A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

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.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Photo Equipment » 35mm Photo Equipment
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Film Lover's Lament



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old March 15th 06, 04:44 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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  
Old March 15th 06, 05:21 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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  
Old March 15th 06, 08:22 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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  
Old March 15th 06, 11:05 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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  
Old March 16th 06, 02:02 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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  
Old March 16th 06, 04:17 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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  
Old March 17th 06, 03:07 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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  
Old March 17th 06, 03:40 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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  
Old March 17th 06, 08:25 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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  
Old March 17th 06, 10:31 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default 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

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 Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:42 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.