35mm Film vs Digital again

I just realised - this debate about film vs digital has been done all wrong
up till now. So far people have argued about the technical aspects, the
not-so-technical "look" of film, the cost of equipment vs ongoing cost, the
relative enjoyment etc etc etc. Everyone (including myself) who has argued
one way or the other has it all wrong. There is one important aspect that
has been overlooked. This aspect, once understood by all, will be the
death-knell of digital and people will return to 35mm in their droves. No
matter how many zillions of dollars are thrown at new bodies by Canon,
Nikon, and everyone else, so far they have all overlooked one crucial
aspect, and it looks certain they will continue to do so. What is this one
important factor? the one thing that will keep 35mm alive? It's simple. No
matter how fancy digital cameras get, they will never ever be able to match
this one thing.....


The usefulness of the empty plastic canisters 35mm film is shipped in.

"Graham Fountain" wrote in message
...
SNIP
The usefulness of the empty plastic canisters 35mm film is shipped
in.

I get them for free from my local photo shop, but they come without
the film ;-)

Bart

Graham Fountain wrote:

I just realised - this debate about film vs digital has been done all wrong
up till now. So far people have argued about the technical aspects, the
not-so-technical "look" of film, the cost of equipment vs ongoing cost, the
relative enjoyment etc etc etc. Everyone (including myself) who has argued
one way or the other has it all wrong. There is one important aspect that
has been overlooked. This aspect, once understood by all, will be the
death-knell of digital and people will return to 35mm in their droves. No
matter how many zillions of dollars are thrown at new bodies by Canon,
Nikon, and everyone else, so far they have all overlooked one crucial
aspect, and it looks certain they will continue to do so. What is this one
important factor? the one thing that will keep 35mm alive? It's simple. No
matter how fancy digital cameras get, they will never ever be able to match
this one thing.....


The usefulness of the empty plastic canisters 35mm film is shipped in.


I thought that the Aluminum screw top cans were useful too.

"Graham Fountain" writes:

I just realised - this debate about film vs digital has been done all wrong
up till now. So far people have argued about the technical aspects, the
not-so-technical "look" of film, the cost of equipment vs ongoing cost, the
relative enjoyment etc etc etc. Everyone (including myself) who has argued
one way or the other has it all wrong. There is one important aspect that
has been overlooked. This aspect, once understood by all, will be the
death-knell of digital and people will return to 35mm in their droves. No
matter how many zillions of dollars are thrown at new bodies by Canon,
Nikon, and everyone else, so far they have all overlooked one crucial
aspect, and it looks certain they will continue to do so. What is this one
important factor? the one thing that will keep 35mm alive? It's simple. No
matter how fancy digital cameras get, they will never ever be able to match
this one thing.....


The usefulness of the empty plastic canisters 35mm film is shipped in.

That's a very important issue -- but I've got several decades supply
still in stock, so it won't constrain my camera choice immediately.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com/ http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/

David Dyer-Bennet wrote:
"Graham Fountain" writes:


I just realised - this debate about film vs digital has been done all wrong
up till now. So far people have argued about the technical aspects, the
not-so-technical "look" of film, the cost of equipment vs ongoing cost, the
relative enjoyment etc etc etc. Everyone (including myself) who has argued
one way or the other has it all wrong. There is one important aspect that
has been overlooked. This aspect, once understood by all, will be the
death-knell of digital and people will return to 35mm in their droves. No
matter how many zillions of dollars are thrown at new bodies by Canon,
Nikon, and everyone else, so far they have all overlooked one crucial
aspect, and it looks certain they will continue to do so. What is this one
important factor? the one thing that will keep 35mm alive? It's simple. No
matter how fancy digital cameras get, they will never ever be able to match
this one thing.....


The usefulness of the empty plastic canisters 35mm film is shipped in.


That's a very important issue -- but I've got several decades supply
still in stock, so it won't constrain my camera choice immediately.

Just wondering (just in case the worse scenarios come true, however
unlikely), how long CAN frozen film last?

Chris Loffredo wrote:
Just wondering (just in case the worse scenarios come true, however
unlikely), how long CAN frozen film last?
There are two areas that some care is needed for long term storage, one
is the background radiation and the other is cosmic rays. The
background radiation can be controlled by storing the film in something
have very low radioactivity. Cosmic rays are harder to control It
would appear you need a few meters of lead to stop a cosmic ray.
I believe it is mainly the background radiation that fogs film however
so just controlling that should help a lot. deep caves work as well.

With care I believe you could extend the life to a fair number of
years, lower ISO films lasting longer then high.


Scott

Scott W wrote:
Chris Loffredo wrote:

Just wondering (just in case the worse scenarios come true, however
unlikely), how long CAN frozen film last?

There are two areas that some care is needed for long term storage, one
is the background radiation and the other is cosmic rays. The
background radiation can be controlled by storing the film in something
have very low radioactivity. Cosmic rays are harder to control It
would appear you need a few meters of lead to stop a cosmic ray.
I believe it is mainly the background radiation that fogs film however
so just controlling that should help a lot. deep caves work as well.

Though at freezing temperatures, does film interact (significantly) with
radiation and cosmic rays?

Chris Loffredo wrote:
Scott W wrote:
Chris Loffredo wrote:

Just wondering (just in case the worse scenarios come true, however
unlikely), how long CAN frozen film last?

There are two areas that some care is needed for long term storage, one
is the background radiation and the other is cosmic rays. The
background radiation can be controlled by storing the film in something
have very low radioactivity. Cosmic rays are harder to control It
would appear you need a few meters of lead to stop a cosmic ray.
I believe it is mainly the background radiation that fogs film however
so just controlling that should help a lot. deep caves work as well.

Though at freezing temperatures, does film interact (significantly) with
radiation and cosmic rays?

I don't think it will change it much at all, otherwise it would be hard
to use a film when it is really cold.

Scott

Scott W wrote:
Chris Loffredo wrote:

Scott W wrote:

Chris Loffredo wrote:


Just wondering (just in case the worse scenarios come true, however
unlikely), how long CAN frozen film last?

There are two areas that some care is needed for long term storage, one
is the background radiation and the other is cosmic rays. The
background radiation can be controlled by storing the film in something
have very low radioactivity. Cosmic rays are harder to control It
would appear you need a few meters of lead to stop a cosmic ray.
I believe it is mainly the background radiation that fogs film however
so just controlling that should help a lot. deep caves work as well.

Though at freezing temperatures, does film interact (significantly) with
radiation and cosmic rays?


I don't think it will change it much at all, otherwise it would be hard
to use a film when it is really cold.


Yep, I'd thought of that you answered.

I guess that, if in the future I need something to do, I'll manufacture
film...

Chris Loffredo wrote:

Just wondering (just in case the worse scenarios come true, however
unlikely), how long CAN frozen film last?

Putting film in a deep freeze will slow down chemical deterioration,
but won't help with radiation fog. 400 speed film such as HP5 should
be very usable at 10 years old, with only a little extra fog. After
25 years you would probably need to increase exposure an extra stop
to overcome the fog. I have some HP5 (the end of a bulk roll)
which expired in 1982. It wasn't frozen, but was kept reasonably
cool and dry. The fog level is decidedly high. Even though it
does take perfectly reasonably pictures, I haven't finished it
because fresh film is worth the price to me.

If I were going to put away film for a long time, I'd pick FP4
and Pan-F. I do have a bunch of Pan-F in the freezer, but I
will probably use it before the expiry date. If it were to
go out of production, I would try to order more. (I was a little
worried last year that Pan-F might not survive, so I bought
around 40 rolls each of 135 and 120. Pan-f remains in production,
even if the price seems to have edged up a bit, so I've saved
a few dollars anyway, and I may have made a small contribution
to Ilford's decision to keep in in production.)

I've heard stories about frozen Panatomic-X being good for
20 years or more, so Pan-F would probably make a good
candidate for long term storage.

Peter.
--