Why?

[mjferron]

<p>"Note from moderator: Let's save the political comments for the Off Topic forum"<br>

No problem. </p>

[nathan_bonsal]

<p>The "film is dead" argument is ridiculous when one considers what they would pay to whoever bought the film production facility from Kodak for a roll of 120 film.<br>

Seriously, I wouldn't have any problem with 8 bucks a roll as long as they keep making it.<br>

 </p>

[photo5]

<p>I think perhaps the younger generation, who did not grow up with film, could think "film is dead". I saw film die quickly around 2004-2005 when the Nikon D70 and other digital SLR cameras were released. The company I worked for decided that photographers need to shoot digital, and began to push them in that direction. Some of the early submissions were total garbage. Instead of submitting finely exposed 35mm, medium format, or large format transparencies, we would get these horrible over-processed 17.5MB TIF files, with completely blown highlights and blocked up shadows, and when we asked the editor for the RAW file, putting the submission into the archive on hold, the editor would override our request and the image would end up available for sale. </p>

<p>The initial digital submissions from the new full frame Canon 1DS were superb. Clean files, no film grain, and well exposed. They needed no cleaning, no scanning, and were ready to drop on to the site for sale. Saved the company a ton of money. And then over the next few years, people started complaining about film grain because digital redefined the state of the art image quality, which was grainless. Even fine grained film got complaints. We had to explain over and over again why there was grain in the image, because it. was. shot. on. film...</p>

[wblynch]

<p>I will use film until it is gone.</p>

<p>When it's gone I will use something else.</p>

 

[wblynch]

<p>I would like to add that last week in the Caribbean I shot about 200 film frames and 100 digital frames. I could instantly see that my digital shots were all crap.</p>

<p>I have to wait until tonight, 6 days later, to see that my film shots are crap. At least I had those six days of blissful imagination that they were all perfect! :)</p>

 

[larrydressler]

<p>I want the last word..... It is all I know. :)</p>

[rossb]

<p>When I was in High School I had a 45 record player that was in my 60 Chevy 2 door sedan.. It would stack 10 records. I think I paid $12.00 for it but by the time I was out of the Army the record player thing in cars was gone. So was my car actually. My friend had an album player in his 62 Impala. I looked around on ebay and such one time and I see none of them for sale. Seems like some of the players would have survived. I think Chrysler came out with a record player in one of the luxury models that was factory equipment. I did meet a car mechanic a few years back that said he had a record player in his 55 Chevy Hot Rod hobby car. However I never saw it or the car. </p>

<p> On the film thing I shoot film and digital. I do love film, the history of film and the wonderful images captured over the decades. It gave us a good look at many moments in History as well as some wonderful art. Shooting film is a wonderful hobby. Not sure why people hate film. Some of the things I have been called here are Luddite, dinosaur, old school, and such. I am actually none of those. I embrace new and old stuff. However I prefer saving money over spending it so I do not buy much stuff and what I do buy I shoot it until it's worn out. Right now I am in the process of wearing out a F100 and a D200. Looking like many more years to do that job. </p>

[larrydressler]

<p>Sigh</p>