More proof FILM IS DYING???

This post isn't about Minolta, but I'm posting it here because I

have always used Minolta equipment.

 

I had lunch today with my friend who manages a camera store owned by

a large national chain. He was saying that there is a rumour that in

a few days, Kodak will announce that they are no longer going to

process slide film.

 

As I mentioned in an earlier post, the question of "Where I can get

my film developed?", will come before "Where can I get film?".

Sell your film equipment. Now. Or Else.

Jeremy- Believe me, I'm tempted to do so. How much do you think I can get for a Maxxum9 w/VC9, both in excellent shape? I have installed the 'L' focusing screen, but will throw in the original screen. I'll hold on to my collection of lenses.

 

But, seriously, I will probably keep the equipment long after the death of film. I'll put it in a glass case as an example of 20th century technology. Future generations will wonder where you put the mermory card, or what ever they use in the future to record digital images.

Please allow a divergent opinion.

 

I too think film is dying - but only in the US.

 

In my conversations with some people from Europe, the African continent and Asia, they see plenty of demand for film. In fact, digital has made few inroads in Asia and Africa because of the high cost of consumables - ink, paper and good printing capabilities for digital at home. People continue to prefer film, and for watching on a computer, they get the lab to put scans on a CD.

 

I am convinced there will be film, and lots of it, for good bit of time into the future.

 

How much do you want for your M9 rig? :)!

"How much do you think I can get for a Maxxum9 w/VC9, both in excellent shape?"</p>only about 50 bucks I'm afraid. Is a cheque in pounds stirling ok?

Film will never die, it will just get more expensive and harder to find and get processed each year

"The sky is falling! This is terrible, just terrible! We'd better hurry up . . . I saw it with my own eyes, and heard it with my own ears."

Shirish- At one time computers were expensive, but now you can get a full system for under $400. I remember when I was going to college back in the early 70's. My sister went to Japan and bought back a calculator that only did addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division. It was large and cost her $75, and needed to be plugged in. She let me take it to college, where I was the only one to have this latest expensive technology. At about the same time, Bulova came out with the Accutron Digital watch, which was also very expensive. Today, digital watches are given away in a Happy Meal.

 

My corner drug store sells a single-use digital camera, for under $20. When you take it back to the store they give you prints and a CD. Within a year or two, I'm sure the price will come down and be comparable to buying a single-use film camera. The memory chip can be erased and reused which helps lower the cost with less environmental impact.

 

Just a week before the Canon Digital Rebel came out, I was reading an article in a photo trade publication, where the president of Nikon was saying that he didn't see how a digital SLR would be able to be sold for less than $2000. Boy was he ever wrong.

 

A year ago, it was said that a digital camera would need 34MP to equal ISO 100 film, then Canon released the EOS-1D Mark II, which Popular Photography tested and it was shown to be as sharp as ISO 100 film.

 

All you nay-sayers apparently do not want to, or wish not to, understand the speed at which technology advances. These advances, along with manufacturing in China, brings down the cost of new products.

This is hilarious - so much worry. Did anyone on Photo.net take economics or political science classes in college?<BR>

As long as there are enough people with working film cameras, there will be companies willing to make, market, and sell film. Sure the amount of different emulsions available will go down - most of them suck anyway. That isn't necessarily a bad thing. I would be all for the companies to quit producing low quality emulsions, and concentrate on higher quality, better consistancy, etc. How many choices do you need? Maybe one GOOD ISO 50/100 for landscapes, one GOOD 160 for portraits, one GOOD 400/800 for action shots... it's a supply and demand curve, simple as that.<BR>

If you want your film rig to be worth something tomorrow, go shoot a roll of film today. Each time you do that, you're ensuring your investment is sound.<BR>

Jed

Who in the world still sends films to Kodak for processing? Mailers have long since disappeared and were deemed unfair trading practice anyway. I'm finding better E6 lines (I assume you're not worried about C41 processing that any Fuji/Noritsu/Agfa minilab does) are busier and busier.

BS!

"If you want your film rig to be worth something tomorrow, go shoot a roll of film today. Each time you do that, you're ensuring your investment is sound."

 

Ok, but I'm pretty busy playing my 8-track tapes and storing data on my 5 1/4" floppy disks. Where do I find the time?

D.A., (Digital Angst)

Clinton,you have been spending much of your time researching the 'life expectancy' of film, and are truely convinced that film will be dead in the very near future. I would like to take your Minolta gears off your hands. I will give you $100.00 for both items...plus I pay shipping. What do you think ??

I won't buy a digital SLR until they cost the same as a film one, let's say $400. that is what the maxxum 7 costs. We still get X-rays in hospitals, despite all the advanced tomography equipment. Let's face it, for some research, film will still be needed (imagine a photographer in the middle of the jungle for many days). Unfortunately not all the world is as advanced, developed and used to waste so much energy as the US. If all the inhabitants of the earth were to have the same way of living as the americans do, we would need 3 or 4 planets. This one wouldnt be enough. But that is just stepping in controversial topics such as global warming...

<p><i>I had lunch today with my friend who manages a camera store owned by a large national chain. He was saying that there is a rumour that in a few days, Kodak will announce that they are no longer going to process slide film.</i><p>

 

Clinton, re-read that sentence slowly. Notice the word rumor. Now, next time you hear a rumor, please refrain from repeating it so as to stop it dead before it spreads. It's not about film dying, it should be about when these rumors will die.<p>

 

Sorry to be so harsh, but honestly, Kodak hasn't even pounded the last nail in the Kodachrome coffin yet, so I think it'll be a while until E6 goes the way of the Dodo; E6 is alive and well, rest assured. And if you have trouble finding a decent lab in your area, learn to develop it yourself. If you still need to be convinced that film is not "dying", just take a trip over to APUG.ORG and see for yourself. By the way, next time you hear film is dying, be sure to call Fuji and let them know 'eh, as nobody seems to have informed them yet. Just don't feel bad when they laugh at you on the other end of the line.<p>

 

As for Kodak, try not to draw any conclusions from them concerning trends in the market as they couldn't manage an ice cream stand successfully.

A year or so ago, it seems like the fact (an actual fact!) that Kodak was getting out of the point-n-shoot camera business was proof that film was on its last legs.

Just to add my 2 cents...I am seeing more and more old cameras being sold on eBay. For example: the old kodak brownies which take the 127mm and 120 and 620 films. I am seeing cult websites dedicated to these cameras which are full of links where you can purchase films for them. Even if common sellers decide not to stock film anymore, it will only make companies like JandCPhoto.Com more in demand. Even though we are entering the digital age, I am seeing a back-lash of folks returning to the cameras that have been stored in their closets for years or passed down to them from grandparents and such.

 

About 8 years ago I picked up a brownie starflex I found at a thrift store. Being in my early twenties I was enthralled by the set-up and especially the viewing screen. Much to my chagrin I was told that 127mm film had gone out of production years ago. Well, fortunately for me I kept that camera and about two months ago I learned that 127 film was in production again. I bought and shot and developed that film and even though those pictures aren't the greatest it prompted me to get out my collection of Minolta SRT's. And even helped me to step into MF with the purchase of my first Minolta Autocord. I am so enamored with this camera that I plan to purchase another. In fact, that is why I am here (at this website) today.

 

It's people like us that are keeping the spirit alive. I agree with the statement above about supply and demand. So I believe that film will be around as long as we are using it. So you might not want to give up those camera's of yours. You'll probably end up regretting it in the future.

The local Walmart reduced their display space for film from 3 racks to 2; ie 2/3'rds the display space. It was 4 racks wide before 9/11; and got reduced to 3 the following summer. The oddball 35mm speeds; a mess of APS films; 2 in on packages locally are in the fire sale area. Oddly; they still sell alot of Kodak 110 Kodacolor print film ; and no Fuji 110 for several years. The slide films are on fire sale; and no slide films; no tri-x are on the downsized racks. They dropped tri-x a year or two ago. There is no real camera store here.

Well you're probably right -your local drug store or walmart will likely not be developing film onsite in a few years but I'm sure they'll be able to send film out to a lab for a premium over digital prints.

 

Film is not dead but as the mass market moves to digital film will become more of a specialty product similar to 120 format. My local photo store just spent $50k on a konica developer which handles film/digital and scans of slides/negs so I figure they'll be developing film for a few more years!

 

I also have a 9 (actually 2 of them) which I absolutely love shooting with even though I have a 7D. While they don't see as much use as they did before the 7D arrived I still use them primarily for wide angle and when I'm going to places where I won't be able to charge batteries.

So the PROOF that film is dying begins with "I heard a rumour..", hmmm. Film may well be dying but passing on a rumour hardly constitutes proof. Let's hope you're not a judge.

Nay-sayers? I don't understand the goal of your prophecy. Why do you really want to convince us that what you THINK is the one and only possible future. (Based on another "rumour" from Kodak.)

 

Technological development has nothing to do with the future of film. Let's see, how many years since the colour film became widely available? And there are still many people using black and white emulsions, some of which were developed fifty years ago. Even more: there are MOVIES that are made (fully or partially) in black and white. Or, there are still plenty of people using bicycles without a motor. There are people paying big bucks on and mastering classical guitar. There are alot of people who simply paint with a brush. Microwave oven did not replace gas or electric ovens. Stuff are still boxed in cardboard (at least partially) and not plastic. People still prefer leather shoes - how old are leather shoes? A few thousand years? Your "proof" is not very well based, i think.

"All you nay-sayers apparently do not want to, or wish not to, understand the speed at which technology advances."

 

This is exactly why I don't rush to join the digital bandwagon.

The latest technology doesn't make you a better photographer. I am perfectly happy using my old mechanical cameras . When they stop working and I can't get them repaired then maybe I will switch over to the latest D10000 .

Clinton:

 

The point I was making is that what happens in the US may not be reflective of the trends elsewhere.

 

While film sales are dropping in the US, they are not in many other parts of the world. People are reluctant to throw away cameras and buy digital for several times more money, for quality which has only recently been able to match film, and at much higher cost.

 

This is obviously more common where there is less disposable income - read poorer countries.

 

It may end up being a rich persons hobby - like riding and such - but heck, its not gonna go away.

 

(Might even become a status symbol. In a conversation, one could turn up ones nose at those 100 megapixel digitals and say - oh that, no, I use only film...:)

This is getting incredibly old. Clinton, why are you so angry?

 

As I recall, there have been a ton of rumors over the last few years that Tri-X was being discontinued. I used to get excited over that.

 

I'll check back in a week or so and ask for an update. I suspect that E-6 processing from Kodak will be just as available as Tri-X.

 

chad