Digital explosion - spill over to traditional?

Not sure this is exactly the best part of the forum to place this thread, but I think it fits here better than anywhere else.

We all know about the massive explosion in digital photography. It has meant that a huge number of people have come to photography for the first time and the number of photography enthusiasts has simply exploded in the past 8 years, because of digital.

Photography has now, in the UK anyway, become one of the most aspirational professions, and enthusiats are everywhere. Courses in all aspects of photography are available all over the country.

I have a theory that I believe is starting to play out. This is that with such enourmous numbers of very enthusiastic photograpers, there is inevitably some "spill over" occuring - people want to try "real photography" because they want to try something different or feel they have exhausted the challenges available to them through the digital medium. It appears We are starting to see a number of converts to traditional, or "bi-users" using both film and digital.


With so many digital enthusiats out there I believe spill over is inevitable, especially now that digital has been around for a number of years, and I don't think this is overly optimistic.

Further to this, there will be less innovations over the next few years in the digital arena as the industry struggles to secure the finance to develop new products, and sales drop as a result of not only the economic downturn, but also the fact that newer digital cameras offer less over exisiting ones (ie. the "pixel race" has come to an end).


I would be interested if anyone has any thoughts on this.

I agree with both of your observations, there is some spill over, mostly with people trying out things like very old camera's or these cheap plastic ones that seem to be a rage now.

Canon in the Netherlands seems to have been hit and forced to lay off people in the past months... this is partly because of the economic downturn and the saturation of the market as you describe, but also because of the regained strength of Nikon and the startup of Sony. Sony managed to capture about a 1/3 of the market here in the Netherlands in the past year. This must certainly have affected Canon...

I think that many digi users see film as a purer and different branch of photography, when I did my BtEC a couple of years ago I was the only film user and many of my fellow students were of the opinion that film was just too much hard work, I did convince some of them that the basics of exposure, composition etc. applied equally to digital - I believe that a good photographer with a low end digital SLR can produce a better image than a mediocre photographer with a Leica. I therefore think that many users might want to try film particularly if they aspire to produce good images.
However I think there are some flaws in the logic;

- getting a decent film camera and film supplies is not easy unless you know where to look and unless you are really determined (or happen across APUG) then this will deter many. The same argument applies to good processing and printing.
- The explosion of camera use due to digital cannot be questioned but how many of the new photographers are going to get past the 'green rectangle' stage ? I am sure that like me you know many people with relatively high end digital SLRs that bought them because they look good and are at a price that is incredibly low compared to similar spec cameras (film or digi) even 5 years ago.

SO I do agree that there may be some trickle down of users towards film and that this will generally be by relatively advanced users but digital will remain the choice of the vast majority of users at whatever level. Still any new film users are welcome and maybe we'll start to see their work on APUG soon.
One last thought - how many of these new users will move on to BW do you think ?

Cheers CJB

I agree with the 'spill over' theory. My limited observation is that I'm seeing more film cameras out and about than for many years. I've also noticed a far more positive reaction to film amongst my friends / colleagues etc. It used to be that film would "cost a fortune" and be a "big hassle" with questionable "quality". Now I'm getting comments about "real photography", inquires about film types and how darkrooms work. Most telling was a recent comment about digital being "all photoshop".

I've yet to convince any friends to build a darkroom, but two have come back to film, one fully and the other shoots both.

Last year I lived in Sweden and a local analogue only photo store reported a huge surge in interest during 2008. What kicked it off was an article in the local newspaper about traditional processes, after that many new people came to the shop.

I began my photographic journey 5 years ago with digital cameras, enjoying some success in local art shows. About a year ago, I traded in all my digital gear for medium and large format cameras, began developing my film and soon hope to learn to use the enlarger thats been sitting in the corner for 6 months. The learning curve I have found is quite steep, but I have never had so much fun with photography, and never found it so rewarding. So in my case you are right.
I am participating in a black and white show soon, and sadly it seems most of the other exhibitors have taken color digital images and converted them to b&w, which seems to be acceptable.

I think those are good observations. By it's nature, the pack mentality means that most people will follow the each other into digital, but there's always an instinct for a small percentage of people to rebel against whatever the pack is doing and follow the less traveled path.

I don't see any more analog cameras being carried around than before. At photokina I saw 1 analog camera outside a booth...

I agree, as I am one of these Spill over people (of sorts). While I had been taking photos since my high school days in the mid to late 80's and I dabbled with Film SLR's, it wasn't until I bought my first Digital SLR 2 1/2 years ago that I really started taking photography seriously. Now, I have come full circle and have picked up film again, as a parallel part of the hobby. Sure, I still shoot digital (I haven't burnt any film for around 3 weeks now), but I also get vast enjoyment from shooting film as well, developing and like coops, hopefully printing.

For me, its just another part of the hobby

A lot of spill over is in the younger generation too. I've noticed, in the 5 years I've been a keen film shooter, more and more people around my age using classic 35mm cameras. My only photography-inclined friend uses digital and probably will do for a long time to come, but after our trip to Nepal and seeing my contact sheets and huge negatives in hand and the results on paper compared to his digital shots, he decided to dust off his old 35mm Minolta he used back in school and has been burning the odd roll of B&W through it.

It's never going to be a tidal wave, but anyone coming back to the light in any way is only good for the industry.

This is an interesting thread and observation. In addition to getting back into analog myself, I belong to and help moderate a forum dedicated to vintage motorcycles, a very specific Honda engine design that hasn't been manufactured in almost 30 years. My bike is 40 this year. I my case, the two go hand-in-hand. I carry a small 35mm kit with me whenever I ride. More and more MC enthusiasts seem to be tiring of the look-a-like, Tupperware shrouded contemporary machines and getting into vintage bikes. Our membership has nearly tripled in the past couple of years. Perhaps this is a multi-interest trend?

bobwysiwyg - I think you're right. Maybe I could add to the theory by pointing to the popularity of Moleskine notepads in a world dominated by Microsoft Word.

Photographers where I live mostly shoot digital, even in college classes. I've visited some universities in the area, and some of them have digital classes as the "intro to photography" classes. One photography instructor I talked said that most people taking the intro photography classes (especially at that college) are computer or engineering majors that really dont care about traditional photography. they just want to get their art elective out of the way. I can understand that argument; I just want to get my math class out of the way so I can concentrate on my photography classes

the universities I've visited do have film classes, but you have to take the intro digital class first if I remember correctly.

An above poster mentioned that a local camera shop had a surge in sales of traditional photography stuff after an article in the newspaper. What if there was a collective effort to bring traditional photography back in to mainstream society? (not that apug isnt doing that. I've shot more film and less digital since joining.) Maybe submitting articles to local newspapers or spreading the word about local photography groups/clubs (There's one about a 30 minute drive from where I live that meets in a local library, which had has a darkroom). Perhaps that's been done before with not much luck. I'm just kinda throwing out ideas without really thinking (which is normal for me)

This is a very interesting thread! I have shot digital for years. Long before anyone I knew shot digital I did. I have been through several cameras in those years. Now I have switched from digital to film with a 20+ year old camera (to start with, as I've now added a couple of older medium formats to my stable). I need to learn the basics witch I skipped because I let my camera do everything and fixed the rest in photoshop. I finally realized the need to learn and I am enjoying it more than I ever enjoyed going through the hundreds of images on the computer. I have far fewer acceptable photos from the film camera but it is my learning process and that is good. I now have to think about every shot. That is good. I have to think about how I develop that film. That is good even when I screw up a roll. I've been reading everything on film photography that I can find. I love it. I'm a convert from digital. Never been a film person other that the old Kodak 110 that I carried with me continually in my preteen/teen years and the cannon point and shoot that I used until digital came along. I may have never went beyond that point and shoot if it weren't for photoshop showing me how to fix photos on the computer. I started reading on film cameras and realized all those terms were actual darkroom terms. Now I only pick up the digital for snapshots (although it can be used to take much better than snapshots) because it is just not fun to use any more.

On the thought of useing older processes/equipment: I am a quilter/seemstress (hobbiest). My newest sewing machine is a 1924 Singer treadle. I just like it better than any of the newer machines I have owned or tried (I have sewn since I was 12 and I'm quite a bit older than that now!). I am currently quilting a quilt on a 1885 Singer. I belong to an international group with over 1000 members who not only collect but use these old machines. I beleive that I am helping to save the heritage of past quilters/seamstresses by saving the few machines in my small collection from becoming a table or lamp and by educateing people that grandma's sewing machine under the plants in the corner probebly still works and will for another hundred years if you take the plants off it and add a little oil?. My "forever car" is my 1955 Willys Wagon although I drive a minivan for every day. I have to add a lead substitute to her gas. She is not as easy to buy parts for but I would never give up the raw climbing power of that old beast! I am still in the process of restoreing her but "Isabella" (cars have to have names right) is a car that I will die owning because she is an example of the simple but effective enginering before computerization.

Okay, I've rambled enough. I worked a 12 hour shift last night and must get ready for the one tonight (sleep)~!
Lori

I'm still looking for a digital method for cleaning the windows and gutters on my house other than the digits at the end of my hands.

Peter Gomena

When you find that digital window/gutter cleaning method be sure to share!

Lori,

You sound like a real level-headed OK person.

Dave

I fully agree.

There is a lesson from the past: when Kodak came with the Instamatic amateur photographers went that way, the same with 110 and disk.
Now we have seen something else: the pro's took to digi aswell and actualy I use it, my clients love it and pay for it.

On the other hand pro's are looking for way's to be diferent than the competition and go back to analogue.
With the amatuers it is the same: people are looners, want to be diferent than the rest, we don't have a culture of belonging to the masses.
My God, I would love to use my RB67 with 50mm outhere to do some "real" architectural photography, LF even better.
If there was just a good pro lab out here in Goiânia...........

People are curious by them selfes, want to try new things out and when the "new" has gone they go back to the "old" .
Give it a couple of years more and the photographic scene has stabilized and digi will have its propper place, like 126, 110 and disk before.

Peter

Yeah, That's what everyone says! I refuse to pay more than $1000 for a car (I'm an RN and make good money but why pay more than I have to for what I need) but I fell in love with my Willys and drove it home 250 miles (after paying $2500 for her) at 55 mph. I blew up the engine in a perfectly good Jimmy from slushy snow getting packed in the grille going to get her (my very understanding husband and I hitched the last 50 miles or so to pick up the Willys). That was the most impractical auto deal I'd made in forever! I already am the person that everyone is befuttled by at work. I told them all that I'd drive any car I own anywhere no matter how far. If it blows (engine/transmission) there is someone who will give you $50 for it and someone else who has a $500 - $1000 car for sale. You're back on the road in a few hours! My Willy's on the other hand would make it home no matter where it was or what was wrong with it! I really love those old non computerized autos and everything else obviously!
OK now I really have to get to bed.
Have a great day all
Lori

Sorry to inject a bit of pessimism into this thread, but... I think spillover to film is short-term wishful thinking. People who start in digital are indeed interested in exploring more unique print methods and film and so forth, but they are going to be financially clobbered when they do so. Most people who are shooting film now are doing so because they already know the value of the end product. It's not a very good medium for widespread amateur exploration- the overall price is too high, unfortunately.

A lot of film *gear* is very inexpensive (notwithstanding the disappointing price of the new 6x7 folder), but film itself is not, and it's not like someone can just pick up a film camera and start shooting away and getting optimal results; there is a learning curve that most digital users have neither the patience nor the time to embark upon. What I see (on certain other forums) is more interest in film emulation and perhaps hybrid techniques, but little or no interest in actually acquiring film gear and film itself. I know plenty of students who like film and like the idea of doing something with it, but when it comes down to actually ordering product.... the only folks actually plunking down big bucks on film are those who already use it.

I don't mean to make it sound like gloom and doom... actually I am very positive about film as an ongoing, intrinsically unique medium, I just don't see any significant numbers of people peeling away from digital to get seriously into film in a way that would affect the market. I know some digital folks who've bought oldie cameras just as shelf pieces and that kind of thing, but it's nto like somnebody who shoots several thousand frames on digital is then going to transfer over to film and shoot thousands of frames of film.

Film will continue to be used by an astute minority for many, many years to come; also, the value of film-derived art will rise very strongly. Especially MF and LF art. That is what we have to remember. Its not about how many people shoot film. It never was. This idea of everybody and their kid having an SLR and uploading masterpieces and finding fame and fortune on the net is a uniquely digital pipedream.

I promise that my next post will be more optimistic

Two big stumbling blocks to a return to analogue in any significant numbers that spring to mind immediately are: setting up a darkroom and securing a new or good secondhand camera. You can find very few high street camera shops with trad cameras and knowledgeable advice. There will always be hobbyists who want the challenge of analogue but 99% of users want a quick easy way of showing snaps to each other and then deleting. A couple I know who are about my age recently took a holiday to S Africa. Both took about 1500 digi pics of which they estimate that 1400 are useless but no matter they kept 100 to show on their TV and maybe 10 will be printed on RA4 paper and framed. I would suggest they are not untypical. It's a very cheap machine gun approach which works for them. In the scenario just outlined using analogue materials just isn't viable

Worse than that is the prospect of inkjet printers and consumables coming down in price to the point where it will be cheaper than getting prints from the mini-lab or in trad B&W from the likes of Ilford. This may well increase the number who make prints and hand them around but they won't be analogue prints from analogue cameras.

Factor in the recent price increases in trad paper and I regret I see no prospect of any return to analogue. Simply holding our own will be difficult.

At my age I might just be able to rely on the continuation of analogue supplies long enough to see me through but if I were in my 20s or 30s then I think not.

There has to come a point where the suppliers of analogue materials(chemicals film and paper ) lose so much economies of scale that they either have to increase prices to a point which so few in the market will be prepared to pay that permanent losses become inevitable and at that point they have to pull the plug.

I'd like to believe otherwise but have no evidence from which I can hold out any long term hope

pentaxuser

I agree with most of what's being said here. I am first and foremost a hobbyist with no professional photography ambition. I've been enjoying the hobby for a relatively short period of time so my observations may not be totally valid. My primary contact with other photographers/hobbyists is through sites such as this one and flickr of course. It seems to me that film users are growing and I can't help but think this is due to the digital "explosion" creating more and more interest in photography. It is fairly obvious that the more digi users there are, the more we'll see some of these users explore film. The trend, if I may call it that, of the younger generations picking up toy cameras and holgas and lomos and cross processing expired slide film seems to have created a film explosion of sorts. Although I can't say that I dabble in this end of the film photography spectrum, it certainly is refreshing sometimes. It is argued alot on flickr and other sites that the more film shooters of this type, the more crap that is out there but that is true of any medium. I prefer to think the more film photographers, the more good film photography, the more inspiration that I find.

Many of the people in the digital explosion are using their cameras to send photos over the internet. As bandwidth and small cheap camcorders (I have a Flip Mino HD) increase I think many will forsake still digital photography. In the not so distant future I think we will see still photography of all kinds diminish..Evan Clarke

Over in Flickr land, I have noticed in a couple of forums/communities a recent converts to the cause, mostly because the photographer reached a point they wanted to try something more challenging. I am happy to see this even in my own camera club with one or two members getting into vintage cameras and film.

Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry9000/4.6.0.167 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/102 UP.Link/6.3.0.0.0)

I think it is wishful thinking to an extent. After all it's getting harder and harder to find music cassettes nowadays. Let alone brand new eight tracks. Or vinyls. As technology improves older ways are left behind in favor of convenience. And for most, whether due to economics or facility, film is less convenient than the alternative for the snapshootist, which is the vast majority of modern photographers.

You have a pretty good hypothesis going about the spillover effect. It's like vinyl records. They're back and used a lot these days by certain people. I just saw a news broadcast on this last week. They showed a store that had rows and rows of brand new records.

The big question is, will it happen rapidly enough and to such an extent that there will be enough new film photographers to offset the current migration away from film and chemical photography? And will there be enough users to support the current film and processing infrastructure, or will we continue to see companies scaling back and closing for a while yet?

I have a feeling it is still going to decrease for a while before it stabilizes. And we are probably going to lose a bunch of emulsions and processing facilities in the process.

That said, people in my age group will use film if that is what they want, even with the cost. It's up to us apuggers to promote it to them, and they will buy it if we convince them of its benefits. PKM-25's Kodachrome Project is proof of this. There are plenty of young people involved. You see, the new generation has a different mentality on average than our parents and grandparents when it comes to money. Yes, we've been through the recession and seen the need to limit our spending and conserve to save for the future. But at the same time, most of us in the 18-29 age group also have one or two passions in life that we will sink a little money into, even if it means skimping on other forms of entertainment to be able to do so. That is because we appreciate the good or service so much that we are willing to sacrifice to see the benefits of it. Now I just need to convince more young people to buy film. If I could just get half the kids I know to quit their heavy social drinking and club and bar hopping habit and use the money saved for more productive and fulfilling endeavors, it would be great.