More proof FILM IS DYING???

[bacsa]

OK, whatever. I wish you to have "death of film" as your (or my) biggest problem in the future.

[sprouty]

<I>"...for every seller there is at least one buyer who is obviously not going digital - explain that."</I>

<P>

Maybe there is just one guy buying all the film cameras?

[bill_thorlin]

Perhaps he knows more than we do then.

[clinton_abe]

SP- I think that might be Chad. He seems like a die-hard (and blow-hard).

 

Jim- Maybe if you got a real digital camera instead of a Panasonic. If you want a good P&S, a Canon with DiGiC II might be your ticket.

 

As for all you other nay-sayers- Don't shoot me, I'm only the messenger. You're like the little Dutch boy sticking your finger in the dike. Only as soon as you do, another leak appears.

[bill_thorlin]

Never examine or consider a point or answer a question just make more and more statements of doubtful veracity. If that doesn't work get personal. Oh well, write it off to experience and move on.

[richard_wallace2]

Clinton: If i do recall polaroid cameras weren't much of a sucess... but who's noticing? If you actually think that digital cameras are in fact killing film, take a look in the prices... no, REALLY look at the prices of a film camera and a digital camera of the "same" level (the film is always a step forward in quality of image,but i'm not considering that "small" detail). Now, you take a look at the prices of film and memory cards. For the price 256mb sd card that can have something like 120 pictures in it (refering to a 3.1mp camera) i can take 900 film pictures. After this, join in the batteries, battery chargers and storage hardware to get the pictures out of the card (or buy another card... and add-on more 900 pictures in film). Keep in mind that a digital camera is obsolete after...let's say... 6 months (taking the example of the canon eos300d/rebel to the 350d) and a film camera model is unchanged for years.

If you still consider FILM is dead, fine with me. People like you DO kill film (you must be rich or something close to it), in the other hand there are people like me (and like everybody else in this forum that said in this tread that you are wrong) that prefer a film camera (making a market on film) rather then buying a 6 months lasting camera the price of a used car!

 

RWallace

 

PS: never saw a collector of used digital cameras

[dw fletcher]

You're only the messenger? That's pretty funny, because everybody knows film sales are on the decline. Everybody. So you're just Mr. Obvious. And if you honestly think film isn't going to be available at all in 5 or 10 years, that's just silly. Do you realize that one can still buy new parts for a Model T Ford?

[bob_gentile]

Film is dying. And the Earth is getting warmer. It's been getting warmer since the end of the last Ice Age. In fact, that's what CAUSED the Ice Age to end.

 

Film is dying. And the universe is expanding.

 

Makes me dizzy just to think of it!

[nikos peri]

Bob,<p>

The universe isn't just expanding, it's doing so at an <i>accelerating</i> pace. Just send my your Leica before it's too late.

[jon_sak]

Film is and will continued to be produced outside the US. In my travels I have seen a lot more film available in Europe and Asia. I think the only people losing film will be US citizens. Companies here seem to make descisions for consumers and limit what is truly available in the world market. For example luckyfilm is the largest film manufactuer in china and they have licenced many Kodak emultions. The film is not perfect and some of it stinks, but in china its all the rave becuase if its combo of price and availablity. each year this companies buisness nearly doubles, but her in the US it just the opposite. I won't even get into what cheap digital equipment is being sold in china, it would blow some people minds if they saw what can be bought for less than $150 USD. The stuff is no digital rebel or D70, but is easily a match for the 6-8 megapixel all-in-one slrs that sell for $600+ in the US. Consumer choices here are very limited unless you use the internet exclusivley in my opinion.

[clinton_abe]

Jon Sak- Thank you for posting one of the only intelligent replies and rebuttal on this subject. Unlike most of the other posters, you bring up some valid points and give a basis for discussion.

 

Richard Wallace- I never said "film is dead", I said "film is dying", a very important difference.

[jamesdak]

From Fuji's own web site:

 

At PMA 2005, Fujifilm will unveil new digital cameras, new 35mm film and film cameras and the latest advances in printing solutions leading the industry in providing advanced imaging solutions along the capture - store - print - share continuum.

[jamesdak]

Oh yeah, and Kodak is running a Free Film for Life Promotion. So, according to who you believe that could be a good thing or a fradulent thing. I also emailed them about the companies forcast for thier participation in the film market for the next 10 years. I'll post the answer if they reply back. Silly of me to get it from the horses mouth instead of a rumor, I know, I know.

[richard_wallace2]

That was a very intelligent posting from Jon Sak and also from Jim Huddle. The first one gave his opinion the second gave facts... better then rumour that MAYBE film is dying. Besides, there are intelligent replies here... you just missed them.

 

RWallace

[clinton_abe]

Hey, Jim- You might want to check-out the Kodak contest again. If you win, you get FREE FILM FOR A YEAR, not for life. Maybe, you're only going to live a year more, so for you, it would be FREE FILM FOR LIFE.

 

Guess this is further proof that the posters on this forum live in some fantasy world, where they only see what they want to see, hear only what they want to hear, and believe only what they want to believe.

[clinton_abe]

Jim, if anyone is starting a rumor, it's you. Even when you saw the Kodak contest for yourself, getting it from the 'horse's mouth', you couldn't correctly relate what you saw. You've started a rumor that Kodak will be giving Free Film for Life. Shame on you.

[bill_thorlin]

A mixture of tactic 4 and tactic 6.

[jamesdak]

Clinton - You are right, it is free film for a year, not life. I made a mistake this morning (never post anything until the coffee kicks in)LOL! But, that has nothing to do with "fantasy" but is a simple and honest mistake which I am openly admitting to.

 

Is there a reason you feel the need to continually keep insulting people?

[aj_champigny]

I think film is dying, but it's not quite down for the count if you know what I mean. It may be harder to get ahold of and become more and more expensive, but most people regonize that film is a little more personal than digital, it just feels better. It's somewhat like a vinyl record, there are plenty of people who still listen to vinyl. Why? Becuase it just sounds better than a cd, as long as something is better, or some people think that something is better, then it will still be sold.

[jon_noble]

Ive just read this whole thread and i dont know why. There is one person here who is really p'ing me off. Very opinionated and stubborn.

 

I have a F65, Walzflex, Paxina, and a D70. I know i will want film forever and i know that many others do so as well. What company would in their right mind would ignore this market that will not go away.

 

Just like when they discontinued Heinz Salad Cream, people wanted it after they stopped production so they restarted it. That may be a bad example but you cannot get rid of something that is so deeply embedded in society.

[bill_thorlin]

Jon - don't let him get to you, after all it takes all sorts to make a world.After a while you get to spot the tactic being used.

[daniel_short]

Today it was announced by AP news that Kodak will be discontinuing production of its

black and white papers, though it will still produce black and white film.

 

My own opinion is as follows: the CONTINUOUS, as opposed to finite, property that is

inherent to film renders images, for now at least, in a way that is quite distinguishable

from digital. Some of us, for aesthetic and other reasons, prefer this sort of rendering over

that offered by digital processes. Why begrudge someone this?

 

Rather than badgering your fellow enthusiasts with one-upsmanship (it's clear to whom I

address my rebuke), why not engage them with ideas concerning the artistic or

professional basis for choosing one technology over the other?

[claudia__]

on an existential note. there is "dying" and there is "death." so far all signs do indeed point to the fact that film is "dying." isn't it interesting that we speak of it as a living thing that is "dying?" but that is just a telling aside (telling of our attachment to it.) but things that are in the process of dying, as we all know (fascism as an example) have this habit of coming back...of being reborn. in short, it is way too soon to declare film dead. right now digital looks like the champ, but one can never tell about new consumer goods. some are a hit and then they decline. we just need to wait out the hysteria and see what shakes out.