35mm Film vs Digital again

Chris Loffredo wrote:

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?

Until the manufacture and supply of developer runs out.

Colin D.

Colin D wrote:

Until the manufacture and supply of developer runs out.

That isn't likely. All of the ingredients in D-76 are used
on a large scale for non-photographic purposes.

Peter.
--

Colin D wrote:
Chris Loffredo wrote:
Just wondering (just in case the worse scenarios come true,
however
unlikely), how long CAN frozen film last?

Until the manufacture and supply of developer runs out.

Colin D.

The developer is much lower tech to produce then the film. Then too
the way things are going it will be the crappy films (read ISO 800)
that last the longest, so if there is a film you have learned to use
and like the idea of storing some when it goes out of production might
make sense.

In the IC business most manufacturers will give you a warning when a
given IC is going out of production, so you can do a last buy. It
would be nice if Kodak and Fuji would commit to giving a warning before
taking any given film out of production. Kodak did give a long warning
when they decided to shut down the manufacturing of BW paper. But
Kodak has been pretty careful of late not to say anything definitive
about how much longer then will produce any given film.

Scott

On 2005-12-20 06:37:07 -0500, "Graham Fountain" said:

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 don't know. My 35mm film is shipped in FULL plastic canisters, not
empty ones. If they were empty I'd be pretty peeved at the price!
--
Michael | "He's dead, Jim."

Chris Loffredo writes:

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?

A LONG time. Multiple decades at least. And remember that, if it
warms up, it merely resumes aging at normal speed, i.e. a power outage
that would ruin a freezer full of meat doesn't do that much damage to
a freezer full of film.
--
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/

columbotrek wrote:

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.


But I haven't seen one in a while.

Colin D wrote:


Chris Loffredo wrote:

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?


Until the manufacture and supply of developer runs out.

Colin D.

Make your own like Fox Talbot.

Colin D wrote:

Chris Loffredo wrote:


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


Until the manufacture and supply of developer runs out.


I've mixed my own developer & fixer many in the past - no problem there
(unless you are suggesting that chemicals will also disappear?)
Apparently even coffee can be used as a developer...

Colin D wrote:

Chris Loffredo wrote:

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


Until the manufacture and supply of developer runs out.

Colin D.

I've mixed my own developer & fixer many times in the past - no problem
there (unless you are suggesting that chemicals will also disappear?)

Apparently even coffee can be used as a developer...

Never underestimate the resourcefulness of a determined film user!
: )

On 20 Dec 2005 11:27:09 -0800, "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.

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


Scott

HoWw about film that was exposed, then frozen, but never developed?
Would you process it differently than unexpired film? Black and
white?

Color, say C-22 process? Can you even get that developed any longer?

Father Kodak