"Why Film Won't Die in 2008 or Ever" (unofficial list 2008 edition)

[americanswan]

Many profess the greatness of digital over film. Probably not on this website.

Many here probably use both film and digital for different situations.

 

I have heard it said that ONE DAY, film will expire and some perhaps clueless,

perhaps wise, individuals are spreading around the web the notion that film is

on life support. I am new to photography. And as photographers everyone hopes

the profession doesn't just become a computer editing job. Taking good photos

is or shouldn't or should be a skill. Those who know or believe there are good

points to film must fight public opinion toward digital or manufacturers might

just stop making film cameras completely.

 

I suggest a list of reasons film should not be abandoned and in some cases

should be adopted.

[shuo_zhao]

Nostalgia and its "unique look" are two significant factors.

[seismiccwave]

How about if we explore the 1 major problem of digital photography instead. Digital

photography requires electricity. No electricity, digital will not work.

 

Yes there are arguments that film cannot be manufactured if there is no electricity

either. However looking at the process film photography doesn't require electricity in

the purest sense. Yes most camera has a battery to operate the light meter and

such.

 

So if you are in the middle of a jungle with no electricity film camera is still the best

alternative.

[americanswan]

Great responses.

 

Electricity

Nostalgia

"unique look"

[bobatkins]

The only reason I can think of to use film is to make more space in my refrigerator where it's been taking up space for the last few years.

 

Developed film may also be more resitant to the EMP (electromagnetic pulse) generated by nuclear explosions, but to be honest, that's pretty low on my list of things to worry about.

[somak_ray]

I wonder why not better films will be produced as a result of our technological progress with time. What about nanotechnology and other cutting edge techniques in improving film quality in near future?

[americanswan]

Ray, interesting point. That might happen. Who is researching "film" right now? Many would claim "none". Some would argue that nanotechnology will benefit digital, not film.

[americanswan]

On another forum where this idea came up a poster suggested that film was better because he has had hard drives fail, cd's broken, files deleted by accident. all a serious pain in the neck so he likes film better.

[bobatkins]

Paper is far inferior to granite for storage of text. Paper can be damaged by water, burnt, it can rot, tear and ink can fade. Marks chisled into granite is far superior. It doesn't burn or rot and the marks don't fade.

 

However I'm still going to use pen and paper for my shoping lists and even for writing my novel.

[americanswan]

Atkins, I like your humor. From now on I'll use granite for my images.

[benjaminoliverhicks]

To add to the list I would say post processing is more fun with film.

[benjaminoliverhicks]

I'm going to use my blackberry for my shopping list and to write my novel...on second

thought I'll just use a pen and paper.

[Brian]

No-one's said it yet so I might as well. The CD didn't kill vinyl, just moved it to another place in the market. The same is happening with film. As long as people want to buy it, it'll be around.

[mendonphoto]

Has glass-plate photography died, yet?

[lex_jenkins]

Same reason egg tempera painting didn't die: For every 10 iconoclasts there's one diehard iconophile. (Source: "2007 Almanac of Stuff Lex Just Made Up.")

[ricardovaste]

I have read that many photojournalists are almost required to still use film; there are just some places that they will venture out to where they will not know when they can recharge batteries again, or if they ever will have such a 'bonus'. In that situation, only (dont nick pick) a fully mechanical camera (film of some format) is applicable.

 

The day we get a solar powered FF DSLR will be an intereseting one :-)

[colin carron]

Many forms of communication Psuch as pones, TV, Rdio and cameras are all merging with digital technology. Doesn't stop you using semaphore though..

[mohir_ali]

http://www.thermojetstove.com/Tonality/

[tholte]

"individuals are spreading around the web the notion that film is on life support." Don't have to listen to rumors, look at the financials of Kodaks film division and look at sales of film cameras by the major producers. "Taking good photos is or shouldn't or should be a skill." Some may disagree with that statement.

[charles_stobbs3]

A horse and buggy is demonstrably different than a car. When was the last time a horse and buggy went past your house?

[americanswan]

Tim Holte: good idea, I should look up those financial statements tomorrow :)

[steve torelli]

Why are you worried about what the the majority of people do ? If you prefer film, shoot film. What difference does it make what anybody else does ? As someone "new to photography" you certainly make some provocative statements. Do you feel oppressed by the digital majority ? I've never understood why some feel the need to denigrate others to make themselves feel more secure. Or maybe I've just answered my own question.

[RobertChura]

Daguerotypes produce the finest image quality. Why don't people moan the fact they aren't popular any more. My guess is convenience. Same with film. A newer

easier method is available to produce excellent results. I have tons of negatives but I enjoy digital more mainly because of cost and time. I can concentrate on getting better images without processing and darkroom work or using a scanner which to me is more tedious than making a darkroom print.

 

Will film die?

It has for me and it doesn't really matter.

The challenge for me was and is the final print. When I finally was able to reproduce a black and white digitally on paper that satisfied me. I was finally

able for technology to catch up to my budget. That just happened last month with an Epson 3800 and Harman Gloss

[._._z]

The Feb 6, 2004 issue of the Wall Street Journal had a page-1 article about Kodak and film. Accompanying it was a graph showing film sales in the US (using statistics from ACNielsen): in 1999 total film sales (including 1-use cameras) was a littled under 2 billion rolls. In 2003 it was a little more than 1.5 billion rolls.

 

http://www.photoreporter.com/article.asp?issueID=&num=14&vol=14&articleType=fc&articleID=926

 

"color slide film sales have been dropping for many years. Even 10 years ago it accounted for less than 3 percent of total film sales. It?s dropped further since....Fujifilm?s global statistics indicate that color film demand in 2006 will be 40 percent of the demand in 2000, and the downward trend shows no sign of leveling off"

 

http://www.photoreporter.com/article.asp?issueID=&num=21&vol=14&articleType=fc&articleID=1174

 

"film sales continue to plummet, now about 30 percent of what they were five years ago. Current estimates claim film will bottom out in some future date at about 10 to 20 percent of the film market at its peak"

[gary_watson]

The best selling SLR ever was the Canon AE-1 and the high water mark for SLR sales was 1979-80. Film will be a long tail item--sidelined, marginal, but available. Kodak keeps improving emulsion technology for cine film, so what's to block the use of "existing" technology for new and improved 135 and 120 film stocks, e.g., the "new" Portra and TMY-2?