End of cheap film?

[douglas_vitello1]

<p>Thankfully virtually everyone who posted on this thread is pro film and I assume because their heart is in film and the equipment.Maybe the walkins who are so bent on convincing us otherwise have a large stake in the retail business of those other products?I really don't know and don't care.I plan on using film and my 'antique' cameras as long as it gives me pleasure and results that satisfy.Film may not be as cheap as it once was but for many of us it is very affordable.</p>

[mac_hordam]

<p><em> "But talking about this old goofy “no demand for film” myth, Mac seemed to attempt to make a stir rather than to bring any value to discussion."</em><br>

Let me quote myself as you so obviously are not. What I said (and I said it in a rational, not inflammatory, way) was - quote .....<br>

<em>"The (film) equipment and film suppliers no longer have quite the same demand"</em>.<br>

I repeat, no longer have <strong><em>quite</em></strong> the <strong><em>same</em></strong> demand.<br>

I would say that is a moderate and accurate assessment of the state of retail worldwide and just reflects the status quo as it applies to the film side of the photographic business. There is no longer the demand for film that there used to be years ago whether that's 1 year, 5 years, 50 years. Like it or not it is a commercial fact but my referencing it is not the same as me being misinterpreted as alternatively saying "<em><strong>no</strong></em> demand for film".<br>

<br>

Allow me to clue you in a bit as you may have jumped to conclusions. Initially I used film because when I started photography that's all there was. I continued using film for a long time after that because that's all there was. And a long time after that as well because, yes, that's all there was. Just so you know I'm not a Johnny come lately digifan (not that it would matter as they can have opinions too). Nowadays we have two choices, film and digital, and I use both. (Actually we seem to have three choices film, digital and arguing the toss). I still have film cameras, I have a freezer full of film. I take photos and I sell them for a living and I don't give a rat's if they were taken on film or digital. More to the point my customers (not other photographers so no vested interest) don't care either, they look at the bigger picture (and some of my 10x8s). I'll still use film if I wish to for a project and I also use digital.<br>

<br>

Those last 4 words are no reason to vilify my comments based on your own presumptions or for others to demean my status on this forum by referring to me as a walkin. A walkin I assume is meant to refer to someone who has not posted on this forum before. But this is <em><strong>photo.net</strong></em> not just any one forum and one joins <em><strong>photo.net,</strong></em> not a particular forum and one has the right to post within any forum where a thread may pique one's interest. If you care to look at my posting history you'll notice that, among others, I've been active in threads on the Medium Format forum hopefully giving useful information and assistance to someone enquiring about the Fuji GX680 camera, a camera I own (It takes film). I counsel the OP of that thread against buying the 680 but give reasons for that advice and they're not anti-film but based on logic. Despite that I have tried to answer his questions in a useful manner should he still decide to get one.<br>

<br>

If you care to go back to the beginning of this thread and carefully read the OP's original post and subsequent one five messages below he sounds very much like someone reconsidering whether he can afford to keep shooting film or, presumably (unless he gives up photography altogether), have to switch to digital only. Within the context of that I think the points I made are well within the scope of this forum.<br>

<br>

<em>"Maybe the walkins who are so bent on convincing us otherwise have a large stake in the retail business of those other products?"I really don't know and don't care</em><br>

<em> </em><br>

Maybe you're an ice cream salesman but as I really don't know either, why would I mention it? However since you posed the question I can confirm that I do <strong><em>not</em></strong> have a stake in the retail business of those other products. I have a stake in my own retail business which is selling the finished product of my own photography whether it be taken on film or digital.<br /><br>

<em> </em><em> </em><br>

I have to go now as I have clients calling back later for a photograph I have to frame. They had a choice of shots taken on film and digital in the same location and chose a digital shot on this occasion. I tell you that just to show that it proves nothing at all as others have also bought the film shot. It's photography. It's all photography, it's a great era, embrace it. Even embrace it all if you so wish, but to act as zealous protectors of one form of photography over another, be it film or digital, is ... a little weird.<br>

<br>

<em> </em></p>

[rossb]

<p> After reviewing my photos from my Yosemite trip this last weekend I have found that the Portra 160 is the best print film I have ever used. It's $30.00 a 5 pack at BHPhoto. Given I am happy with Target's 95cent processing I am going to shoot more of it along with the Kodak 400 GoldMax film that is very cheap. The 400 is nice film all around however the grain is a bit over the top. I usually punch up my photos somewhat in elements and it really makes the grain stand out. Mostly it's just in the skys. Shots around the house of the family look nice and very nice skin tones. Anyway I am going to pretty much shoot those two film for the rest of the year. Currently I am shooting a roll of fuji Superia 400. I to a couple snaps of the Lighthouse in Santa Cruz with it last evening. I crew a 27ft Santa Cruz (sail boat) twice a month and I took a few photos as we motored out of the harbour. Not much time for photography however. Once we are under sail there is no time for it.</p>

[roman_p]

<p>Mac,<br>

Apparently I was a bit premature and inattentive on commenting you post. I admit that <em>no longer have <strong>quite</strong> the <strong>same</strong> demand</em> and <em>no demand </em>makes difference. But <em>The consumer has been presented with a product they want</em> that what has triggered my inadequate reaction. It sounded like you were talking about all ( or almost all ) consumers. If you didn’t have such intends please disregard my remarks.</p>

<p>Ross, I found that the 400 Gold is too grainy too and quite high in contrast. I’ve tried it onceand never did it again regardless of its price. Instead I liked the new Portra 400. I found that Portra 160 is too sterile for me but the 400 is just right in saturation and contrast. It ‘s not much grainy than the 160 (if any) and cost I believe about the same. If you didn't try it yet I really recommend it to do.</p>

[mac_hordam]

<p>Roman, I'm pleased you can now see the distinction, which when I wrote it I was at pains to make it clear I was reflecting actual conditions rather than any wish fulfilment, hence the <em><strong>quite</strong></em> and the <em><strong>same.</strong></em><br>

<em><strong> </strong></em><br>

The comment "<em><em>The consumer has been presented with a product they want" i</em></em>s merely recognition that suppliers have produced large numbers of digital cameras and the consumer (i.e. the ones who are buying them) has been only too ready to buy them. Again there is no intention, explicit or implicit, that this is <em><strong>all</strong></em> consumers having abandoned any other form of photographic purchase. But if larger numbers of people are buying predominantly from one sector it is going to have a knock on effect on the other.....back to my Supply and demand quote.</p>

<p>I note with interest a subsequent thread on the price of Provia which bemoans the increase in film prices. Several have commented that they've noticed prices go up and Fuji has made announcements to that effect. This is the situation I refer to in my other quote "<em>and, if they can, raise prices for those items where this is still a small amount of demand"</em> It's to be expected and there's not much we can do about it other than keep our freezers full.<br>

(I should clarify that <em>small amount of demand </em>is how I see the manufacturer as defining it and not some global insight of my own as to how many people still buy film).</p>