and the site receives a small commission
how long will they keep producing?
- Thread starter lawless23456
- Start date
CT
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 26,617
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Well unless I'm reading you wrongly, from the tone of your post and your help thread which I linked to earlier, you seem be somewhat disenchanted with the whole film process - printing particularly, and positively looking forward to the total demise of film, with all our film cameras relegated to conversation pieces in display cabinets. 
I can even understand it given your printing woes, film photography has always been more difficult, and obtaining that elusive perfect print is probably one of the most difficult parts of all. The very nature of film photography is a challenge compared to digital, and one of the reasons why photographers will keep returning to it as long as it's available. Just looking at this site there's a very evident resurgence in interest in film and if that's a fair cross section of the photographic users out there, then it's strong evidence of renewed interest.
It isn't just about a bunch of old crock photographers looking back through rose tinted specs either, film still has a lot to offer which digital doesn't. When highlights blow out in digital, they do so suddenly and quite offensively compared to film, and it'll be a while yet before digital can match the colour and tones of a Velvia or Provia 6X6 or 6X7 slide held up to the light - something real and tangible which you can hold in your hand.
I can even understand it given your printing woes, film photography has always been more difficult, and obtaining that elusive perfect print is probably one of the most difficult parts of all. The very nature of film photography is a challenge compared to digital, and one of the reasons why photographers will keep returning to it as long as it's available. Just looking at this site there's a very evident resurgence in interest in film and if that's a fair cross section of the photographic users out there, then it's strong evidence of renewed interest.
It isn't just about a bunch of old crock photographers looking back through rose tinted specs either, film still has a lot to offer which digital doesn't. When highlights blow out in digital, they do so suddenly and quite offensively compared to film, and it'll be a while yet before digital can match the colour and tones of a Velvia or Provia 6X6 or 6X7 slide held up to the light - something real and tangible which you can hold in your hand.
- Messages
- 533
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I've got letters after my name and everything, but if that sort of thing impresses you, then you're in the wrong business I'm afraid.
And with your attitude I'd be surprised if you get any paying customers, especially one's that dare to question the quality of your work or choice of medium.
- Messages
- 109
- Name
- Julian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Feeb,
You seem to be putting an opinion forward, then stating it as "fact", for instance, stating that "film photography will die out", "film photography will become obsolete", etc. Are you Mystic Meg? Can you tell the future? Good grief.
To be frank, I think the only person on here having a hissy fit is you, everyone else seems to be being very patient with you. In the face of people disagreeing with you, you just leap to the defensive claiming you're being attacked. You're not. Please show the respect you're asking us to show you. There are people on here who were probably taking pictures 30 years before you were born, and believe it or not, despite your few months at college, they know more than you!
When I claimed that film already was making a revival, your proof that I must be wrong was that your college darkrooms weren't being used very much. Well, that proves nothing except that your college doesn't require students to use them much, does it?
I have 5 friends who enjoy photography, and they all use film. We have little pocket digital things for snapping stuff for the internet, but in my experience, when hobby toggers want to take their pictures, they still prefer film, and I think they always will. It's nothing to do with your argument about quality and how long it'll take for digital to get better than film, you're missing the point; it's about the organic, tactile, 'real' nature of film - being able to develop it yourself, see it, touch it, being responsible for its creation. It's about not sitting in front of a computer tapping away on photoshop, it's about being an artist and not a computer operator.
I don't care how good digital gets, it will never give me the feeling of satisfaction I get when I open the dev tank and see a set of perfect negs, and I'm not alone.
Can't you understand? There are lots of people who simply DON'T LIKE DIGITAL! I think that film will continue to be made for them.
Look at art - people were painting in oils hundreds of yrs ago, and look - they still are, despite how old fahioned it is. And who is the better craftsman, who is the artist- someone who creates an image on photoshop, or someone who stands there with a palette, oils and a brush? I know which I'd have on my wall, thank you.
Take a look at my car. I could have a modern, quiet, smooth economical one, nice and ordinary, plain, just like everyone else's. Instead I choose to drive a '67 beetle. It smells, it's noisy, it's awfully slow, ice forms inside the windowslol and it handles like the tyres are full of porridge. But I, and plenty people like me love it. People in the street stop me to talk about it - they want one. It has character, soul, I've been under it and around it and restored it myself, been covered in oil and rust and crap. I do it myself - hands on - I don't just plug it into a laptop and let some bloody software restore some bloody factory settings. It's more real somehow. And what's more there's a MASSSIVE classic car industry supported by rows of magazines supporting it for people like me. People making spares for it years and years after VW stopped making them itself, ensuring that cars like it will be on the road for a LONG TIME, no matter how old fashioned they are. Cameras are very similar. Film may be slower, clunkier, more old fashioned, and young people like you just can't seem to understand why it's still in use, but there's a dimension to film that people love, that digital can never provide, and that you, due to your lack of experience, don't understand.
Kodak is still developing new films for market,and Ilford and Fuji are constantly carrying out R&D on film too. There's a reason for that.
(Aaaaaannnd breeeeaathe!)
You seem to be putting an opinion forward, then stating it as "fact", for instance, stating that "film photography will die out", "film photography will become obsolete", etc. Are you Mystic Meg? Can you tell the future? Good grief.
To be frank, I think the only person on here having a hissy fit is you, everyone else seems to be being very patient with you. In the face of people disagreeing with you, you just leap to the defensive claiming you're being attacked. You're not. Please show the respect you're asking us to show you. There are people on here who were probably taking pictures 30 years before you were born, and believe it or not, despite your few months at college, they know more than you!
When I claimed that film already was making a revival, your proof that I must be wrong was that your college darkrooms weren't being used very much. Well, that proves nothing except that your college doesn't require students to use them much, does it?
I have 5 friends who enjoy photography, and they all use film. We have little pocket digital things for snapping stuff for the internet, but in my experience, when hobby toggers want to take their pictures, they still prefer film, and I think they always will. It's nothing to do with your argument about quality and how long it'll take for digital to get better than film, you're missing the point; it's about the organic, tactile, 'real' nature of film - being able to develop it yourself, see it, touch it, being responsible for its creation. It's about not sitting in front of a computer tapping away on photoshop, it's about being an artist and not a computer operator.
I don't care how good digital gets, it will never give me the feeling of satisfaction I get when I open the dev tank and see a set of perfect negs, and I'm not alone.
Can't you understand? There are lots of people who simply DON'T LIKE DIGITAL! I think that film will continue to be made for them.
Look at art - people were painting in oils hundreds of yrs ago, and look - they still are, despite how old fahioned it is. And who is the better craftsman, who is the artist- someone who creates an image on photoshop, or someone who stands there with a palette, oils and a brush? I know which I'd have on my wall, thank you.
Take a look at my car. I could have a modern, quiet, smooth economical one, nice and ordinary, plain, just like everyone else's. Instead I choose to drive a '67 beetle. It smells, it's noisy, it's awfully slow, ice forms inside the windows
lol and it handles like the tyres are full of porridge. But I, and plenty people like me love it. People in the street stop me to talk about it - they want one. It has character, soul, I've been under it and around it and restored it myself, been covered in oil and rust and crap. I do it myself - hands on - I don't just plug it into a laptop and let some bloody software restore some bloody factory settings. It's more real somehow. And what's more there's a MASSSIVE classic car industry supported by rows of magazines supporting it for people like me. People making spares for it years and years after VW stopped making them itself, ensuring that cars like it will be on the road for a LONG TIME, no matter how old fashioned they are. Cameras are very similar. Film may be slower, clunkier, more old fashioned, and young people like you just can't seem to understand why it's still in use, but there's a dimension to film that people love, that digital can never provide, and that you, due to your lack of experience, don't understand.Kodak is still developing new films for market,and Ilford and Fuji are constantly carrying out R&D on film too. There's a reason for that.
(Aaaaaannnd breeeeaathe!)
CT
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 26,617
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I think Feeb you need a serious reality check - you ask if anyone here has studied the subject, as though study is only valid if it's sat in a classroom behind a desk. We have all sorts among our members, from beginners to seasoned pros with many years of experience.
There' s nothing wrong with you taking your degree course, in fact I commend you for it, as I would anyone taking the steps to enlightenment, whatever the route, but the simple truth is that when you hopefully have your degree at the end of your course, when it comes to earning a living in photography, no-one will give a flying ferret about your degree or any other qualification you can wave. It's like turning up for an audition as keyboard player with a rock band and waving your Grade 8 Music Diploma, when they've finished laughing they'll just want to know if you can play.
Where your diploma might come in useful is in a teaching job in photography or in certain public sector areas, where the degree will be sufficient evidence of a certain level of understanding. Here's another simple truth....
Those who can do - those who can't teach. You wont find too many great and gifted photographers sat in classrooms imparting basic knowledge to students, they're too busy actually taking photographs and earning a living.
For someone who's been studying photography for all of 6 months your attitude is frankly awful!
There' s nothing wrong with you taking your degree course, in fact I commend you for it, as I would anyone taking the steps to enlightenment, whatever the route, but the simple truth is that when you hopefully have your degree at the end of your course, when it comes to earning a living in photography, no-one will give a flying ferret about your degree or any other qualification you can wave. It's like turning up for an audition as keyboard player with a rock band and waving your Grade 8 Music Diploma, when they've finished laughing they'll just want to know if you can play.
Where your diploma might come in useful is in a teaching job in photography or in certain public sector areas, where the degree will be sufficient evidence of a certain level of understanding. Here's another simple truth....
Those who can do - those who can't teach. You wont find too many great and gifted photographers sat in classrooms imparting basic knowledge to students, they're too busy actually taking photographs and earning a living.
For someone who's been studying photography for all of 6 months your attitude is frankly awful!
Wow, guys dont get the wrong end of the stick i have LOVED the time i have spent making prints in the dark room, i am not disillusioned, i am just very very new at it all (in total i have made one decent print!)
and as i have said, digital will only take over when it can give us what film can, at the moment digital simply cannot produce the quality of black and white print that you can get in a dark room, this is something i have really learnt over the past few months.
i think it will be a long long time UNTIL digital produces the same effects that film does, but i do think it will happen and at that point there will be less and less uses for film anymore (it will be a far more expensive way of producing the same result)
there are many aspects to film that are beautiful and i am enjoying learning them all
its a wonderful process and your right, watching a print develop properly is so so cool and alot of fun, its just i have been struggling to know what a good print looks like, because i havent ever done it before (thats why i posted my 'help me' thread) and i think i explained that fine
i have been studying photography for many many more than six months (lol) thats just how long i have been at college doing it.
i think the ability to do something and the ability to teach something are diffrerent things, none better nor worse than the other.
I agree that specialist arty/photographic types will still be using film for many years to come, i also completely respect that without a basic knowledge of film and printing, its very very hard to achieve good work in digital
but that doesnt change the fact that the industry is moving far more into the digital era, than backwards into film.
Its a beautiful hobby, but in a world full of mass produced posters, the internet and widely avaliable media, it is quite deficient as it is expensive and specialist to re-produce
i have never said my tutor is 'greatly gifted' only that he is a damn good tutor, i will try and find some of the people he has taught and perhaps that will sway you a bit?
and can i once again make it clear that AGE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS its irrelevant how old i am, i go to college with people who are in their 50s and have been working professionally for years! its a choice to go to uni and thats one we have made
and as i have said, digital will only take over when it can give us what film can, at the moment digital simply cannot produce the quality of black and white print that you can get in a dark room, this is something i have really learnt over the past few months.
i think it will be a long long time UNTIL digital produces the same effects that film does, but i do think it will happen and at that point there will be less and less uses for film anymore (it will be a far more expensive way of producing the same result)
there are many aspects to film that are beautiful and i am enjoying learning them all
its a wonderful process and your right, watching a print develop properly is so so cool and alot of fun, its just i have been struggling to know what a good print looks like, because i havent ever done it before (thats why i posted my 'help me' thread) and i think i explained that fine
i have been studying photography for many many more than six months (lol) thats just how long i have been at college doing it.
i think the ability to do something and the ability to teach something are diffrerent things, none better nor worse than the other.
I agree that specialist arty/photographic types will still be using film for many years to come, i also completely respect that without a basic knowledge of film and printing, its very very hard to achieve good work in digital
but that doesnt change the fact that the industry is moving far more into the digital era, than backwards into film.
Its a beautiful hobby, but in a world full of mass produced posters, the internet and widely avaliable media, it is quite deficient as it is expensive and specialist to re-produce
i have never said my tutor is 'greatly gifted' only that he is a damn good tutor, i will try and find some of the people he has taught and perhaps that will sway you a bit?
and can i once again make it clear that AGE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS its irrelevant how old i am, i go to college with people who are in their 50s and have been working professionally for years! its a choice to go to uni and thats one we have made
- Messages
- 5,993
- Name
- Darren
- Edit My Images
- Yes
It's been a long time since I've done any but I love to teach.
As for the long lost topic of will film survive. Yup, I think it's going to be around for ever.
I haven't shot on film commercially for at least 4 years and I don't know anyone else that has either. Professional sales of film or equipment has never been the majority of the market and as such, it's totally irrelevant whether it's a viable commercial media.
People still like it, that's all that counts.
Guns didn't stop the manufacture of bows or arrows, cars haven't displaced saddle makers, MIDI keyboards didn't kill off pianos and digital won't be the end of film.
CT
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 26,617
- Edit My Images
- Yes
CT
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 26,617
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I haven't shot on film commercially for at least 4 years and I don't know anyone else that has either. Professional sales of film or equipment has never been the majority of the market and as such, it's totally irrelevant whether it's a viable commercial media.
i think the problem is, that few amateurs are now using film (compared to massive amount of digital users) and very few pros now use film, so the market as become a specialist thing.
i can imagine one or two companies still producing film, but no where near the amount that they used to. also most camera manufactures have stopped producing new 35mm cameras.
so if both sides of the market are working mainly on digital, i dont see how film will continue and evolve and get better, beyond where digital will go with an awfully huge market to warrent further exploration into it
at some point digital will take over for quality and that is when i think film will really start to falter.
there is definatly an art to film photography, i do think it will be around for a while yet, but i dont think it will be around forever, it eventually will become like VHS, out of production
- Messages
- 533
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Read Orby1's post again, it was really rather good.
I AGREE, BUT ATTITUDE & EXPERIENCE DOES.
CT
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 26,617
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Where on earth was the insult? :shrug:
- Messages
- 5,993
- Name
- Darren
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Personally I don't think the VHS analogy really holds to film, the differences between analogue and digi procedure from stills to video are too large.
I agree that film is likely to become more scarce as the years go by, that it will become more expensive and choice will reduce but as long as there is even the smallest demand, someone will meet it.
- Messages
- 109
- Name
- Julian
- Edit My Images
- Yes
My dad was in the Royal Photographic Society, he was a fellow of it or a licenciate or something, I don't remember. Anyway, I remember him when I was little always going on about how you couldn't get this paper anymore, or that film, or that they'd stopped making this paper or that chemical.
And that was 25 years ago, before digital was born!!!
I suppose what I'm saying is that digital has hastened the shrinking of the film & paper market, but business being what it is, the range of options film and paper wise has been shrinking for years anyway.
Eg, can you still buy potassium ferricyanide as a fixer? I doubt it. I have some of my dad's leftovers should anyone be interested!
And that was 25 years ago, before digital was born!!!
I suppose what I'm saying is that digital has hastened the shrinking of the film & paper market, but business being what it is, the range of options film and paper wise has been shrinking for years anyway.
Eg, can you still buy potassium ferricyanide as a fixer? I doubt it. I have some of my dad's leftovers should anyone be interested!
CT
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 26,617
- Edit My Images
- Yes
You wanna see a really complete contradiction?
Gotta admit though, you're good at making scenes.
i would LOVE for people to disagree with me and have reseach and debating skills to back themselves up. what i refuse to get involved in is this constant slating of one person or another! its really not benefical to anyone!
i have attempted to answer any genuine posts amongst all this madness, and i will do so again by answering this one
thing is, with less paper, film and companies developing these things, the market is small and therefore expensive (why price drop if your not competing) and the youth of today are far far more used to digital use than they are to film, eventually that youth will be the older generation and they wont be doing nearly as much work with film as the older generation now, is. So there will be a continuing decrease in film usage.
I think its a bit sad, because using film teaches you a respect for photography that you just dont have with digital at the moment. You want every picture to be acceptable if you are shooting film, because your effort and work goes into developing those images at every step of the way
digital doesnt do that, it certainly offers different pros and cons but it is a double edged sword when you can take as many images as you want and delete them later
hmmm, i hear what your saying about chemicals and papers, but from what i can gather, papers were always something that chopped and changed, a new wave would be developed and different sizes and shapes would be avaliable, after which they would not be avaliable again for a while (which is all very romantic!)
So i think it may take a few years, a few generations and a few upgrades in technology, but i dont think the youth of today have the passion for film photography that some of the old purists have
i suppose it really comes down to wether or not they will continue teaching dark room practise and if people are still prepared to learn it
time will tell and we shall see. i know what i think is going to happen though
i have attempted to answer any genuine posts amongst all this madness, and i will do so again by answering this one
thing is, with less paper, film and companies developing these things, the market is small and therefore expensive (why price drop if your not competing) and the youth of today are far far more used to digital use than they are to film, eventually that youth will be the older generation and they wont be doing nearly as much work with film as the older generation now, is. So there will be a continuing decrease in film usage.
I think its a bit sad, because using film teaches you a respect for photography that you just dont have with digital at the moment. You want every picture to be acceptable if you are shooting film, because your effort and work goes into developing those images at every step of the way
digital doesnt do that, it certainly offers different pros and cons but it is a double edged sword when you can take as many images as you want and delete them later
hmmm, i hear what your saying about chemicals and papers, but from what i can gather, papers were always something that chopped and changed, a new wave would be developed and different sizes and shapes would be avaliable, after which they would not be avaliable again for a while (which is all very romantic!)
So i think it may take a few years, a few generations and a few upgrades in technology, but i dont think the youth of today have the passion for film photography that some of the old purists have
i suppose it really comes down to wether or not they will continue teaching dark room practise and if people are still prepared to learn it
time will tell and we shall see. i know what i think is going to happen though
i posted that last year i think?? anyway, i hadnt been on any photography forums before even though i had been taking pictures for agges
suddenly realised there was so much more i wanted to learn so i came to places like this for the inspiration that i got from going to college in the end (people are a bit more friendly there)
i have never said i am a master photographer, or that i have been doing it forever, just that i have been learning photographer a good few years longer than i have been studying it at college
not a contradiction mate, just the truth (i hope one day you will learn to see the difference between the two)
suddenly realised there was so much more i wanted to learn so i came to places like this for the inspiration that i got from going to college in the end (people are a bit more friendly there)
i have never said i am a master photographer, or that i have been doing it forever, just that i have been learning photographer a good few years longer than i have been studying it at college
not a contradiction mate, just the truth (i hope one day you will learn to see the difference between the two)
CT
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 26,617
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Nope - posted 21st July, 2008.
- Messages
- 7,993
- Name
- Bazza
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Ok I havn't read all the threads on this forum so please excuse if its been mentioned before.
From what I understand any forensic evidence photographed by the police has to be done with a film camera to make it harder to tamper with the picture.
I may be wrong on this but i don't think so, therefore film will be around for some time to come unless the courts decide that digital photographic evidence is admissable.
Realspeed
From what I understand any forensic evidence photographed by the police has to be done with a film camera to make it harder to tamper with the picture.
I may be wrong on this but i don't think so, therefore film will be around for some time to come unless the courts decide that digital photographic evidence is admissable.
Realspeed
your right mate, someone brought this up earlier, its true that digital imaging is far far too easily manipulated to be used in a court of law, but what if there was some sort of digital polariod? or even some software that embedded into certain cameras and stopped them being tampered with? its not done at the moment because film is readily avaliable and just as benificial, but i dont think it will be long before its replaced with something digital. afterall they are storing 'evidence' in an increasingly digital manner, so perhaps that will be the next thing to change?
just a thought x
- Messages
- 1,828
- Name
- Nick (yes there is more than one of us)
- Edit My Images
- Yes
~sigh~ this seems to be all getting out of hand.
They will still produce film, chemicals and paper for as long as there is a commercial reason to do so.
Yes digital has come on in leaps and bounds and yes the quaility is good and as a TOOL for producing an image then commercially it wins.
But sometimes it is more about taking your time and enjoying the moment, even if it means waiting a week for you sildes or working in a smelly darkroom.
I also go to college (even at 45, never stop learning) and it has a fully equipped darkroom, which is used every week by one or more of us, and speaking to the lecturer the full time students (digital natives) love using it as well.
Some like digital some like film some like both.
They will still produce film, chemicals and paper for as long as there is a commercial reason to do so.
Yes digital has come on in leaps and bounds and yes the quaility is good and as a TOOL for producing an image then commercially it wins.
But sometimes it is more about taking your time and enjoying the moment, even if it means waiting a week for you sildes or working in a smelly darkroom.
I also go to college (even at 45, never stop learning) and it has a fully equipped darkroom, which is used every week by one or more of us, and speaking to the lecturer the full time students (digital natives) love using it as well.
Some like digital some like film some like both.
- Messages
- 1,602
- Name
- Mark
- Edit My Images
- Yes
Feeb - Not being funny right but in another thread you have complained that you don't have enough time to get your college Film Print college project complete.
What are you doing spending all this time responding on this thread when you could be getting on with your studies?
Just my 2p'th...
What are you doing spending all this time responding on this thread when you could be getting on with your studies?
Just my 2p'th...
CT
TPer Emeritus
- Messages
- 26,617
- Edit My Images
- Yes
I can confirm that that certainly used to be the case and that the person producing the prints in court would have to testify that the unretouched negatives from which the prints were made were in, and had remained in, their possession.
Previous posts from people working in the field would suggest that this has now changed in some areas at least.
Some interesting reading here about admissibility of digital media in evidence. CLICKY
Feeb - Not being funny right but in another thread you have complained that you don't have enough time to get your college Film Print college project complete.
What are you doing spending all this time responding on this thread when you could be getting on with your studies?
Just my 2p'th...
Hiya, we dont have use of the darkrooms all the time, i went in earlier but a friend was using the enlarger that i have done all my test prints on, so i have arranged to go back in half an hour and spend the rest of the evening there
i am quite aware of my project, and how much time i need to spend on it, but thats for your concern
~sigh~ this seems to be all getting out of hand.
They will still produce film, chemicals and paper for as long as there is a commercial reason to do so.
Yes digital has come on in leaps and bounds and yes the quaility is good and as a TOOL for producing an image then commercially it wins.
But sometimes it is more about taking your time and enjoying the moment, even if it means waiting a week for you sildes or working in a smelly darkroom.
I also go to college (even at 45, never stop learning) and it has a fully equipped darkroom, which is used every week by one or more of us, and speaking to the lecturer the full time students (digital natives) love using it as well.
Some like digital some like film some like both.
as a career choice, do you think many people go for film or digital? or is it split 50-50
we have open briefs most of the time, so we can chose what we are going to use
for example next term i have to take a photo in the style of Diane Arbus so i will be hopefully using a medium format for the first time! (very exciting!)
i'm sure i read a press release that suggested they were no longer making 35mm...
- Messages
- 1,828
- Name
- Nick (yes there is more than one of us)
- Edit My Images
- Yes
1) I have no idea how many pros still use film, I would think Achitecture, advertising photographes still use film but as for a "split" really do not know.
2) Have fun Diane Arbus certainly had a very interesting way of capturing people, pitty she died at such and early age.
3) Nope 35mm film is still being made, in fact some of the companies like Konica, Agfa (I think) who stopped making B&W film have now been released by a comapny in China called Marco (who are developing new emulsions as well).
Don't forget that there is still a big interest in Large Format photography.
- Messages
- 3,080
- Edit My Images
- No
hello Fi , sorry if you thought i was shouting at you ,you just happened to be nearby as i raised my voice . just because digital is going to get better than film ( if it isnt already )wont stop me wanting to use it ,,the point i am trying to make is that i like film and will end up fighting someone out there for the last roll of it to be made ,as said by someone earlier , they drive an old vw bug , because they like it ,dont have to ,but they want to ,well i will use film because i want to . and im just wondering why you are looking forward to using a dying system ? ( that'ill be mf )
yeah i think its fading but some certainly still do
its wether the next generation of pros will though...she facinates me, i have been studying her for ages and have written a long essay on her and Dorothea lange, and their different techniques, next year we get to choose which one we would like to work on and i have chosen Arbus
sorry i actually meant 35mm Cameras. i might be wrong but i am sure i heard that somewhere (possibly in the Independant)
see i feel this is where digital has a long long way to catch up, its going to be a good while until the quality of medium and large formats are avaliable in digital. It is when that cross is made (when digital produces images as good and better than those formats, that i think film will be gone)
Hi there, i like working with film because its something different and exciting and is over all teaching me ALOT about photography (shadows, shapes that sort of thing) i find it quite easy to get excited about loads of things which is handy when you are learning lots of new stuff
i think the issue is, that although there are many people like you guys who LOVE film and remember the joy of using it and everything else, those people are slowly getting older, and the youth of today dont have the nostalgic aspect of shooting with film. they are far more into their digi cameras and find it hard to transistion backwards
i think you would be hard pushed to find more than a handful of people under 20, who care as deeply about film as some of the posters here
for that reason, i feel in a few generations, it will have run its course