Film photography makes a stunning comeback

[Derek Lofgreen]

Nothing new to us here but a good article letting the rest of the world know we aren't crazy for still shooting film.

http://www.europeanceo.com/culture/film-photography-makes-a-stunning-comeback/

D.

 

[skorpiius]

Just a comment on

The cost of shooting analogue is immediate and physical: you have to buy film, you have to pay to have it processed and scanned. With these criteria, digital appears less expensive and many wonder why anyone would choose to shoot film. However, people fail to build into their costing how long it takes to edit digital photos. If they were to cost out how long it takes to edit and prepare digital files for production, it would be equivalent or near to the cost of shooting analogue; they balance out in the end”, said Macleod.

I do find this, sort of.
With digi cams I find that a) the tiny screen is not good enough to judge if a photo was captured 'perfectly', and so I find I'm always simply not caring, since I can just 'fix in post process', which can be a HUGE time suck. One of the things I like about my partial return to film is since that is less of an option, I spend more time making as sure as possible the image I capture is likely to be perfect, and then there's no post work required.

 

[pentaxuser]

A reasonable article but I do wonder if the word "stunning" is justified or just a piece of journo-speak to gather reader interest

pentaxuser

 

[pdeeh]

With digi cams I find that a) the tiny screen is not good enough to judge if a photo was captured 'perfectly', and so I find I'm always simply not caring, since I can just 'fix in post process', which can be a HUGE time suck. One of the things I like about my partial return to film is since that is less of an option, I spend more time making as sure as possible the image I capture is likely to be perfect, and then there's no post work required.

This is nothing to do with digital VS film but everything to do with personal discipline.

You can make as much effort as you want with a digital camera to make the "perfect" shot, and you can be as careless as you like with a film camera.

Plus, you don't have to look at the digital camera's screen if you don't want to ... it's not essential to taking a photograph.

Let's just enjoy film because we enjoy film. We don't have to make up spurious justifications for it, or indeed spurious denigrations of digital.

 

[gone]

I haven't read the article yet, but any good film news is good w/ me. Of course, no one is going to suddenly sell their DSLR kit and start shooting film from one article, but I like any conversation about it.

In my case, it's not that I really degenerate digital (other than, yes, it sucks). It works very well for taking photos of my film gear if I wish to sell it :] But, and this is a serious "but", I can't stand the look of digital, so I don't shoot it. Especially dislike the look of B&W digital. In fact, I find it painful to watch any movie that is not shot w/ film. So to me it's really about an inferior medium that exists only for convenience.

We live in a culture and commerce that totally does not support film in any way, shape or form. It's a fringe craft, and a fringe industry. So anything that puts it in a positive (but realistic) light I'm all for.

 

[Ian Grant]

I heard something to the same effect last month, that there was a surprising upturn in film sales, greater than expected. The source was reliable.

Ian

 

[benjiboy]

Another "clutching at straws" article.

 

[gone]

OK, I read the article, and pretty much like everything it's about. Good stuff. Thanks for posting it.

 

[michr]

Like the much ballyhooed resurgence of LPs, the return to film is a small blip in comparison to the massive decline from when these media where dominant. I want to continue using film, but as we've seen only too recently with dropping of FP-100C, our choices are getting smaller and the scale of the market continues to contract. Realistically, things will never be like they were. Let's hope we can reach a stable state of affairs and retain the remaining good materials we have left for silver-based photography.

 

[Mainecoonmaniac]

I love film photography. I think using film cameras instead of digital digital cameras is mostly for artist, amateurs and hobbyist. With professionals needing fast turnaround times and photo editing capabilities, digital will still be king. That's OK. Most commercial images have a short shelf life anyway. No need to waste silver for those images. Save film for special images.

 

[skorpiius]

This is nothing to do with digital VS film but everything to do with personal discipline.

I agree, film forces me to have it.

 

[BrianShaw]

A reasonable article but I do wonder if the word "stunning" is justified or just a piece of journo-speak to gather reader interest

Yup.

 

[pdeeh]

I agree, film forces me to have it.

I suspect you have missed my point. perhaps purposely?

but I think you you'll find that neither film nor digital forces anything upon the photographer in the act of taking a photograph

 

[skorpiius]

I suspect you have missed my point. perhaps purposely?

but I think you you'll find that neither film nor digital forces anything upon the photographer in the act of taking a photograph

Your point seems to have been to tell me I'm wrong when I wrote what film photography does for me personally?

 

[pdeeh]

that's right

 

[pdeeh]

sigh

 

[Ai Print]

but I think you you'll find that neither film nor digital forces anything upon the photographer in the act of taking a photograph

Yes and no, and I shoot **tons** of both.

When I am shooting film, I simply do not have the option of seeing the photograph right away so to me at least, that represents a fairly big difference in shooting / seeing rhythm. It translates to my use of digital as well as I usually go hundreds of images on digital before I look at the LCD, usually to make a slight change in a Kelvin setting if I detect a change in the light, but there *is* the option in seeing the photo right away and it pays off big time in certain experimentation or can be a major disruptor of seeing rhythm.

Most people I know who shoot digital regardless of whether it is for work or pleasure look at the LCD a LOT, almost like a conditioned response. So while it is a nicety to say one does not have to, most do and far too much.

I love film photography. I think using film cameras instead of digital digital cameras is mostly for artist, amateurs and hobbyist. With professionals needing fast turnaround times and photo editing capabilities, digital will still be king. That's OK. Most commercial images have a short shelf life anyway. No need to waste silver for those images. Save film for special images.

While true, the uptick in pros using film is pretty much commensurate to how many enthusiasts are picking it up all for the same reasons, it is a great medium that is now a fantastic niche so no reason to abandon it. Not only am I finding that clients have no objection to putting in a budget line item for film, they are pretty excited about it and love the results.

It's the best of times really, we have so many great film choices too which is overwhelming at times when all a really great photographer needs to make his or her mark is 2-4 films in their career / lifetime.

 

[pdeeh]

Most people I know who shoot digital regardless of whether it is for work or pleasure look at the LCD a LOT, almost like a conditioned response. So while it is a nicety to say one does not have to, most do and far too much.

but there is a significant difference of kind in "people who do this do it a lot" and "people who do this a lot are forced to do it".

if someone is unable to do something with a digital camera that they can do readily with a film camera (like "slow down" or "not chimp" or "make perfect compositions") then the "problem" - such as it is - lies with them, not the equipment.

 

[awty]

Oh no!
Must be my fault......sorry.
This is what happened to me with analog music. When I decided to get back into hifi and records 6 or 7 years ago, second hand records and turntables were cheap and plentiful, look at it know, some prices have increased 10 fold.
Now I decided to get back into film, prices will go. Need to buy up big.

Seriously film gives you a better connection, familiarity (specially if you grew up with it) and a special charm you cant get with digital.

 

[Ai Print]

but there is a significant difference of kind in "people who do this do it a lot" and "people who do this a lot are forced to do it".

if someone is unable to do something with a digital camera that they can do readily with a film camera (like "slow down" or "not chimp" or "make perfect compositions") then the "problem" - such as it is - lies with them, not the equipment.

I get where you are coming from but there are certain things that if one wants to nit pick, you could be forced into doing with one method over the other, but these are not really as much creative aspects as they are technical.

Either way, it is a good article that seems a lot more well informed and well rounded compared to others I have seen in the past.

 

[removed account4]

nice article

i think at a certain point people have to realize one can photograph with a dig camera the same way one
would shoot with a film camera. one can not spend enormous amounts of time infront of a screen just as one
can not spent 2 weeks and 4 50 sh. boxes of 11x14 paper hoping to get the print just right.
while the media re different they are the same if one wants them to be, and the end, unless
you are doing it with time constraints and clients who are freaking out if the stuff wasn't in their hands yesterday,
it is more about personal choice than anything else. one was able to chimp and not care just as easy with a winder
and drop the stuff off at a lab and be happy with the results just as one does the same thing now with
chimping and the facebook wall. endless arguments about which one is better or worse are useless.
i'm just happy i can still use film.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

Good article. I'm glad they mentioned this:

"Herein lies the problem – digital files do not last on their own. File types come and go – even the ubiquitous JPEG format may not be readable by standard hardware in 20 or 30 years – so constant, active conversion is required to ensure the survival of an archive. Properly stored negatives, however, can last almost indefinitely, with no particular action required. They are tangible records that can be passed down through generations."

 

[TheRook]

Like the much ballyhooed resurgence of LPs, the return to film is a small blip in comparison to the massive decline from when these media where dominant. I want to continue using film, but as we've seen only too recently with dropping of FP-100C, our choices are getting smaller and the scale of the market continues to contract. Realistically, things will never be like they were. Let's hope we can reach a stable state of affairs and retain the remaining good materials we have left for silver-based photography.

I wouldn't put it so bleak. I run into significantly more young people in the streets with film cameras than I did seven, eight years ago. This must mean something. Certainly some films are disappearing, limiting one's options. But manufacturers must cater to the demands of today's photographers, not what was popular decades ago.

 

[Peter Schrager]

I'm in freestyle quite often here in Los Angeles and people are in and out all day long buying film chemicals etc...dropping film off for developing too...uptick my butt...prices for silver are down..film prices up so these little niche players like Ilford and kodak are doing fine...we have lots of choices with new films and foma makes some great paper...impossible film and new 55.able to do scaning...it's really the BEST OF times!

 

[Luminousoctaves]

It's definitely something going on. BJP published an article a year ago about Ilfords film sales increasing and british art schools building new darkrooms. In Sweden I know at least two major art schools that have invested in (re)buidling new dark rooms. I work as teacher in photography and the interest for darkroom work has exploded the past three years. Kids growing up today never held a film camera before. They are totally into exploring the analog process.

Of course analog photography will never come close to the sales and activities 20 years ago, but who cares! With internet connecting us the community is huge anyway.

EDIT: There's a yearly analog camera fair, Kameraloppis, in Stockholm that I usually attend. It has grown in popularity and what's most encouraging is that the visitors aren't just old men 60+ (no offense!) but a lot of young people... of both sexes(!!!).

That's me to the left in camera selling some junk: