Does 35mm color slide film have a future?

[Thanasis]

Hi there,

I am new to these forums but I must say that they are very informative and entertaining. I have been shooting 35mm slides on an SLR for about 5 years now. I love long-exposure photography, landscapes, night photography and portraits (in that order). I'm about to buy a new film camera and I'm at a crossroad. Whether to make the jump to medium format or stick with 35mm. I guess I am a bit troubled by whether good quality 35mm slide film (Velvia etc) will still be available for the next 5-10 years before I spend my hard-earned on new equipment. I still want the versatility of 35mm equipment and I also want to be able to make good enlargements from 35mm slides. I realise that MF and LF are better for enlargements and that is certainly an attraction.

My fear is that if film becomes a niche, then 35mm might be the first format to bite the dust. I realise that there are other threads that talk about the future of film and I am interested in this but I have specific concerns on 35mm slides. I'd love to hear your opinions on this.

Thanks and regards,
Thanasis.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Slide film is dropping in sales more than any other branch of Color Analog Photography. Negative film sales are not dropping any where near as fast.

PE

 

[Petzi]

I don't think slide film is in danger within the next 5 - 10 years.

 

[Alex Bishop-Thorpe]

35mm is also the most popular format. All those vacation slide shows you ever saw were on 35mm slide film - if slide film was to die, sadly I think it would be the larger formats to go first, as they are mostly used by pros rather than your regular public. I think you're safe for the next 5-10 years, however.

 

[Lee L]

I appears that Fuji has enough demand for the return of a film more similar to Velvia 50 that they are working on a new film with characteristics closer to RVP than their current offerings. This announcement was posted here on APUG.

Here's one of the threads about it: (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

One of the reasons transparency film was so widely used was that it served as its own color reference, no interpretation of negatives, when transferred to an ad agency, art director, printing house, etc. That market has obviously gone to a very high percentage digital at this point. However, I think there are enough reversal film devotees to make it survive as a niche market, although likely with reduced choices. There's nothing else quite like a nicely projected small transparency or a fine LF transparency on a good lightbox. I doubt Fuji would do the R&D on a new Velvia unless they foresaw a decent lifetime for the product.

Lee

 

[Thanasis]

I heard about the return of Velvia 50. This made me very happy. Yesterday, I even sent an email to Fuji here in Sydney, Australia asking whether they have plans to sell it here. So far no response. I'll keep you posted though.

 

[JBrunner]

At the present time availability of chrome film isn't really a consideration in choosing between 35mm and LF. Instead, focus on the real advantages, and disadvantages of MF vs 35. At the present time, with so much great used MF gear available at fantastic prices, its almost a no brainer, unless you must have 36 exposures on hand at once, or a very small camera, or very fast lenses.

35mm is certainly capable of providing great results, but MF will easily out perform 35 in most normal circumstances. You might try a decent, but budget TLR, and get your feet wet, and see if you like it. If you don't, you can resell the camera for what you paid for it, if you shopped well in the first place. If you really like the results, upgrade to a more sophisticated system.

 

[dslater]

Hmmm - while I can't disagree with you about the popularity of 35mm, it is also possible that 35mm will go first because it is the easiest to replace with relativity inexpensive digital. Having said that, I agree that 35mm film is probably going to be around for at least another 5-10 years.

35mm is also the most popular format. All those vacation slide shows you ever saw were on 35mm slide film - if slide film was to die, sadly I think it would be the larger formats to go first, as they are mostly used by pros rather than your regular public. I think you're safe for the next 5-10 years, however.

 

[braxus]

I dont agree on 35mm going first. Its the most widely used format in the world and most labs are setup to using it. I cant say the same for 120. 35mm has the most cameras out there as well, plus dont forget the movie industry still used strictly 35mm film. How many 70mm motion pictures do you see these days other then IMAX? Plus the fact that just some people do NOT want to go digital because for them its easier to use film. Easier or their only option. 35mm will be around the longest in my opinion. 120 will go before that and it shows with the amount of medium format cameras both for sale new, and the glut of used ones on the market today.

 

[HerrBremerhaven]

I think worst case you could adapt some motion picture film for 35mm usage. However, the processing is different, and you would need to get a bulk loader to fill your own cartridges.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
Dead Link Removed

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

A 35mm slide still looks way better than a digital image projected on an LCD projector, and slides on a light table are easier to edit than digital images on a computer or negatives with contact sheets for that matter. I feel pretty safe about 35mm E-6 for the next 5-10 years.

 

[zenrhino]

I dunno -- I've been talking to a lot of art schools lately and every single one has said they want portfolios on CD/DVD rather than slides. I suspect we'll start seeing MFA theses on DVD next rather than slides

I think my main reason for wanting slide film is with a slide, what you see is what I saw (given tolerances for Velvia-type hypersaturation, etc). When I send off a DVD of my images, who knows if their monitors will be calibratred warmer or colder than mine, if they'll be viewing in a room with white light and grey walls, or flourescents with colored walls, etc.

 

[Woolliscroft]

Use it or loose it. Film has a future for as long as there is a market for it. I talk to a surprising number of people who tell me they don't really like digital, but they got into it because they were afraid that (or had been told by sales staff that) film would soon vanish. That could easily become a self fulfilling prophesy.

David.

 

[PHOTOTONE]

In the last 30 days I have used over 50 36exposure rolls of color slide film for my personal projects. For my business I average about 100 sheets of 4x5 a month, although my business has been slow for a couple of months.
This is in addition to digital. Some clients still appreciate the higher quality of a scanned 4x5 over a 12-16mp digital capture. I have always processed E-6 myself....got started with E-3 and Anscochrome processing decades ago.

 

[butterflydream]

Negative.

 

[Henning Serger]

Slide film will survive

Dear Thanasis,

you will be safe at least for the next ten years. Here are some reasons why:

- Fuji introduced two new slide films this year (T 64 and Provia 400X), and will restart production of the Velvia 50 next year. They have invested a lot of money in these new products because their detailed market research results in the conclusion that the demand and the market is big enough for the next years. The same with Maco/Rollei: Here in Germany we got some information that Maco/Rollei intends to introduce a slide film next year, probably produced by Agfa-Gevaert in Belgium. They won't do that if they were not convinced that there is a stable market for the next years.
- at Photokina in Cologne this year we got official statements from Fuji and Kodak, that they are investing in R&D of film (cn and slide), and that we will see improved or new films in the future
- lots of professionals are still using slide film, because there is no alternative for certain applications.
For example cross processing. The colours you get from cross processing are unique, you can't reproduce such colours with photoshop. The same with the unique colours of Velvia. I know several photographers who tried to imitate the velvia colours with photoshop. They all have failed, it's impossible. It's always a bad imitation, not the original.
At the photokina Kodak said that over 50 % of all professionals are still using film, most of the profs are using both digital and film, and 10 % of all professionals are still using film exclusively.

Relax, buy the film equipment you want, use the films you want and be happy.

Best regards,
Henning

 

[srs5694]

Thanasis, you said you want to be able to make high-quality enlargements. If by this you mean traditional "wet" darkroom enlargements, you should be aware that, AFAIK, there's only one commercially-available product for doing this: Ilfochrome (formerly known as Cibachrome). Ilfochrome has become quite expensive. For instance, at B&H, a 100-sheet box of 8x10 Ilfochrome paper is currently $226. This compares to about $33 for most varieties of RA-4 paper (for prints from color negatives). I haven't checked the prices of Ilfochrome vs. RA-4 chemicals, but I expect the Ilfochrome would be pricier. I'd also be more concerned about future availability of Ilfochrome materials than about the slide film itself, in either 35mm or MF. I suspect that most labs today, when handed a slide to print, scan it and make a digital print, either on RA-4 paper or using other materials.

As a side comment, it's possible to use RA-4 materials with a reversal step (similar to doing E-6 slide processing) to get prints from slides; however, RA-4 paper wasn't designed with this in mind and so you're not likely to get optimum results. You might luck out and/or develop tricks to improve your ability to get good results, but I wouldn't count on this as a substitute for Ilfochrome materials.

In short, if you want enlargements, you might want to reconsider your choice of slide film, at least if price is a factor. (OTOH, if you're happy with digital prints, this isn't a big deal.)

 

[firecracker]

Well, bad news over here in Japan. According to Kodak Japan, "Kodak Kodachrome 64" is going out of the market. The links below are in Japanese only:

http://wwwjp.kodak.com/JP/ja/corp/info061213.shtml
http://wwwjp.kodak.com/JP/ja/consumer/reversal/Kodaclome/index.shtml

However, other slide films (E-series and Elite Chrome) will still be available in the market.

 

[firecracker]

In the statement, they are likely to run out of the stock of the film by March 07 but continue to provide the processing service within Japan by the end of the same year. But after that, for the Japanese customers, the processing will take place in Kansas!

I'm just wondering why they can't have a place in Hong Kong or somewhere in China...

 

[elekm]

Kodak has more or less created this situation by itself by making Kodachrome difficult to process and then by continually shutting down processing facilities.

Now, it has become a major inconvenience to use and process Kodachrome, which certainly is a factor when buying the film. I love Kodachrome. I really liked K25, and K64 certainly is no slouch.

But getting it processed is no easy feat. Getting E-6 processed, on the other hand, is very simple with some places offering same-day service.

Regarding the availability of slide film, it's all supply and demand. If demand remains sufficient, then supply will follow. If we all flee to digital, then that will certainly kill of the film quicker than hand-wringing.

 

[Photo Engineer]

The sales figures tell the story.

Both Kodachrome and the E6 films are falling rapidly in sales. Digital is replacing them faster than it is replacing negative films.

PE

 

[copake_ham]

I think this is great.

The poster says he is new here - and asks about a topic that has been beaten to death so many times that it's become a cliche - and does anyone say - "Check the archives"?

Nope.

You dive right into the same of F-I-D pool (slide film subdivision).

C'mon, let's be real here. Please, oh please, never, never, never post to a "newbie's" F-I-D thread!

It doesn't matter what you say - it's just an unanswerable query!

 

[marsbars]

I don't think that this has anything to do with FID. I would have to say that he is asking opinions on whether MF or 35-mm would make more sense from a film availability standpoint. I have all 35 mm cameras and have no fear of losing film. Total number of emulsions is likely to dwindle as some less used get discontinued. And like some have said that there are certain things that digital can't reproduce and that will help to keep film around. I would say to the original poster to get what you want to. Just don't forget all the other great BW film out there.

 

[PKM-25]

In the statement, they are likely to run out of the stock of the film by March 07 but continue to provide the processing service within Japan by the end of the same year. But after that, for the Japanese customers, the processing will take place in Kansas!

I'm just wondering why they can't have a place in Hong Kong or somewhere in China...

Oh my, this is going to happen quicker than I had hoped. I was hoping I had about two years, but to expect that would be foolish at this point.

You see, if you look through other posts, you will find I am doing a project called, "Our American Dream: One last look on Kodachrome.

We'll be down to one lab, this is a wakeup call for me.

Kodachrome has to become a full time job for me now.

Thanks for posting this.

 

[Thanasis]

I think this is great.

The poster says he is new here - and asks about a topic that has been beaten to death so many times that it's become a cliche - and does anyone say - "Check the archives"?

Nope.

You dive right into the same of F-I-D pool (slide film subdivision).

C'mon, let's be real here. Please, oh please, never, never, never post to a "newbie's" F-I-D thread!

It doesn't matter what you say - it's just an unanswerable query!

I was actually interested in knowing, from an availability standpoint, and from the perspective of the more experienced among theforum whether 35mm would outlast MF. I realised that this would have been touched on previously in other posts but I was also interested to hear the forum's current opinions and regrettably, I was not able to locate one topic where this was the main theme of discussion.

Most of the responses and opinions provided by the forum have been very informative. Thank you to all of you. I certainly won't hold anyone to their word here as I realise nobody can provide a definitive answer. But the debate has been interesting as usual.

It seems that most agree that 35mm will be around for at least another five years in one transparency format or another. For the time being, I have decided to stick with 35mm but I will be keeping a close eye on developments. Henning Serger's post was very positive news.

Thanks once again.

Regards,
Thanasis