Film is alive and well… at least on TV and in Ads…

Sirius Glass said:

Solarize, I agree with you.

Click to expand...

Me too. That was the issue I tried raising last night in an apparently redundant thread that either hit the rocks or was too redundant for retention. No matter what impression the media, or the occasional optimist in the film lab, gives... there's room for both medias and claims of the former superseding the latter are likely to be somewhat illusionary.

... and now I leave y'all to yack. I'll be at the film lab retreiving my processed film.

Skateboarders do appear to have made a fetish of Hasselblads. In another forum, someone was asking about setting up to do skateboard photos with a V Hasselblad and several people suggested that 35mm or the other capture device might be more appropriate. Seems to be unique to skateboarders. When I'm up on Skyline Drive, I've never seen another Hasselblad, but have seen a 4x5 camera. Mostly phone cameras and point and shoot digitals, with about a quarter DSLRs or SLRs (don't look closely).

thisismyname09 said:

I am part of this "next generation" and I agree completely.

Click to expand...

same here . i'm 21 and totally agree!

-Dan

funny thing is : I know of a photog that shoots for Apple somewhat regularly (she shoots those photos for the iLife ads and Steve Jobs announcements, etc...

she still uses film quite regularly, with an RZ67. she shoots portra 160/400 vc and portra 800.

for her, film is still alive and well, and she doesn't have any problem explaining it to her clients, most of whom don't care how she gets the image, just that she does

she has a hybrid workflow of course, but starting with a mostly analog process for her is "quite liberating, and makes the art director trust me even more" (what she told me)

quite a lot of fashion is still shot on film, btw, mostly for late in the day or early morning. batteries in cameras can only last so long away from power. especially on location somewhere out in the boonies

-Dan

MizBrown said:

Skateboarders do appear to have made a fetish of Hasselblads. In another forum, someone was asking about setting up to do skateboard photos with a V Hasselblad and several people suggested that 35mm or the other capture device might be more appropriate. Seems to be unique to skateboarders. When I'm up on Skyline Drive, I've never seen another Hasselblad, but have seen a 4x5 camera. Mostly phone cameras and point and shoot digitals, with about a quarter DSLRs or SLRs (don't look closely).

Click to expand...

I've seen this, too. Skateboarding forums now sport some of the liveliest debates concerning Bronica vs. Hasselbald.

As a current skater and former bmx rider I'm aware of the Hassy fetish as well. I can also say that Provia 100F and the Portra NC films seem to be the popular choices. Of course off-camera slave flashes as well.

BetterSense said:

Thanks; I thought I was going to have to be the one to walk in and burst the bubble. I don't see these symptoms as good things. I don't think this is a good thing at all considering the attitudes surrounding it.

I don't shoot film because it's all retro and looks old-school. I don't think there's anything old-school or retro about film photography. Unfortunately a lot of people are starting to think differently than I.

Click to expand...

I look at it the same way I look at Lomography - I don't understand the attitude but if it induces somebody to pick up a roll of film - I don't care.

It concerns me not at all that somebody buys a roll of film because he/she wants to achieve a "retro" look (whatever that means) or an irrational fear that that pixels cause cancer.

In any case, I am fully comfortable predicting that 10 years there will be no dedicated digital STILL cameras manufactured at all. It's all going the video & frame capture route...*any* sort of still photography will be retro by 2020. Photojournalism already started going down that road a few years ago and device convergence will see to the rest.

MizBrown said:

Skateboarders do appear to have made a fetish of Hasselblads. In another forum, someone was asking about setting up to do skateboard photos with a V Hasselblad and several people suggested that 35mm or the other capture device might be more appropriate. Seems to be unique to skateboarders. When I'm up on Skyline Drive, I've never seen another Hasselblad, but have seen a 4x5 camera. Mostly phone cameras and point and shoot digitals, with about a quarter DSLRs or SLRs (don't look closely).

Click to expand...

Hassies were one of the most-used skateboarding cameras in the days when digital was not a feasible option for most people.

As such, they are still used by some people. They do have excellent image quality, and for years were one of "the" skateboarding cameras, so the square frame has become a staple of skateboarding pix. Not to burst anyone's bubble, but while they are still used for this, most have gone to digital SLR for all the usual reasons people go to digital SLRs. The fact that skateboarding magazines are often monthlies gives film a better chance of remaining in use.

I cannot ride a skateboard to save my life, but I have an acquaintance who lives and breathes skateboarding photography to the point that it sickens me. He shoots for magazines, books, etc. He says that Hassies are still used, by older photographers and by younger ones wanting to conform to the "old" way. He sometimes shoots 4x5 for his pix (which have won him full-ride scholarships and awards in the past). His digital is a Canon 1D (mk. I). When he wants to shoot medium format, he rents a Hassy. He usually only does this for the fisheye.

2F/2F said:

Hassies were one of the most-used skateboarding cameras in the days when digital was not a feasible option for most people.

As such, they are still used by some people. They do have excellent image quality, and for years were one of "the" skateboarding cameras, so the square frame has become a staple of skateboarding pix. Not to burst anyone's bubble, but while they are still used for this, most have gone to digital SLR for all the usual reasons people go to digital SLRs. The fact that skateboarding magazines are often monthlies gives film a better chance of remaining in use.

I cannot ride a skateboard to save my life, but I have an acquaintance who lives and breathes skateboarding photography to the point that it sickens me. He shoots for magazines, books, etc. He says that Hassies are still used, by older photographers and by younger ones wanting to conform to the "old" way. He sometimes shoots 4x5 for his pix (which have won him full-ride scholarships and awards in the past). His digital is a Canon 1D (mk. I). When he wants to shoot medium format, he rents a Hassy. He usually only does this for the fisheye.

Click to expand...

I used to do quite nicely on a skateboard, thank you very much. Then I tore the labrum in my right hip (not skateboarding-related) and that was that.

Back in the 90s there was quite a bit of skateboarding going on in Cambridge, Somerville, Revere, and East Boston. I never noticed all that many people photographing it (Somerville cops would have been all over that like a fly-on-you-know-what, actually) but I definitely recall some Pentax 6x7 shooters (probably that 1/1000th shutter speed) using monopods.. I haven't been back to any of those spots in quite a few years, and most of them are gone, anyhow. Most skateboarding iin the Boston Metro area, these days, is on the Wii. Same goes for rock bands. I've no idea what people use to shoot that, though.

Never saw a Hassy but in the mid-90s I wouldn't have known what one was.

At this point, we should stop worrying about the marginalization of film as an "alternative process". It's fait accompli and it's already about 5 years in the historical rear-view mirror.

I think the images you are referring to, i.e., the proof sheet etc., are no doubt digi shots inserted into a "film frame" for effect using PS. Sad, but I'm sure true.

I watched a TV show about UK cops this week and they used a polaroad to take a photo of a suspect, although I spose they will have no choice but to stop that now, or switch to the Fuji equivalent.

ajuk said:

I watched a TV show about UK cops this week and they used a polaroad to take a photo of a suspect, although I spose they will have no choice but to stop that now, or switch to the Fuji equivalent.

Click to expand...

There are also legal reasons for doing this, having to do with anti-tampering, but you know, I'm not 100% versed on what the requirements are for forensic/crime-scene photography. Someone else on here might know better.

thisismyname09 said:

I am part of this "next generation" and I agree completely.

Click to expand...

Same.

I think that this sort of use occurs because film cameras like a Rollieflex continue to have a recognizable image, and when they are used in a show or an ad, they are noticed. The public may not be particularly familiar with cameras of that type, but they still are recognized as being at least a little bit special or remarkable, and as such that they have an effect on the viewer.

Nowadays, if the show or ad used a typical digital point and shoot, there would be no such effect. Then again, if in the 1980s or 1990s the show or ad had used a typical point and shoot film camera, there would also have been no such effect.

In general, this is good!

Matt

Have any of you seen the Miracle Whip ad? The one with the group of 20 somethings on a roof partying and BBQ. There is a young lady with a Polaroid Swinger camera taking "Happy Snaps" of the activities.
I wonder if the director or set designer knows that camera and film maker are no more?

Wow, since just 2 days ago (8/14/09) when I first posted this, 1087 hits and 39 responses… ooh I feel so honored. Once again I did not think this was such a hot topic.

My intention for the post was to get the anger and disappointment off my chest and hence the killing off of more film stock by the “Boys up in Rochester” remark. (due to the fact that PKR/KR 64 is no where to be found, that followed by not finding any more E100 GX, which was discontinued, about 2 weeks after the Kodachrome obit)

Look, I am neither naive nor stupid! I know, see and experience everyday the frustration of film as well as consumables slowly but surely disappearing.

But rather than seeing what I mentioned as even a remotely possible resurgence, I find and I am surprised, and even more astonished that here of all places, on an analog forum, many have thrown in the towel and see films demise as a fait accompli and with a DNR order in hand, are on a death vigil for film, waiting to pull the plug!

As for… “ What will impress "the boys in Rochester" will be when all those masses of people who see those ads showing contact sheets jump up from their sofas, run to the corner drugstore, and purchase a few rolls of Kodak film…”

Well the problem is that… the corner drugstore (as well as the gas station, supermarkets, and the “Mart” type stores) no longer sell film…. Brick & mortar camera/photographic supply stores are disappearing daily so one can hardly expect the masses to run and buy film at least from those locations. Maybe if the mail order outlets and major camera/photographic supply stores advertised to the masses instead of the converted few, that they still do indeed sell film, then people could jump from the sofa and buy.

This lack of easily available film is mainly due to the impact of the marketing mavens for the Big Yellow K, and the relentless pounding into the minds of the masses, the buyers for these stores, (and worse yet, the BIG boys in Rochester and the stock holders) that film is dead,

Yes I can see it now; the marketing mavens up in Rochester are saying … “Well our focus groups say that film is dead”…. “So therefore ‘tis must be true”.

Let me tell you something about focus groups. I worked for an ad agency many, many years ago, in consumer research. Trust me, many, and I mean many of those focus group members could give a Rats A** about the product they were “focusing in on”, they were there because they got paid for participating. As such they would say anything that they thought the folks behind the 2-way mirror would want to hear.

As for using a “proof sheet” as a Cool, Retro & Hip prop…. To who …target audiences of tweens don’t think so….

I don’t think that pre-pubescent tweens are looking at that B&W proof sheet backdrop and thinking… Oh how cool and retro…. Makes me think back when I was young… oh right, about 3 years ago…

Face it, tweens are too busy fantasying about the singer…. The tween boys in one direction and the tween girls in another direction.

Just maybe the photographer actually used FILM, rather than digital and the set designer for the show said, “Hey nice shots, lets go with it!” Do you honestly think the set director said to the photographer, “Hey, go PS your digi shots cause I want to have a cool, retro and hip look”.
The focus was on the singer, not the backdrop, (they could have shown a moose giving birth in the background, and nobody would notice) they were watching the singer gyrate, so I don’t think they would go to all that trouble.

I don’t think that teenagers are looking at the print mail ad and thinking “Oh B&W how cool, hip and retro”, they especially could care less… once again, just maybe the ad agency assigned to the this client had a photographer that actually used FILM and the client liked it and said go with it!

As for…“At this point, we should stop worrying about the marginalization of film as an "alternative process". It's fait accompli and it's already about 5 years in the historical rear-view mirror.”

Somewhere within this forum (check the archives), a poster included some pics of a “Supermarket for film/papers and chemicals” somewhere in Japan. If you can find it and you see the pics I swear you will drool. (Look under > General Discussion > The Lounge > Film paradise: Here it is).

Why is it that Ilford made a real commitment to analog?
Why is it, that Ilford lists “DarkRoom for Hire” (UK & Ireland only), does the Big Yellow K do that?

Why is it that Fuji made a commitment to analog, (only instant film around!) and is gladly taking market share from the Big Yellow K with their E-6 line, as they (the Big Yellow K) gladly hand it to them on a silver platter!

Why is it, that the British Photo Mags have numerous ads for traditional analog services for labs that will hand print and develop, yet the American Photo mags lack these ads.

Do you think maybe, just maybe that they are more committed to analog and not biased by London's Berkeley Square focus groups? (London version of New York's Madison Avenue)

I’m sure many of you as well as myself have met other photographers who lament and say “digital has no soul”, and they prefer film… but due to the demands of the client with a “I want it yesterday philosophy” digital is the way they have to shoot.

But yet…just a few days ago I met two photographers who own a rather large studio. One used to shoot 4x5, the other 6x6. Now they have to shoot digital, because of the majority of their clients… but guess what … they are adding a real wet analog darkroom to their studio… why because now they are finding that some, not all, but some clients actually DO WANT FILM.

Look, I realize that with a dwindling market, environmental concerns, and the state of the economy it may not be practical and/or profitable to run production lines of film/paper/chemicals, as in the past.

But again….

Maybe I am being extremely naive or just plain stupid…. But just maybe, just maybe all these TV and print ads and the resurgence of the look of “Film” in ads and TV, maybe it really is a subtle way to rally back to film.

Just my 2¢, (well actually now my 4¢)

eddym said:

What will impress "the boys in Rochester" will be when all those masses of people who see those ads showing contact sheets jump up from their sofas, run to the corner drugstore, and purchase a few rolls of Kodak film. Unfortunately, the vast majority of them will not even notice the contact sheet, not know what it is, or not know that it has anything to do with film... or all the above.

Click to expand...

Won't happen. Marketing is all about memes. Ideas and thoughts that take on a personality of their own. They use this to stigmatize the audience like a constant bombardment. And they've got reinforcements to replace yet reinforce the motif they ever so quickly tease your mind with. It's akin to a food recipe that has 20+ ingredients.. the individual ingredient gets washed out by so many others you cannot quite place the flavor anywhere on the flavormeter. The fact that anyone would take notice of the 35mm contact sheet long enough to make note of it means that they were falling short of meme reinforcements, and we wouldn't be discussing this topic. Therefore marketing didn't do its job properly, and .. voilla, nobody will "buy it".

Sound about right? hehe

clayne said:

There are also legal reasons for doing this, having to do with anti-tampering, but you know, I'm not 100% versed on what the requirements are for forensic/crime-scene photography. Someone else on here might know better.

Click to expand...

there are still some fire and police departments here in LA that still use film, especially Polaroid film for documenting crime scenes and burnt out houses, etc.

they are still scared of the tampering thing i guess.

I don't remember what department it was, but last year when Polaroid discontinued the instant films, I took a call from a city accountants office, saying that they wanted to buy ALL the polaroid 600 film that we had in stock. (i worked at samys). We had just gotten a shipment of the film in from Polaroid, and 3 days later I sold them close to 9,500 dollars worth of it. this was at 9.50/single pack. Twas a nice commisions check from that sale .

now you're lucky if you can find it at all, especially since the ebay scroungers have sucked it all up.

-dan

Did anyone notice the RZ67 in the movie Watchmen?

Don't generalize about the 16 to 24 year-olds unless you are actually talking to some of them. I mentioned 120 film at a meeting recently and had two college kids respond with "Have you heard of Holgas?".

Dave Pritchard said:

Don't generalize about the 16 to 24 year-olds unless you are actually talking to some of them. I mentioned 120 film at a meeting recently and had two college kids respond with "Have you heard of Holgas?".

Click to expand...

I don't know if it's good or bad but I see it as bad, the fact of 120 film meaning "holga, diana and probably LOMO". I don't know if it was better if it meant "rollei, hasselblad, skill"
I haven't got anything against people loving the lomo stuff. They support the medium because they buy film (at least the ones not buying it expired).
But most of this people follow a trend, and probably one day the stuff won't be that cool.

I'm from the youngest generation that shoots film and don't have many faith on the others. I know someone that doesn't know what the heck is film, another who seen it as a expensive and retro.
So far, if there's anyone of my age who gets interest in photography, most go the digital way. I just deviated and fell here

Dave Pritchard said:

Don't generalize about the 16 to 24 year-olds unless you are actually talking to some of them. I mentioned 120 film at a meeting recently and had two college kids respond with "Have you heard of Holgas?".

Click to expand...

Yes, because Holga is the grand representation of medium format right? I know I'm sounding grouchy, but I'd like to see the younger ones take things more seriously. Granted, it'll probably happen, eventually (I hope).

clayne said:

Yes, because Holga is the grand representation of medium format right? I know I'm sounding grouchy, but I'd like to see the younger ones take things more seriously. Granted, it'll probably happen, eventually (I hope).

Click to expand...

Too bad I didn't finish the post before you. I pressed "post reply" and had it an hour written and entretaining myself in other tabs of the browser. Then, when I started to close the mess of tabs I Found the reply written but not posted.
I just told that in my other post. I see it as bad that 120 means "holga, diana, lomo" and not "rollei, hasselblad, shrap, quality" and whatever.

Ira Rush said:

This lack of easily available film is mainly due to the impact of the marketing mavens for the Big Yellow K, and the relentless pounding into the minds of the masses, the buyers for these stores, (and worse yet, the BIG boys in Rochester and the stock holders) that film is dead,

Click to expand...

Ira,

Actually the box is yellow and the K is red. So it is more proper to refer to Kodak as "the Yellow Box company" rather than "Big Yellow K".

I thought that you would want to know.

Steve

Not sure if anyone has seen this: http://www.dazeddigital.com/Photography/article/4381/1/Urban_Polaroids