how long will they keep producing?

joxby said:
I can live with that as a reason not to shoot film, although the shooting can be pretty similar.
Unfortunately, it renders the other perceived disadvantages used to argue against shooting film.....irrelevant..:LOL:

I love both digital and film, I shoot digital for money because I have to, I shoot film for recreation because its more full filling, I'm angry with myself because I'm not good/confident enough to shoot paid work on film, that doesn't mean film is good for nothing, it just means I'm useless, but entertained.

I get miles more entertainment per quid spent out of film than I'll ever get out of digital, it never leaves the studio except for maybe some sports stuff, but I always have my film camera with me...:shrug:

IMO - If you want to earn a living shooting dslr sized film, don't bother trying, if you want to shoot photographs where the sum of the parts equals more than the whole, shoot film.
And don't dis either till you've tried both as an art rather than a commercial enterprise...:D
Click to expand...



Minor rethink - there is one type of film I did love to use

What's usually referred to as 'Slide' film. The vibrancy & saturation of Kodachrome 64 was a sheer delight

As was the fact that it's the hardest film to shoot on as its exposure latitude is low, and in many ways the 'purest' too as (aside from the odd filter) you could not add or take anything away. What you shot is what you got and to get a full frame image that was a belter of colour, composition, exposure & subject was FAB

DD
 
Chris Reed said:
some people feel shooting film will give them some kind of "street cred" and that iss why they do it, they then trade this for various things, like a snobby attitude towards those who do not shot film, or sexual favors.
Click to expand...

Could we have ourselves a lesser spotted TP troll? There's no more snobbery in shooting film from my limited experience than the snobbery of those shooting full frame digital, medium format digital of those who have 1-series bodies. I could argue with a certain amount of conviction that there's far more snobbery from Canon and Nikon users over their brand alleigance (sp) than there is from people shooting film. In fact there's probably more snobbery from digital user who turn their noses up asking why you're using one of those old fashioned film cameras.
 
DiddyDave said:
Minor rethink - there is one type of film I did love to use

What's usually referred to as 'Slide' film. The vibrancy & saturation of Kodachrome 64 was a sheer delight

As was the fact that it's the hardest film to shoot on as its exposure latitude is low, and in many ways the 'purest' too as (aside from the odd filter) you could not add or take anything away. What you shot is what you got and to get a full frame image that was a belter of colour, composition, exposure & subject was FAB

DD
Click to expand...


Oh god yes, its discontinued, I never had the opportunity to shoot it :shake:, if Velvia goes, I'm bumshafted, not that koda 64 is anything like Velvia.
They do say the introduction of Velvia contributed to its demise, I dunno why they're completely different, maybe it was the complicated processing.
I'm gutted its not available any more, its a feeling film shooters of the future might experience with films that are widely available today, like Velvia.
 
joxby said:
Oh god yes, its discontinued, I never had the opportunity to shoot it :shake:, if Velvia goes, I'm bumshafted, not that koda 64 is anything like Velvia.
They do say the introduction of Velvia contributed to its demise, I dunno why they're completely different, maybe it was the complicated processing.
I'm gutted its not available any more, its a feeling film shooters of the future might experience with films that are widely available today, like Velvia.
Click to expand...

Kodachrome hasn't been discontinued! :) There's 1 place in the US that develops it. 7Dayshop sell Kodachrome afaik. Process paid, obv.
 
I think that's probably 35mm, I want 120, it was discontinued in 1996.
It would still be a bind to send it to the US for processing, Switzerland was bad enough. :(
 
joxby said:
I think that's probably 35mm, I want 120, it was discontinued in 1996.
It would still be a bind to send it to the US for processing, Switzerland was bad enough. :(
Click to expand...

Yes, 35mm - sorry I didn't see you specify 120, although I only sped-read through the topic.

Kodachrome isn't all that, there's ektachrome which I think is at 120 with fairly similar results, although at 35mm is very noisy.
 
I'm very far from being an expert, but personally I think film is delicious! :love:

I'm on my third photography course now and in each one we always start out using film. I think it's important to understand every step of photography in order to fully use this knowledge to get the shots you want - and the knowledge you gain using film translates very well to digital.

I do have my DSLR which I use regularly, but for me a digitally produced image does not hold the same value as a film and image lovingly devloped and processed by hand! I love the control you have over every single step of the way, and the fact that it slows you down and forces you to consider your images.

It seems like with the huge rise of digital cameras, so has there been a huge rise in terrible photos and "photographers" plastered everywhere - the DSLR has allowed Joe Bloggs and all of his friends to show off their (not so) artistic talent to the world!

I think film and digital are both great for different reasons, but I think these days film gets a raw deal. In my personal opinion, a 'professional' photographer who is adept at every stage of film processing as well as top notch digital skills stands out more than one who has just come into photography with a DSLR.
Yes, I know, it is the end image that counts, it's just something that, for me, sets photographers apart from the rest, it brings a certain something to the table.

Also when I think forward to my imaginary wedding day, :thinking: I often consider what sort of photographer I would want, and what sort of images. One thing I would DEFINITELY want is a photographer highly skilled in B&W film, so that they can produce some beautiful, delicious, high quality silvery images - I'm sorry, but B&W prints from digital will never compare to this - higher res or not!
 
There's much more of a 'ritual' when shooting film, it's a lot more intimate. I have the luxury of being a complete amateur and shooting what I want when I want and actually enjoy the 'creative' & developing process. I think it's a shame that DiddyDave finds the whole thing soulless and dry by taking on a 'We make money not art' kind of philosophy.

Kodachrome actually is 'all that' it's been around for 70 years or so and still nothing touches it for sharpness and colour, it's unique and unfortunately it seems Kodak are reluctant to run another batch of 64, so the stock that's left now may be the last, so grab while you can.
 
sprog said:
I think it's a shame that DiddyDave finds the whole thing soulless and dry by taking on a 'We make money not art' kind of philosophy.
Click to expand...



Where the Hell did that come from ??? :eek:

That's Gonads of the highest order to suggest that represents my views at all - I create ART, commissioned art it may be but first & foremost I create art in my images, that's what I'm after full-stop!!!

What I don't agree with is the emotional aspect some here are affording to the process of capturing that art. For me, shooting film would be a pain compared to shooting digital, but the shooting process is souless - it's just using a bit of equipment to capture my art - that's all it is

I doubt Banksy loves his spray cans, and perhaps Leonardo didn't get all moist-eyed over his brushes, its what they produced with them that matters

So Sprog - do me a favour and either explain where you got that idea from, and preferably retract it

DD
 
I see where your coming from but perhaps it does come down down to a difference between those of us that photograph for a hobby and those that do it for a living. From a commercial aspect your reasons are completely sound, from a hobbyists point I think things are a bit different.

Its a bit like people who like doing track days, they could take something like I dunno, a Focus ST, a great car, they'll go quickly and have some fun. They could do the same trackday in a caterham, no traction control, ESP, no gizmos. Different ways of skinning the same cat but one will be a lot more involving than the other I suspect. And I reckon it's a simliar thing with film.

I probably haven't explained myself very well but hopefully you catch my drift.
 
PMSL at all this contention! :LOL:

I sincerely hope they don't stop producing film, and there does seem to be a resurgence of interest of late. I shot film on a commercial basis for years, only going over to digital when I reverted to being a hobbyist. Would I shoot a wedding on film now? No - the advantages of shooting digital are obviously enormous, not the least of which is having complete control of your output.

I always hated the darkroom side of film work - printing particularly, so having the ability to scan negs these days is a huge bonus and gives me the best of both worlds.

All roads lead to Rome, but it's no bad thing to change your route now and again. ;)
 
I prefer film, and only shoot digital like a Polaroid in the studio to check the lighting distribution and contrast before I shoot medium format. I think it will be a hell of a long time before digital even full frame can produce the quality of medium format film.
 
Kev M said:
a Focus ST... caterham...
Click to expand...

That's a similar analogy I use, except it's a Nissan Skyline vs an Aston Vantage (or MP3 vs Vinyl) IMO digital has no soul and is too clinical and dry for a lot of the stuff I like to shoot, my new S5 Pro is an improvement, but I still don't get the same buzz that I get from film.

Digital's probably great for your turnover if you're trying to make a living from photography and punting out portraits day-in-day-out, but still lacks something (punters are probably totally unaware of course, but you know)
 
Dave , maybe the difference between you and some of us is that we do it for fun and you don't . if i wanted to go out for a fun day on a motorbike i'd want a yamaha r1 , not a honda 90 ,,,so what i (we )use matters to us .
 
anyway as for how long will film last ,,,,just wondering how many film cameras there are in india and china (and the rest of the world ) that will still be needing film for a while ,, cant see them all being able to afford the latest digital cameras just yet
 
DiddyDave said:
so called experts brow-beating about the "best" method

No-one's said that in this thread, in fact I don't think anyone's said either is better - so was that a general though of yours?

DD
Click to expand...
For sure - a general observation. I've overheard people saying "Pah! You're not still shooting film are you?!" and that I find a bit baffling as much as comparisons in magazines where presumed experts have been trying to prove the resolving power of the latest chip is greater than some film or other... Anyway sorry I was a bit slow picking up this thread again!
 
joxby said:
I'm sure that's probably true, when digital began to get competitive, it was seen generally as the second coming of the messiah.
We've had time to evaluate it from all angles and it turns out it isn't "all that" to a lot of peeps.
Another factor is the peeps that wouldn't have got interested in any kind of photography were it not for digital, now taking it step further and exploring other avenues of photo production.
So there's a demand for film right there that wouldn't exist without digital beginners.
Click to expand...

Yep, you've certainly got a point there, joxby ;).

I bought my first SLR (a digital, Olympus E420) just last week and after having got myself acclimatised to the prices of digital cameras and lenses from all of the major brands, I had a quick glance on eBay at the non-digital stuff :|.

:eek: I could not believe that prices had tumbled so far and so fast, on equipment that I can remember my dad cancelling our family holidays to pay for :p in the 1970's. So, I just couldn't resist buying a couple more Olympuses (Olympii ?) - an OM10 and a minty "Trip", at just over £50 for the pair :D! That sort of money wouldn't even buy me the cheapest, secondhand lens for my E420 :shake:.

Now that the digital SLR has allowed me to understand some of the basics of photography, without costly and time-consuming experiments with real film, I feel more confident about having a go at doing it "properly", which would not have happened without my DSLR :).

Next, I have to figure out the best place to buy film and which kind to use :thinking:. Still, at least I'm lucky enough to have a photo processing shop on the other side of my street - not as many people can say that today, as could 5 years ago :crying:.
 
i think it will take a few more years of InkJet evolution, but when you can copy exactly with digital what you can do with film... there will be no more need for it
 
there's no need for people to ride horses anywhere ,, but they still do ,,,,

THEY ENJOY IT , sorry was i shouting ?
 
yeah it will become a reclusive, specialist thing, maybe having a come back in a few years time

but i honestly dont think film will be neccessary when its objective can be achieved with digital, we are still a long way off that though at the moment.

Your totally entitled to your opinion and so am i thanks
 
really? strange that the dark rooms at my college (which is one of the three places in the country you can study practical photography at degree level) there is a severe lack of new or old students using the dark room, other than one or two projects they have pretty much resigned it and use it only to teach more affluently the nature of photography

infact very few current professional photographers use flim, those that do are more fine art printers. they mix the two and this is where darkroom work is good

by having a come back, i mean it willl be used by the pros, therefore the paper developing companies will start up again (99% of them have stopped) and film will start being produced as it was before, not at a quater of the revenue as it is now

you can cry and shout and stamp your feet for however long you like, fact is, digital is taking over it HAS taken over

film is an obsolete concept which has become specialist

fact
 
So how does that explain Fuji & Kodak reporting an increase in film sales?

Unless people are hording it perhaps.
 
because fuji and kodak are the only two companies producing some types of film anymore, therefore they have had an increase very recently, because the other companies have all stopped making them.

film sales in general, and companies relying on film production are suffering massively

look at jessops, or any one making fibre paper anymore! its just not happening like it used to
 
feeb said:
you can cry and shout and stamp your feet for however long you like, fact is, digital is taking over it HAS taken over

film is an obsolete concept which has become specialist

fact
Click to expand...

Stop the press, digital has taken over...omg ! why wasn't I told...:LOL:
My digi cam has been a bit obsolete for a while now, still, I's now a specialist...:banana:...like quantum physics or bio chemistry.

There is no argument that the use of film in any arena, isn't what it was 10 or 15 years ago.
With the greatest respect, students aren't the most reliable section of society to use to measure the popularity of old skool film use, they're far too busy with pixels, keyboards and the instant nature of digital to be taken by the subtleties and patience of film, unless forced into it by course work.
I think there has definitely been an upward turn in the use of film and therefore the sale of film in the past couple of years.
I dunno about pros shooting film..Kodak did a survey about a year ago and found that of the 9000 pro togs that took part, 75% still used film.
I dunno what that says about the big picture, or the type of people who are likely to take part in that survey, or even if Kodak "stacked the deck" quite why they'd do that I dunno, I'm sure they'd rather be selling crappy flash cards and plastic mini tripods to peeps who don't know any better for bigger margins...like Jessops, :shrug: but its the same old same old reasons.
 
we havent used digital for ANY projects other than one photoshop project (which was a week long, mini one) we use film all the time, most of the time infact!

my sources are trained professionals who have been in the business for thirty years, they know what they are talking about, and we have studyed the decline of film in the last 10 years compared to the (relatively new) technology being developed with digital.

its something they HAVE to teach us about, as its part of the industry and something we need to know if we are to make it anywhere fast!

my kicking and screaming comment was in relation to the guy who chose to shout at me, digital photography is the future of photography, if you dont believe me, do some research and i am sure you will find the facts add up

i can totally believe that about the courts, without technology being introduced that allows them to know for definate that the images havent been tampered with, they are NOT going to allow digital photographs into a court

i think thats fairly beside the point though, as i said in previous posts 'film will become obsolete when digital photography can supply the same quality as film' and its true, it will. look at point and shoots, they are NOT really in production as far as film goes, because digital has become an easier medium which produced similar results

amateur photography, has become far more about the digital now, that is has about the film, because people just go for the easiest, cheapest option, which gets them good results.

now i am just not going to react to any more of these bitter little squabbles, if you have a point of view please post it and we can have a chat

but i really dislike making my point very clear and it being invalidated by people who dont even have the good grace to come up with a suggestion of their own.

thank you

Fi
 
feeb, you appear to be the only one who's bitter. Other people are only posting their opinions and if they disagree you throw a hissy fit. you really need to take a chill pill.
 
i honestly have no problem with people havent differing points of view, i think i have far from flung 'a hissy fit' i just much prefer communicated with people who are having a discussion than an argument about something

if we all have our own perspectives then thats fine, but picking apart someone elses to prove your point makes me feel that you really DONT have much of a point.

you responded with 'police forensics dont use digital' and responded to that, because it WASNT negative and bitter

i dont want to be upsetting people, making people angry or feeling like i am being hounded all around me because for some reason my opinion isnt valid, that will make me lash out as it would any thoughtful and feeling individual

so tell me fabs - whats your view on the whole thing?
 
looking back to the post before yours, i can see i have been completely ridiculed by a person who has no idea what i have been taught, what i have learnt on my own accord and who has been teaching it to me. its crazy!

please can we just have a bit of respect for eachother and our points of view, its not hard its just common courtesy.
 
You keep going on about people making out that you opinions aren't valid, but I see no veidence of that here. It's quite obvious that you feel that you've been taught/told certain things and therefore they must be true and if anyone here disagrees then you are taking it personally. You also have to remember that you are seeing written words and therefore it is also difficult to tell intonations. This is not a university debating society, it is an internet forum used by people of all ages from all walks of life and they will have different ways of expressing themselves.

As for my opinion, I think that probably film will eventually die out, but not for a very long time. There is still plenty of film being produced and a very large number of enthusiasts who still enjoy using it. As long as there are people who want to buy it, then they will sell it. Remember, there are still people out there using methods of photography from 200 years ago!
 
feeb said:
we havent used digital for ANY projects other than one photoshop project (which was a week long, mini one) we use film all the time, most of the time infact!

my sources are trained professionals who have been in the business for thirty years, they know what they are talking about, and we have studyed the decline of film in the last 10 years compared to the (relatively new) technology being developed with digital.

its something they HAVE to teach us about, as its part of the industry and something we need to know if we are to make it anywhere fast!
Click to expand...

It's a bit odd that with all this high power instruction and informed opinion at your diposal, you need to come on TP asking for help with printing in this thread.

I'm not quite sure what your point is - of course film has declined since the advent of digital - whether it will eventually die out completely remains to be seen. In the meantime, many people will prefer to shoot film while some will enjoy shooting both film and digital. Count me among the latter, I enjoy shooting film if only for a change from the samo samo digital process.
 
CT i will ask for help and support if i so wish to thank you very much, i am studying and i have been for a few months. i dont claim to know everything (a long shot from everything, i still have another 6 months of my first year to do) and i have no shame in that, i would hate to feel i know everything, its all very new and learning is so much fun.

I would far rather this discussion was about film rather than my inability to discuss it with such well educated people (have any of you actually studied this topic??)

i think you summed it up in your last line, you enjoy shoots film because its a change from the samo digital process

well until 10 years ago film was the samo process, digital has taken over as the general medium for photography.

eventually film will be obsolete for amateur photographers, and i think that printing will be very different and seen as an art form in its own right, thats a specialist thing though

look at galleries and shows happening around at the moment, in the National Portrait Gallery, the majority of the photography is shot in digital.

however printing artists are showing their work in Southampton because its novel and different to have a printing artist than just a photographer

they have become different mediums, one popular and one not so popular at all.
 
You have to consider that virtually all the blurb you've posted in this thread so far has been other people's (i.e. your tutors) opinions, when you grow up and get some of your own, maybe people will actually listen to you.
 
sprog said:
You have to consider that virtually all the blurb you've posted in this thread so far has been other people's (i.e. your tutors) opinions, when you grow up and get some of your own, maybe people will actually listen to you.
Click to expand...

I dont claim to be speaking for anyone else, my opinion is MINE. i think this is fairly off topic though, why has this suddenly become an excuse for everyone to tell me why i dont have an opinion? i can answer that

its because you really dont have the back up research and information to provide one half of a healthy debate, so you have to resort to mud slinging in order to make yourselves feel better

what has my age got to do with ANYTHING?? am i not a photography because of my age? do you even KNOW my age?

i study with people who are 19 and i study with people who are 50. Degrees arent just for young people, lots of people do them

now do you have a point of view? or are you just mud slinging?

p.s - the point of a degree, and any amount of study, is to give you the basis to develop your own opinion, no good tutor (and my tutor is very good) would give me a point of view, they just offer me the resources to make my own.
 
feeb said:
why has this suddenly become an excuse for everyone to tell me why i dont have an opinion?
Click to expand...

Students can have an opinion, it just doesn't matter. (an oldie but a goody)

now do you have a point of view? or are you just mud slinging?
Click to expand...

I suppose I was really making a point about your posting style, it is very confrontational and polarised. Have you considered a career in right wing politics?
 
right so my opinion doesnt matter! and you wonder why i am not all sunshine and light? come on guys! lead by example!

i would love to have a healthy debate on here with someone who actually had a reasonable point of view on this matter, and didnt feel the need to resort to such nasty comments to get some sense of satisfaction

now i must ask, have you EVER decided to study your art? or are you just blithering through hoping that you understand what it all means one day?

how does my decision to go to college make me LESS of a photographer than you, or have LESS of an opinion than you? Did i have more of an opinion six months ago when i was in a similar situation, learning from online tutorials and trying to learn myself?

your point is so insulting to anyone that is studying and i think you need to take a step back and stop insulting people frankly

might posting style is ONLY confrontational to those who chose to appose it, unfortunatly it seems to be far more about insulting others than making a vaild argument in return

if you wish to make 'a point about my posting style' how about you PM me or start a new thread, this one is about film and the production of thanks
 
doesnt seem very funny to me- maybe the use of a :) would have helped?
as it is he has chosen to insult me (and the thousands of other people doing degrees in their chosen field) again and again and again

yet is shockingly quiet when it comes to his own education.

strange that isnt it!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top