If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Film Lover's Lament
"uw wayne" wrote in message
oups.com... Hellow Summer Wind. I Have honestly, 9 Nikon film bodies. Three of which are range finders. The number of lenses and Nikon/compatable strobes is just short of what someone of questional intellect might acquire. I am seeking out more. Particular models of course.I do embrace digital as the wave of the future. But film and it's quality will be with us for quite some time. Maybe at a slighty premium price but it will be worth it.Hurrah for Digital, Thank Goodness for emulsion. I still shoot film for stills. My digital video camera takes lousy 1-MP stills, and I will use it now and then for a quickie shot to e-mail. I'm a little afraid to get a digital SLR because I might be smitten by the convenience. Digital's convenience won out over film's quality, or that's the consensus among most film aficionados, and it's my opinion. I hope you are right that film will be around a some time. The rise of digital is an interesting phenomenon. SW |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Film Lover's Lament
"Summer Wind" wrote in message news:a4MRf.53999
I'm a little afraid to get a digital SLR because I might be smitten by the convenience. Digital may or may not be more convenient than film. It is not a given. There may be times that one does not want to edit hundreds of vacation photos, or to worry about having enough memory to store all those shots while away from home. And my film SLRS have no battery problems--my batteries are good for 10,000 exposures or one year. Not so with my digicam. And sometimes it is just easier to drop the film off at the photofinisher and let them do all the work. One can always scan and edit the important shots later. There are millions of good film cameras in circulation, and even if new production halted entirely, it would be decades before all the cameras currently in circulation had reached the end of their service lives. Of course, film will probably become a commodity, and be made in China. I don't think that Kodak will want to produce it in America and pay US wages and benefits. Where I think we will experience some dissatisfaction is with the decline of photofinishers. I suspect that lots of retail outlets will get rid of one-hour or overnight film processing, so they can make better use of the floor space to sell more profitable items. It may be that we'll have to mail our film out, or will have only a handful of local outlets that will handle it over-the-counter. But that is years down the road. |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Film Lover's Lament
It may be that we'll have to mail our film out, or will have only a
handful of local outlets that will handle it over-the-counter. But that is years down the road. Actually, this is exactly the situation I've been in for the past five years. It isn't a problem. "Jeremy" wrote in message newsaXRf.11561$Km6.8735@trnddc01... "Summer Wind" wrote in message news:a4MRf.53999 I'm a little afraid to get a digital SLR because I might be smitten by the convenience. Digital may or may not be more convenient than film. It is not a given. There may be times that one does not want to edit hundreds of vacation photos, or to worry about having enough memory to store all those shots while away from home. And my film SLRS have no battery problems--my batteries are good for 10,000 exposures or one year. Not so with my digicam. And sometimes it is just easier to drop the film off at the photofinisher and let them do all the work. One can always scan and edit the important shots later. There are millions of good film cameras in circulation, and even if new production halted entirely, it would be decades before all the cameras currently in circulation had reached the end of their service lives. Of course, film will probably become a commodity, and be made in China. I don't think that Kodak will want to produce it in America and pay US wages and benefits. Where I think we will experience some dissatisfaction is with the decline of photofinishers. I suspect that lots of retail outlets will get rid of one-hour or overnight film processing, so they can make better use of the floor space to sell more profitable items. It may be that we'll have to mail our film out, or will have only a handful of local outlets that will handle it over-the-counter. But that is years down the road. |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
Film Lover's Lament
There is nothing like the security of a piece of medium that has to go
through a chemical bath process run by a minimum wage kid more interested in oogling the better looking customers than keeping an eye on his machine. -- http://www.chapelhillnoir.com home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto The Improved Links Pages are at http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html A sample chapter from "Haight-Ashbury" is at http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html "Summer Wind" wrote in message . com... I was shooting at the art museum with my Yashica-Mat 124G Sunday and it caught the eye of a professional photographer. She shoots mostly digital professionally but still loves film and uses it for personal projects, using her TLRs and 4x5 view cameras. We both agreed that having a negative, rather than a digital file, gives one a feeling of security. I just saw this article from 03-02-06 today. Are any of you doing the "panic buying" of film cameras that's going on in Japan, as mentioned in the article? I'm considering picking up a couple of P&S models from Adorama while I can still get them, including a Olympus Stylus Epic. The photo mags have almost no ads for film Point & Shoot cameras. I'm worried about the availibility of film in a few years, but I hope it's a needless worry. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...065452,00.html The Times March 02, 2006 Film camera is killed off by millions of pixels By Ben Hoyle and Leo Lewis FROM Henri Cartier-Bresson's reportage to Mario Testino's portraits, the camera and film captured the images that defined the 20th century. But they may soon be available only as expensive collectors' items, driven out of production by the digital revolution. Within the past few weeks two giants of the industry, Konica Minolta and Fuji Photo Film, have announced their withdrawal from the traditional film and camera business, triggering a frenzy of last-minute buying in Japan. In Britain, Dixons stopped selling 35mm cameras last August. Jessops, the leading specialist retailer of photographic equipment, has committed itself to stocking 35mm cameras for the foreseeable future but digital cameras outsell them nine to one. Digital cameras now cost from less than £100, are cheaper to run because they don't require film, and offer flexibility of shooting styles and effects that traditional photography cannot match. Sales in Britain are expected to reach £963 million in 2009, according to Mintel, up from £215 million in 2001. The traditional leading camera brands are having to evolve or die. Struggling with losses of nearly half a billion pounds, Konica, the company that made Japan's first colour film, will close its camera and film operations by March, and is laying off nearly 4,000 workers. Fuji Photo Film is cutting 5,000 jobs and has begun a gradual retreat from the business that made its name. Nikon has reduced its film camera output to a single model while Canon, the world's largest maker of digital cameras, is believed to have prepared its withdrawal strategy from the 35mm market. Kodak is trying to reinvent itself as a digital company. As a result photography stores in Japan have reported "panic buying" of film cameras by enthusiasts worried that the machines will disappear altogether. Cameras which, four weeks ago, were being sold for around £800, have now soared in value to £1,500. A similar boom may be about to hit the British camera market. Alex Falk, the owner of Mr Cad, the largest independent camera store, has been stockpiling 35mm cameras. "In the past few months there has been a huge increase in the number of people coming back to film. Digital cameras are made from glue and plastic so when they break you can't fix them. A three-year-old digital camera is worth about three and six but you can sell a Nikon Rangefinder from the 1950s for £3,000." For many photographers the feel of a film camera is more important than its resale value. Chris Gatcum, of Amateur Photographer magazine, said: "There's a real romanticism to film that digital doesn't have and a lot of our readers are up in arms because they think this is the end of film. It's not - it's just the end of film camera production." Among the professionals, news and sport photographers have used digital cameras for years, but others remain wedded to film. Brian Aris, a photographer who took the Beckhams' wedding photographs and the Queen's 70th birthday portrait, said that portraiture was likely to prove the last refuge of film photography. He uses film for 90 per cent of his work but is preparing to move more into digital: "We've all got to embrace it." David Bailey, arguably Britain's best-known photographer since the 1960s, agreed: "Digital is great for photography as a whole and for the amateur the advantages are enormous because you can stick your photos straight on to your computer and you don't have to mess around with chemicals to get your images. But there's still a place for film and I use it 80 per cent of the time." Visit our pictures galleries online LIGHT FANTASTIC 1826 Nicéphore Niépce creates the first photograph using a pewter plate and a substance called bitumen of Judea. It is a view of his outhouses in Chalons sur Soane 1855 The physicist James Clerk Maxwell exhibits an early colour photograph of a tartan ribbon to the Royal Society of Edinburgh. 1888 First Kodak camera goes on sale. An improved model with film instead of paper is introduced in 1889. The cameras had to be sent back to the factory for processing, but they could take 100 pictures. 1900 The Brownie camera goes on sale, an inexpensive box camera that made snapshots possible, and remained popular until the 1960s. 1963 Instant colour film; Polaroid is introduced 1981 Sony markets the Mavica as a filmless camera - the first incarnation of the digital camera |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
Film Lover's Lament
"Jeremy" wrote in message newsaXRf.11561$Km6.8735@trnddc01... "Summer Wind" wrote in message news:a4MRf.53999 Where I think we will experience some dissatisfaction is with the decline of photofinishers. I suspect that lots of retail outlets will get rid of one-hour or overnight film processing, so they can make better use of the floor space to sell more profitable items. It may be that we'll have to mail our film out, or will have only a handful of local outlets that will handle it over-the-counter. But that is years down the road. The disappearance of photofinishers is indeed a worry, but they are currently printing digital files and I hope that keeps them going. I still do my own black and white now and then, but I'm more likely to scan the negatives than make traditional wet prints. I also have a Jobo CPE-2 that I haven't used for color in quite a while because the chemistry is difficult to find locally. I moved last September and all of my darkroom equipment is still down at my old house. That gives you some idea of how often I use it these days. Just thinking about it makes me want to shoot a few rolls of B&W this weekend and process & scan. SW |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Film Lover's Lament
"Summer Wind" wrote in message
. com... The disappearance of photofinishers is indeed a worry, but they are currently printing digital files and I hope that keeps them going. I still do my own black and white now and then, but I'm more likely to scan the negatives than make traditional wet prints. I also have a Jobo CPE-2 that I haven't used for color in quite a while because the chemistry is difficult to find locally. I moved last September and all of my darkroom equipment is still down at my old house. That gives you some idea of how often I use it these days. Just thinking about it makes me want to shoot a few rolls of B&W this weekend and process & scan. I never did like traditional darkroom work and I did embrace the digital darkroom. I've gotten back into slides, after a 2-decade hiatus, and it's a great feeling to see the much greater level of luminance--even through a battery-powered viewer. I'm going to try some Kodachrome and see how long it takes to get back to me from the processor. It is becoming harder to get prints made from optical enlarging equipment, but Dale Labs still does that work, and they use a Nikkor enlarging lens that costs over $10k! Best part of using film is the range of films that can be put into the camera, rather than settling on the characteristics of the chip in a digital camera. Next best thing is that I can exploit the capabilities of my nearly 20 SMC Takumar and SMC Pentax lenses--with their creamy bokeh and deep color saturation. I am not about to give that up, and I feel sad for those younger photographers that never had the advantage of working with film. I use my digital for snapshots and non-critical stuff, like home inventory shots, and I'm happy with that. I just think that folks that dumped film, thinking that it has become obsolete, have thrown the baby out with the bath water. For me, photography is not just about creating images, it is also about the tactile sense of gratification that comes from using older, heavier, metal cameras and lenses, with their silky smooth focusing. I take photos for pleasure, not for a living, and to me a camera is more than just a tool from which I earn a paycheck. Admittedly, my delight in classic equipment is subjective, but millions of amateurs in years past had similar feelings about photography. Without wanting to start a flame war, let me just say that digital photography has become somewhat "commoditized," over film photography. Especially with amateurs and novices, all one hears is a discussion about whose camera has more megapixels, as though that were all one needed to think about. I rarely see lens reviews anymore, unlike back in the 70s. And it's been awhile since I saw any of those annual "film roundup" issues from the photo magazines, where the subtleties of the various emulsions were analyzed and discussed. Looking at the digital camera reviews online, the first thought that comes to mind is to not get too excited over the latest feature set, because in another 6 months it will all be "old hat." Just like computers--once upon a time we all waited for the next technological innovations to appear, but now I don't even pay attention. When I need a new computer, I just buy whatever HP or Compaq is currently offering, and I know that it will meet my requirements by a wide margin. But there is no thrill in buying it--it's just another commodity, like buying a CD Walkman. |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Film Lover's Lament
"Tony" wrote in message
m... There is nothing like the security of a piece of medium that has to go through a chemical bath process run by a minimum wage kid more interested in oogling the better looking customers than keeping an eye on his machine. But if security of the medium is your interest, then that isn't the sort of place that you get your processing done, now is it? Peter |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Film Lover's Lament
Bandicoot wrote: "Tony" wrote in message m... There is nothing like the security of a piece of medium that has to go through a chemical bath process run by a minimum wage kid more interested in oogling the better looking customers than keeping an eye on his machine. But if security of the medium is your interest, then that isn't the sort of place that you get your processing done, now is it? Peter But, here at least (Chapel Hill/RTP/Raleigh/Durham), it is hard to find anyone but that to do the processing, I've been through all of the local labs including the "professional" ones and I still get obvious drip marks and scratches on my slides and mis-mounted slides. If I pay a premium rate I expect a premium service and that doesn't seem to be available here. Jim |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Film Lover's Lament
"Tony" wrote ...
There is nothing like the security of a piece of medium that has to go through a chemical bath process run by a minimum wage kid more interested in oogling the better looking customers Well, when I take my films in I say "let her look, damn it" !! ;^) |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Film Lover's Lament
Two of the three real labs in this town have closed in the past couple
years. There are still plenty of one hour machines in drug stores though. Film really isn't safe even in a good lab - accidents happen. Until the stuff is scanned and residing in multiple locations, negatives or slides are no safer than the physical medium you use for your digital pictures. As long as there is only one copy, the chances of the picture being lost are the same with any medium. -- http://www.chapelhillnoir.com home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto The Improved Links Pages are at http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html A sample chapter from "Haight-Ashbury" is at http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html "JimKramer" wrote in message oups.com... Bandicoot wrote: "Tony" wrote in message m... There is nothing like the security of a piece of medium that has to go through a chemical bath process run by a minimum wage kid more interested in oogling the better looking customers than keeping an eye on his machine. But if security of the medium is your interest, then that isn't the sort of place that you get your processing done, now is it? Peter But, here at least (Chapel Hill/RTP/Raleigh/Durham), it is hard to find anyone but that to do the processing, I've been through all of the local labs including the "professional" ones and I still get obvious drip marks and scratches on my slides and mis-mounted slides. If I pay a premium rate I expect a premium service and that doesn't seem to be available here. Jim |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Elementary questions on film handling. | Liopleurodon | In The Darkroom | 22 | December 8th 05 07:37 AM |
"Nature's Best" contest and film vs digital | Bill Hilton | Photographing Nature | 15 | December 8th 05 12:03 AM |
"Nature's Best" contest and film vs digital | Bill Hilton | Digital Photography | 1 | November 28th 05 08:44 PM |
What film? | Art Reitsch | Large Format Photography Equipment | 5 | November 10th 05 01:14 PM |
The first film of the Digital Revolution is here.... | Todd Bailey | Film & Labs | 0 | May 27th 04 08:12 AM |