Digital doing serious film users a favour ?

[kevin m.]

You lost me on reality distortion, Brad... I assumed you were referring to turntables, which I

only brought up as a potential indicator of the future of film marketing.

 

It seems valid to me that once the majority consumer market is out of the equation, whatever

producers are left will no longer have to cater to their demands.

[Brad_]

No Kevin, it was about the original post and a few that followed. Mostly about film not

dissapearing and "getting spoiled for choice."

[stuart_richardson]

I just hope there will be room for both. Why can't we all just get along? I shoot film and

digital, and I listen to both records and CD's (Music Hall turntable and Cary CD player). And

yes Al, you can still get tubes. All types, but it is a bit like cameras, people are still paying a

great deal for certain old tubes, just like they would for an M3 or Nikon F etc.

[vivek iyer]

Digital has driven deathnails into some of the better films and it is just continuing. Find out whatever happened to the likes of Ektar 25 and Techpan from Kodak and we are left with only the likes of T-Max. Have you heard anything about Agfa? They used to make films..

[adrian bastin]

Was'nt talking about the past.

[vivek iyer]

The future is quite bleak in terms of choice and pricing. Whatever few film that are offered, the users are bound to heap praise on them because, a) they are very expensive b) they might scan better.

 

Neither of these factors say anything about the current/future quality of films.

[billsr]

You can get all the vacuum tubes you want, made in Russia. They're sold here under the "Svetlana" brand, if I recall correctly.

[adrian bastin]

Now there's a subject for a new thread; what is Russian film and what is it like ? ; there has to be some excellent stuff there. Chemicals?

[al_kaplan1]

I thought China was the new source of film. All the Kodacolor Gold I've bought lately was made there. Kodak has been buying up Chinese film companies, or at least controlling interest in them. We may soon be buying Lucky Tri-X...LOL

[peter]

It is doing us a favour in another respect. If you look at eBay (in particular,) you will find that it is often possible to pick up terrific equipment bargains. Prices have fallen remarkably and I have bought several (pre AI) lenses for Nikons for example that just a few years ago would have cost at least double what I paid. The same applies to a lesser extent to bricks and mortar stores - although these often will not even take film based cameras as trade ins so pickings are harder to find.

 

I am not sure if the same can be said of Leica gear, but it is certainly so with other top end stuff. I am content with this situation - if I can get a nice film camera and assortment of lenses to add to my collection of good quality "users" I am not too worried if it costs a little more to develop the images, and if the digital crowd miss out than that is their mistake. I should say that I own and use a digital camera as it is convenient sometimes if I plan to digitise the images - eg for holiday snaps, but I will always have a Leica rangefinder or a Nikon SLR or Pentax Screwmount SLR sitting beside it in my camera bag.

[thomas_sullivan]

heh...I'll play........PRO-JECT 1.2 Turntable w/Ortofon X3-MC...

 

....and on the digital side.....California Audio Labs DX-1 CD Player

 

...as far as the post's implied scenario......I see no evidence of it (for one, I believe that throw away cams still sell the largest amount of cheap consumer film...), albiet, it would be nice if it did happen.

[bill_thorlin]

Peter - obviously you and I agree ( see my earlier post ) and so do a few million others who buy on fleabay. And yes the little digital I have also does the job I want it to.

 

Just off to meet some fellow dinosaurs and bury our heads in the sand ( may just uncover a treasure trove of something called film ).

[adrian bastin]

Thanks everyone. I had a hunch I would not be shot down in flames.

 

I'm very aware of the effects when the manufacture and supply of materials is monopolised by a few big companies. The makers of artists' paint had a major negative effect on the art of most of the twentieth century. That's a big claim but a lot of top-line painters will agree with it. Much of the paint was rubbish. Artists let that happen by loosing touch with the craft of painting and familiarity with their materials. That coupled with a growing popularity of amateur painting (and photography, of course). It's changed now with small paint makers being able to get into the market again and improve the quality.

[adrian bastin]

For "monopolised" please read "controlled by a few...." etc.

[vinay_patel]

There will always be a demand and supply for film, not for the people living in mud-huts in the jungles of the Amazon, but for affluent people in the western world who wish to assert their individualism and freedom of choice and to pursue a hobby the way that makes them happy. Whether some holier-than-thou types think that's hogwash and everyone should just accept digital and get on with making photos, that's just not going to happen, any more than everyone buying a Prius, no matter how high a gallon of gas costs, or how far they have to drive or wait in line to fill up.

[adrian bastin]

Vinay. just love that kind of dry humour. Sort of like all those darned cyclists asserting their right to the roads and their right not to use fosil fuels, batteries, plastics, etc.

[vinay_patel]

Well, thanks, but I can't take credit for humour that wasn't intended as such. A sculptor could produce a more technically-perfect bust of a person in a fraction of the time with a fraction of the effort by scanning their photo into a CAD-CAM milling apparatus than by using a hammer and chisel, but not all of them have gone that way.

[al_kaplan1]

Vinay, those people can't understand why anybody would want to waste time doing anything by hand where you couldn't make a whole bunch of perfectly identical duplicates. They refuse to understand why the art market cherishes the fact that every handmade thing is unique unto itself, not exactly like any other, and what bugs 'em the most is that people will pay so much more money for the imperfections ;-)

[Brad_]

Anybody have any idea at all who Al is talking about?

[al_kaplan1]

If the shoe fits, wear it. Dang, you're paranoid! I wasn't even thinking about you, Brad. I have friends right here in Miami that are 100% digital and think I'm nuts. If you ever get down this way I'll make some introductions.

[adrian bastin]

Vinay. Sorry I misread you; I thought you were associating Prius (or Priapus) drivers with Leica users.

[vinay_patel]

No problem. Actually I've driven the hybrid Lexus crossover SUV and if nobody told me it was a hybrid I wouldn't have known. These things are not golf carts in any manner, shape or form!

 

BTW please nobody think Al K has accurately paraphrased my analogy to the sculptor, in fact he seems to have perverted it to fit his own agenda. My point was that some people will always diverge from the majority to assert their individuality, and there's a high percentage of them among artist-types. There's also probably some connection between the act, or process of creating art and the art itself. Or so I've been told by more than one artist. I know one very talented painter who always paints in the nude. Fortunately he paints still-lifes, not portraits : )

[adrian bastin]

But you really need to keep your socks on or there's nowhere to keep your brushes.

[adrian bastin]

Vinay, I'm sure you're right. But I don't believe in self expression.

[Brad_]

<I>If the shoe fits, wear it. Dang, you're paranoid!</I><P>

Anybody have any idea at all what Al is talking about?