)

 

Just wait for that first digital camera virus too - you just _know_ some geek is working on it in a dingy bedroom somewhere right now ;-)

Yes, Ilford Germany had some problems.<br>My local Drugstore sold all its FP4 and HP5, due in 6/2006, for half the price and I got 10 rolls FP4 for next summer and 5 rolls HP5 I already used up.<br>

From January Fotoimpex/JandC sell rebranded FP4 and HP5 for a reasonable price<br>

So I don't see any need to digitize my Zorki 4 :-)<br>

<img src="http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?s=&postid=32664"><br>

OTOH, I sold my IIIf to fund WA Zoom for my D60. No loss, the shutter was off 2/3 in unpredictable directions and a repair was to expensive.

Hell, everything is dying. You're dying, I'm dying. Dylan said, "Those not busy being born are busy dying..." or something like that. Digital is dying too. Rocks die. Don't worry about it. It can make you crazy.

Exit digital cameras in 5 years - replaced by Phocams with 5 megapixels. So said a camera dealer near us.(He is nearing retiring age so doesn't care). He hardly ever takes photos now.

From where I'm sitting it's a shorter ride to the "art supply" store than to the photography store. They still sell canvas, brushes, tubes of oil paint, and all that other obsolete 15th century crap that should have dissapeared a century ago, maybe more. I wonder why? Who buys all that junk? Probably because the chain drugstores don't carry that sort of thing.

 

Most local camera shops twenty or thirty years ago stayed in business from film sales and photofinishing. People thought that if they got their Kodacolor developed and printed by leaving it off at Browne's Photo Center they'd get much better photos than if they left it at the corner drug store. The same driver from the same local lab picked up and delivered to both, but the retail customer didn't know that. Now Walgreens has a one-hour lab right there in the store, tons of inexpensive color film in 4-packs stacked on a table next to the disposeable cameras. The old fashioned camera store's bread and butter has gone!

 

Still, for many people too young to remember the way it used to be, the ability to go to a web site, charge to a credit card, get overnight or second day shipping on an order of film and chemicals and not have to drive 5 or 20 miles, perhaps pay to park, or find the time to do it when the store is open is both convenient and what they're used to doing.

 

What's missing is the always hot coffee pot, meeting other photographers, being reminded that the Kodak rep will be there Friday morning about 10, the ability to pick up a single roll of some exotic emulsion you need at the last minute, and being told by Joe behind the counter that Bruce is seriously considering buying a new 35mm Summilux and are you interested in buying the 35 'cron he'll most likely be trading. That's all gone.

 

If you look back over 40 years at the available films Kodak made less varieties of 35mm film than they do today. There was Ektachrome and High Speed Ektachrome, plus type B (tungsten) H.S. Ektachrome, and Kodachrome also had a tungsten version. Kodacolor was the amateur color negative and Ektacolor the pro film, which was easily available in 120 rolls but still only sold in 100 ft. rolls of 35mm. No cassettes! Tri-X, Plus-X and Panatomic-X were the B&W films. There's a lot of room for contraction in the available film varieties before panic should set in.

Film is contracting, not dying. I'm not anti-digital by any means but to me, it is not a panacea. I take pics for me and prefer film. I have a Pentax water resistant digi P&S that I use for the convenience.

I like it.

 

As I see it, we just have more choices regarding photographic expression.

Ah, well, nuthing new, n erwin puts will reach his expiration date too, sooner or later, yawn,...

Eddie - how is digital cheaper? I picked up my FM2 two years ago and it hasn't depreciated at all, having the same resale value now as I paid for it - how much is a digital camera bought two years ago worth now? Do you factor that into the "cheaper" equation?

 

Meanwhile I have taken literally thousands of pictures with it and even with film and self-processing costs it still hasn't cost me as much as a good DSLR.

 

So add the costs of a DSLR, then for home printing add in the costs of a PC and printer and printing paper and inks etc etc etc, plus storage media for copying pictures onto to free up the memory card when I'm on a long trip...

 

...that's a huge outlay that will keep me in film and chemicals for years. Add in depreciation and it's a very expensive "upgrade".

 

Finally, one medium being "better" than another is totally subjective depending on how you take pictures. Film is "better" for me and a lot of other people, just as digital is for a lot of others - I don't think you have anything to worry about for a long time to come in terms of film.

Rehash rehash...Who really cares. If we wake up and don't have film anymore then we'll do something else. Until then, I'm shooting film and loving it.

Did anyone actually read the article? It reads like the transcribed mutterings of a drunken barstool rant. Maybe someone should phone him and see how he's doing?

Stop dwelling on it, just keep shooting. It will die when the last film users die. Judging by

Al's age in about 20 to 30 years ; )

Carsten, I don't quite understand. If you prefer the handling of a rangefinder, and you miss

some of the lenses, why do you use the D70 at all then? Why do you have to wait for a full

frame digital rangefinder?

 

Personally, I don't really shoot differently with digital or film, and I scan my film anyway, so

the only digital camera I use regularly is the tiny Panasonic FX7 that I carry with me at all

times when I don't have my Leica with me. Otherwise, I use my Digial Rebel only when I

need to do flash photography, and when I need to use a telephoto IS lens.

...and you know what's going to happen the day after the last roll of film on earth is used up?

 

The sun is going to come up like it always does.

Oh my gosh, really? Same old reactions/justifications from the insecure ignoring or

resisting the shift mixed in with a little clinging to how great it was in the old days...

"Same old reactions/justifications from the insecure ignoring or resisting the shift mixed in with a little clinging to how great it was in the old days..."

 

Do you want to see film die? Film photgraphy has a long history and some of the greatest images ever were taken on film. As a lover of photography who professes no concern for the medium used to capture images it would seem that you would want varied forms of photography to survive.

Recent information on Contax film cameras:

 

http://www.kyocera.co.jp/prdct/optical/news/discontinue1222.html

 

Discontinued:

 

RX2 body;

Aria/D body;

T3 black;

TVS3/black;

Distagon 35mm/F2.8MM;

Distagon 35mm/F1.4(J)MM;

Distagon 25mm/F2.8(J)MM;

Makro-Planar 60mm/F2.8©MM;

F-Distagon 16mm/F2.8AE

 

More is expected to be announced in future.

<I> Do you want to see film die?</I><P>

 

Dennis, that's a really bizarre question. I have no such "wants." Perhaps you're suggesting

I don't like film - which is really silly. Why would I want film to die? <P>

 

No, it's more I'd rather see people move forward and make photographs rather than

justifications.

Use whatever works for you. I sometimes use digital imaging at work and find it very convenient. <p>There are very few true pros using this forum, making a majority of people here, and on many other forums, hobbyist <i>amateurs</i> (I should add that some are highly talented and obviously could be pros if they wanted to). <p>Why shouldn't people use what medium they want to- Why this perceived need to sell out and buy the new technology? Some people enjoy running older cars, keeping them on the road, others like to travel to the South of France and paint the beautiful counryside- taking a break from this incessant consumerism<p><i>It's a hobby remember </i>:-).