Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > RFF News

RFF News News related to photography and rangefinderforum.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Film Photography Makes A "Stunning" Comeback
Old 07-27-2016   #1
noisycheese
Normal(ish) Human
 
noisycheese is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,216
Film Photography Makes A "Stunning" Comeback

Comeback?? It never went anywhere to begin with!

__________________
The Leica M passion: From the inside it's hard to explain; from the outside it's hard to understand.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2016   #2
Gregm61
Registered User
 
Gregm61 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 223
We've got to stop meeting in the same places. People will start talking...

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/.../#entry3086249
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2016   #3
Archlich
Registered User
 
Archlich is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 746
Fully agree with Adan in the l-forum post. "Comeback"? Not really. The "economically-viable floor where it can survive" is all I could ask for.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2016   #4
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Age: 43
Posts: 17,949
These articles always make a big deal over small increases... same with vinyl. Sure, the numbers are slightly up, but prices keep rising a lot. At this point, all we can hope for is that film keeps being made by someone and can be done so within reason. It'll never be mainstream again.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2016   #5
MikeChong
oldskhool
 
MikeChong's Avatar
 
MikeChong is offline
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Canada
Posts: 48
We knew it all along, thanks for the link.
__________________
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2016   #6
Spanik
Registered User
 
Spanik is offline
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 1,347
If it neverwent anywhere, then please explain where are Kodachrome, Provia 400X, Neopan, FP100, FP3000, 110 film, 127 film, cibachrome, Agfa Isopan, Scala, Efke, etc.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2016   #7
rfaspen
Registered User
 
rfaspen's Avatar
 
rfaspen is offline
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Corvallis, OR
Posts: 961
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spanik View Post
If it neverwent anywhere, then please explain where are Kodachrome, Provia 400X, Neopan, FP100, FP3000, 110 film, 127 film, cibachrome, Agfa Isopan, Scala, Efke, etc.
And the old Agfa APX.

I'm about to purchase yet more film. Doing my part...
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2016   #8
Ko.Fe.
Me. Write ESL. Ko.
 
Ko.Fe.'s Avatar
 
Ko.Fe. is offline
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: MiltON.ONtario
Age: 50
Posts: 4,362
Is it CEO article? I read it few days ago and call it "babushkas talk".
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2016   #9
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
 
Calzone's Avatar
 
Calzone is offline
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Hell Gate, Madhattan
Age: 59
Posts: 7,356
Less diversity/selection and higher prices.

Not sure if that's a comeback, but that's the trend.

On the other hand all I need are a few films that I like and can afford as staples.

Cal
__________________
"Vintage Hipster"
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2016   #10
BLKRCAT
100% Film
 
BLKRCAT's Avatar
 
BLKRCAT is offline
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,386
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spanik View Post
If it neverwent anywhere, then please explain where are Kodachrome, Provia 400X, Neopan, FP100, FP3000, 110 film, 127 film, cibachrome, Agfa Isopan, Scala, Efke, etc.
wow only 7 posts in before someone dropped a "K" bomb...

It was never going to last even if were economically viable. The process isn't good for the environment.
__________________
Tumblr Youtube
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2016   #11
rfaspen
Registered User
 
rfaspen's Avatar
 
rfaspen is offline
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Corvallis, OR
Posts: 961
Quote:
Originally Posted by BLKRCAT View Post
wow only 7 posts in before someone dropped a "K" bomb...

It was never going to last even if were economically viable. The process isn't good for the environment.
That's true. The K-14 process is reported to be very polluting. I never found out exactly what chemicals are responsible for this, but the Kodak rep who used to pester my former place of employment assured us it was really nasty and they braced for some possible consequences.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2016   #12
nukecoke
⚛Yashica
 
nukecoke's Avatar
 
nukecoke is offline
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Sweden/China
Posts: 557
#comebackisreal

Hope sellers don't use such articles to hype up the prices.
__________________
tumblr

flickr

About Film Cameras
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2016   #13
daveleo
what?
 
daveleo's Avatar
 
daveleo is offline
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: People's Republic of Mass.
Posts: 3,622
That article is a big zero.
Some guy yapping on a bar stool.
__________________
Dave


"Insults are pouring down on me as thick as hail." .... E. Manet
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2016   #14
charjohncarter
Registered User
 
charjohncarter's Avatar
 
charjohncarter is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Danville, CA, USA
Posts: 7,534
Welcome news, I wish a few more pros would use film. I personally don't like most of their new work.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2016   #15
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is online now
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,335
I don't quite get the theory about measuring the time spent processing digital images against the cost of purchasing, developing and scanning film and seeing the film option as better value. Personally I don't want film to go away and any increase in usage is great but this article is a fair bit of hyperbole in my opinion. Until the mainstream picks it up (unlikely) and starts using it it will remain a niche product. And what about the infrastructure required to support it ... there is no facility within twenty kilometers of me that can develop a roll of film. Home developers are not going to support the level of sales required to make the industry boyant ... it will need more than that.
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2016   #16
John Bragg
Registered User
 
John Bragg's Avatar
 
John Bragg is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Penwithick, Cornwall U.K.
Age: 55
Posts: 1,255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
I don't quite get the theory about measuring the time spent processing digital images against the cost of purchasing, developing and scanning film and seeing the film option as better value. Personally I don't want film to go away and any increase in usage is great but this article is a fair bit of hyperbole in my opinion. Until the mainstream picks it up (unlikely) and starts using it it will remain a niche product. And what about the infrastructure required to support it ... there is no facility within twenty kilometers of me that can develop a roll of film. Home developers are not going to support the level of sales required to make the industry boyant ... it will need more than that.
The very attraction of film for me is that I can home develop it. I have done so for the last 30 or more years and the magic is still there. I am a tactile hands on kind of guy and digital just leaves me cold. The nearest film developing facility is always going to be wherever I happen to be, and it doesn't get any more convenient than that !
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2016   #17
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is online now
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,335
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Bragg View Post
The very attraction of film for me is that I can home develop it. I have done so for the last 30 or more years and the magic is still there. I am a tactile hands on kind of guy and digital just leaves me cold. The nearest film developing facility is always going to be wherever I happen to be, and it doesn't get any more convenient than that !

We are the lucky ones but what about the dewy eyed hipster who has just bought a Nikon F from eBay ... do they learn what we know or do they bite the bullet and pay the price for their developing and scanning needs?
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2016   #18
John Bragg
Registered User
 
John Bragg's Avatar
 
John Bragg is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Penwithick, Cornwall U.K.
Age: 55
Posts: 1,255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
We are the lucky ones but what about the dewy eyed hipster who has just bought a Nikon F from eBay ... do they learn what we know or do they bite the bullet and pay the price for their developing and scanning needs?
Good point Keith. I hope they do what we did and start off using commercial d&p until the real bug bites and they then realise how much they are missing by doing that. We can but hope and help where needed ....
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2016   #19
Faintandfuzzy
Registered User
 
Faintandfuzzy is offline
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spanik View Post
If it neverwent anywhere, then please explain where are Kodachrome, Provia 400X, Neopan, FP100, FP3000, 110 film, 127 film, cibachrome, Agfa Isopan, Scala, Efke, etc.
I use 110 film all the time. Gotta keep my Pentax Auto 110 and Diana Mini 110 well fed.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2016   #20
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 3,790
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
We are the lucky ones but what about the dewy eyed hipster who has just bought a Nikon F from eBay ... do they learn what we know or do they bite the bullet and pay the price for their developing and scanning needs?
they'll pay someone to do it for them as they won't have the time for it with all their kombucha home brewing.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2016   #21
rfaspen
Registered User
 
rfaspen's Avatar
 
rfaspen is offline
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Corvallis, OR
Posts: 961
Mmmmmm. Kombucha.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2016   #22
peterm1
Registered User
 
peterm1's Avatar
 
peterm1 is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 4,007
While it is technically true that films are a physical form of storage of images that can last for a long time if correctly stored I find the argument this makes film superior (also made in the article that formed the basis of this thread) a bit misleading. Because the assumption that they will be correctly stored is a big "if". And of course physical storage is only half the problem. Access is in some ways even more problematic -stuff gets lost 'cos no one knows what is there!

Truth is, I know that 99.9% of my film based images were either thrown out already or are stored in a box in a garage where I never look at them. Because correct storage is problematic. One day, probably when I am dead, they will be thrown out too most likely sight unseen. Films are very bulky and inconvenient to store and unless carefully cataloged (itself a slow and difficult task so usually never undertaken properly) are difficult to view.

More over, usually there is only one copy of the image kept - the original negative or maybe the print. Which makes it vulnerable to loss by fire, flood etc. What goes for my personal store of images goes much more for images made by big firms who may have millions of images. So how do organizations like Time Life deal with this - they digitize their film based images. Images digitized and put into the public digital domain will last for much longer are randomly accessible by anyone given access and are also infinitely replicatable without quality loss.

Maybe this cannot exactly be said for images on someone's home PC which is itself susceptible to loss unless backed up but that still does not negate digital's other benefits described above.

BTW much is often made of the argument that as technology moves forward digital images saved in todays common formats may no longer be viewable. This argument is also made in this article/thread. This is an argument of someone who does not understand digital technology. Has no one heard of conversion software? Surely if that ever were to happen, someone will write an app that can be run over the images in the old, archaic format to update them into the new format. It is a trivial thing to do if the data is intact in the old format. Not only that, the conversion will certainly be done in bulk and at high speed, something that is never possible with film. After all I have done exactly this kind of thing with scores of DVDs I own in order to have the convenience of storing them on a hard drive to access and view on my smart TV after converting from .vob files to .avi files. And of course such conversion software for images is already available to convert proprietary (Nikon, Canon etc) RAW files to .JPG or even to convert between RAW file types such as from .NEX to .DNG files.) ITS NOT AN ISSUE!

There is a place for film images along side digital and if people want to shoot film good luck to them, they have my sincere best wishes. But truth is its a tiny niche and likelier will become more so over time. Meanwhile digital technology will just go on getting better and more accessible to the masses.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2016   #23
sjw617
Panoramist
 
sjw617 is offline
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: NY
Posts: 374
A 5 percentage rise in 2 years sounds more like people here stocking up just in case than a resurgence.
__________________
Panoramist
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2016   #24
tunalegs
Pretended Artist
 
tunalegs's Avatar
 
tunalegs is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 2,272
Quote:
Originally Posted by peterm1 View Post
...

Maybe this cannot exactly be said for images on someone's home PC which is itself susceptible to loss unless backed up but that still does not negate digital's other benefits described above.

BTW much is often made of the argument that as technology moves forward digital images saved in todays common formats may no longer be viewable. This argument is also made in this article/thread. This is an argument of someone who does not understand digital technology. Has no one heard of conversion software? Surely if that ever were to happen, someone will write an app that can be run over the images in the old, archaic format to update them into the new format. It is a trivial thing to do if the data is intact in the old format. Not only that, the conversion will certainly be done in bulk and at high speed, something that is never possible with film. After all I have done exactly this kind of thing with scores of DVDs I own in order to have the convenience of storing them on a hard drive to access and view on my smart TV after converting from .vob files to .avi files. And of course such conversion software for images is already available to convert proprietary (Nikon, Canon etc) RAW files to .JPG or even to convert between RAW file types such as from .NEX to .DNG files.) ITS NOT AN ISSUE!

There is a place for film images along side digital and if people want to shoot film good luck to them, they have my sincere best wishes. But truth is its a tiny niche and likelier will become more so over time. Meanwhile digital technology will just go on getting better and more accessible to the masses.
It probably doesn't matter anyway, since the vast majority of digital images have likely already been lost/abandoned. The thing that I find depressing about digital photography is how many people will grow up with practically no record of their life, despite how many photos they've taken/had taken. Because the majority of people never print them or back them up. They get posted on a website or emailed to relatives, and then forgotten about. And then they're gone. In a decade or two, they may as well have not taken any in the first place.
  Reply With Quote

Ektachrome
Old 07-27-2016   #25
enasniearth
Registered User
 
enasniearth is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 409
Ektachrome

Photomoof is right ,
I do miss ektachrome
That and hie b&w infrared .

An old blues song

"A tree grows in my backyard ,
It only grows at night,
It's branches are all twisted ,
It's leaves afraid of light ."
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2016   #26
noisycheese
Normal(ish) Human
 
noisycheese is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,216
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spanik View Post
If it neverwent anywhere, then please explain where are Kodachrome, Provia 400X, Neopan, FP100, FP3000, 110 film, 127 film, cibachrome, Agfa Isopan, Scala, Efke, etc.
You are correct - those and other slow selling emulsions are no more and we me miss them all. Back in the days of yore, I never shot any Kodak Tech Pan even though I always wanted to. Now I no longer have the chance to give Tech Pan a shakedown cruise. :-(

However: Let us not overlook the fact that B&H currently offers 206 options in rollfilm, while Freestyle Photo currently offers 171 options in rollfilm. That doesn't exactly sound like film as a whole is gasping its last breath...
__________________
The Leica M passion: From the inside it's hard to explain; from the outside it's hard to understand.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2016   #27
newsgrunt
Registered User
 
newsgrunt's Avatar
 
newsgrunt is offline
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,075
I'm honestly getting tired of these repetitive stories. I mean really, who cares ? We use film and that's all that matters. It comes. It goes. We still shoot film until the last man standing comes knocking. Are we that insecure that we need to trumpet every 'film is on the rebound' story ?
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-27-2016   #28
Michael Markey
Registered User
 
Michael Markey's Avatar
 
Michael Markey is offline
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Blackpool ,England
Age: 66
Posts: 3,384
Quote:
Originally Posted by newsgrunt View Post
I'm honestly getting tired of these repetitive stories. I mean really, who cares ? We use film and that's all that matters. It comes. It goes. We still shoot film until the last man standing comes knocking. Are we that insecure that we need to trumpet every 'film is on the rebound' story ?
Couldn`t agree more.
I too fail to see the point of such articles other than for marketing purposes .

I use both digital and film .
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-28-2016   #29
jsrockit
Moderator
 
jsrockit's Avatar
 
jsrockit is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: NYC
Age: 43
Posts: 17,949
Quote:
Originally Posted by newsgrunt View Post
I'm honestly getting tired of these repetitive stories. I mean really, who cares ? We use film and that's all that matters. It comes. It goes. We still shoot film until the last man standing comes knocking. Are we that insecure that we need to trumpet every 'film is on the rebound' story ?
I think it's always written by someone who feels they have discovered something. The unique taste of millions.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-28-2016   #30
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is online now
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,335
In Hindsight I think 'resurgence' may have been a better choice than 'stunning come back!'
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-28-2016   #31
bobby_novatron
Photon Collector
 
bobby_novatron's Avatar
 
bobby_novatron is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: the Great White North (Canada)
Age: 47
Posts: 1,223
I don't care if it's the under-30 year olds or it its the grey-haired dreamers that are buying and shooting film ... as far as I'm concerned, any news like this is GOOD news.
__________________
my Flickr:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/bobby_novatron
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-31-2016   #32
KM-25
Registered User
 
KM-25's Avatar
 
KM-25 is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,585
Quote:
Originally Posted by newsgrunt View Post
I'm honestly getting tired of these repetitive stories. I mean really, who cares ?
I care,

I not only need film to stick around but I want more people to use it so I look at these articles as a form of advertising, reaching new customers by re-branding the message.

There is a time and place for repetition and the promotion of the niche of film is most certainly one of them.
  Reply With Quote

Old 07-31-2016   #33
ChrisPlatt
Thread Killer
 
ChrisPlatt's Avatar
 
ChrisPlatt is offline
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Queens NYC
Age: 56
Posts: 2,367
Perhaps some brave camera company will start making affordable film cameras again.

I hope you didn't destroy all the dies and machinery, Kobayashi-san...

Chris
__________________
Bring back the latent image!
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-09-2016   #34
mslatfly
Registered User
 
mslatfly is offline
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Hagerstown, MD, USA
Posts: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by daveleo View Post
That article is a big zero.
Some guy yapping on a bar stool.
Speaking of some guy on a bar stool. Has anyone seen this?

https://www.borderstan.com/2016/08/2...r-florida-ave/

It's off topic, but I haven't run into the article here on RFF yet
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-10-2016   #35
thawkins
thawkins
 
thawkins's Avatar
 
thawkins is offline
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Texas
Age: 67
Posts: 350
Film is a niche item. No doubt about that. I shoot far more megapixels than film. However my Nikon DSLR is only a computer that takes pictures. When one uses an SRT101, M3 or Retina one has to be a photographer. Film and ancient mechanical cameras help maintain photography skills. My film comes from Freestyle and is processed by Dwaynes in Kansas.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-10-2016   #36
JP Owens
Registered User
 
JP Owens is offline
Join Date: Dec 2014
Age: 66
Posts: 322
Traditional floodlights, I noticed, have disappeared around town here over the last couple of years. Replaced by traditional looking fixtures that have a quarter size flat "dot" in them that put out a thousand watts of light. Technology eventually eats everything. I'm glad film is still having its moment. Would be sad to see it completely disappear.
__________________
_______

"Nothing exists beyond the edges of the frame."
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-10-2016   #37
farlymac
PF McFarland
 
farlymac's Avatar
 
farlymac is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Roanoke, VA
Posts: 5,181
One thing I've noticed in the last few months is a rise in the bid prices for camera gear. Could just be cyclical, but every once in a while I'll run across someone who is just getting into film photography, and sound serious about it, asking about where to find good cameras.

PF
__________________
Waiting for the light
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-10-2016   #38
Bill Clark
Registered User
 
Bill Clark's Avatar
 
Bill Clark is offline
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Minnetonka, Minnesota
Age: 68
Posts: 1,861
I hope you folks are correct. I would like the film industry to continue.

But I also see, to me, it seems like the next generation has just a smattering of people who enjoy making photos using film.

But I hope film products stick around a while longer.
__________________
I use my real name. How about you?
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-10-2016   #39
David Hughes
Registered User
 
David Hughes's Avatar
 
David Hughes is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 5,822
Hi,

It seems to be thriving here...



Not much of a photo but I couldn't use flash and just grabbed it yesterday.

Regards, David
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-10-2016   #40
Cameron
Shoot me, not film
 
Cameron's Avatar
 
Cameron is offline
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 181
Quote:
Originally Posted by charjohncarter View Post
Welcome news, I wish a few more pros would use film. I personally don't like most of their new work.
I think a lot of pros still use film in the fashion industry.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:15.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.