Film photography predictions for 2015

Richard S. (rich815) · Jan 3, 2015

RattyMouse said:
I wish I got a chance to shoot Neopan 400 in 120 size before it disappeared.

It is sublime.

Albany roof garden macro SL66 80Planar(old) Neopan400 Rodinal 1-50 9min30sec 22C 1minAg 2008-06 ES 4990 001 by rich8155 (Richard Sintchak), on Flickr

Ping me when you get back to the states. I still have some 120 in my freezer. No guarantee but if I still have some I might share a roll or two in trade for something if you want.

AgX · Jan 3, 2015

Photo Engineer said:
There is quite a story to the implosion of EFKE that is not relevant here except for one point which coincides with that of Ferrania. All of the photo engineers were getting old, and it was difficult to recruit new ones for a field that was perceived as difficult to learn and waning in popularity (analog films). In the face of one fact, the aging of an already elderly staff, EFKE closed its doors.
And, BTW, this has been posted here before and on the EFKE web page.

That becoming of age applies to all manufacturers.

removedacct1 · Jan 3, 2015

Richard Sintchak (rich815) said:
It is sublime.

.

That is certainly the right word for it. That is beautiful!
Does Neopan Acros 100 not have similar tonality?

Sal Santamaura · Jan 3, 2015

paulbarden said:
...Does Neopan Acros 100 not have similar tonality?

No, exactly opposite. Whereas Neopan 400 had a long, significant shoulder, Acros' characteristic curve goes up at the top.

Richard S. (rich815) · Jan 3, 2015

paulbarden said:
That is certainly the right word for it. That is beautiful!
Does Neopan Acros 100 not have similar tonality?

In my personal opinion and experience Acros is a bit more "Tmax" or even digital-looking. A bit more clinical but not so bad as digital B&W. Also I think Neopan 400 has a bit more "bite" to it and can appear sharper due to edge effects. I mostly use Acros for 35mm work vs the Neopan 400 for MF since the grain is not as much an issue with MF sized negs. Lastly I found that Neopan 400 has more ability to vary it's look through exposure, developer, development technique, etc vs Acros. That last aspect perhaps why I'm most upset it's gone.

Here's a somewhat similar shot with Acros:

Golden Gate Park fern grove Rolleiwide FujiAcros HC-110dilH 9min30sec 21C 1minAg2x 05-2012 VSmac 9000 Scan-120531-0001 FFw by rich8155 (Richard Sintchak), on Flickr

RattyMouse · Jan 3, 2015

Richard Sintchak (rich815) said:
It is sublime.

Ping me when you get back to the states. I still have some 120 in my freezer. No guarantee but if I still have some I might share a roll or two in trade for something if you want.

Beautiful shot! Just gorgeous. Your offer is extremely attractive! I have some Astia 100F (220) expired but shoots beautifully on ice now. I can trade some of that to you if you like that. Or I have Neopan 400 in 135 size!! Wouldnt that be funny, trading Neopan for Neopan.

I should spend some time in the US this year, hopefully VERY soon!

SchwinnParamount · Jan 3, 2015

Richard Sintchak (rich815) said:
In my personal opinion and experience Acros is a bit more "Tmax" or even digital-looking. A bit more clinical but not so bad as digital B&W. Also I think Neopan 400 has a bit more "bite" to it and can appear sharper due to edge effects. I mostly use Acros for 35mm work vs the Neopan 400 for MF since the grain is not as much an issue with MF sized negs. Lastly I found that Neopan 400 has more ability to vary it's look through exposure, developer, development technique, etc vs Acros. That last aspect perhaps why I'm most upset it's gone.

Here's a somewhat similar shot with Acros:

Golden Gate Park fern grove Rolleiwide FujiAcros HC-110dilH 9min30sec 21C 1minAg2x 05-2012 VSmac 9000 Scan-120531-0001 FFw by rich8155 (Richard Sintchak), on Flickr

This is gorgeous. Can you tell us a bit about the light conditions when you made this exposure? Do you remember the stop and shutter speed?

Richard S. (rich815) · Jan 4, 2015

SchwinnParamount said:
This is gorgeous. Can you tell us a bit about the light conditions when you made this exposure? Do you remember the stop and shutter speed?

Thanks mate. It was mid-morning which in San Francisco is about 80% of the time evenly overcast or what we locally call a "high fog". I often shoot then as this fog can often clear out about 11-12 or so making for more contrasty conditions but I like the "big light box in the sky" effect this high fog so often gives for even lighting. I do not take extensive notes when shooting but remembering the day I was on a tripod and likely about f/8 and 1/60 or 1/125th or so.

tnabbott · Jan 4, 2015

I tried to enjoy film photography for the past 5 years. The experience ends up being one of never ending supply chain problems such that little time is left for art. Film is not dying; it is essentially dead already.

eddie · Jan 4, 2015

I've never had a problem with the supply chain. I can no longer drive to the local store for supplies, but just a bit of mail order planning keeps me stocked with all I need. I would think, being in a major California city, you should have an easy time getting supplies, if that's what you wish. My guess is there are other reasons you're giving it up.

StoneNYC · Jan 4, 2015

tnabbott said:
I tried to enjoy film photography for the past 5 years. The experience ends up being one of never ending supply chain problems such that little time is left for art. Film is not dying; it is essentially dead already.

If you're having supply problems in the USA it's YOU and bad habits not the supply...

Sad to see you go but what a terrible outlook when I don't have any supply issues except getting Velvia50 in 8x10, which I've now solved and I doubt you're talking about that.

Pioneer · Jan 4, 2015

I have no earthly idea what you will do in 2015.

I have less of an idea what the industry will do in 2015.

I predict I will shoot more 4x5 sheet film in 2015. (Two of my Kickstarter 4x5 cameras will be delivered and I am finishing a rebuild of a nice Crown Graphic.)

I predict I will be purchasing more Ilford film in 2015. (My stock of Arista Premium 100 is almost out and will be replaced by FP4+. Freestyle will finally run out of Arista Premium 400 so I will begin to purchase HP5+.)

I will continue to use out of date film cameras. (They just continue working so I have no reason to replace them. If they do break (rare) the can almost always be repaired for much less than the cost of new camera.)

I will use my Holga and Brownie more this year. (I am learning that my skill level is barely up to the capabilities of these cameras. After several years of on and off again abuse (know by me as photography) they refuse to break down either.)

Public Disclaimer - I refuse to be held accountable for any of these silly predictions. If they do come true this year it will be through no fault of my own.

Truzi · Jan 4, 2015

If no one has predicted stand-development debates, I'll predict about 14 of them (not including the one carrying over from last December).

I also predict I will get in an argument about finances with my best friend when I get a Super Graphic (read; I predict I'll finally buy one this year).

Regarding availability, perhaps it's affected people in urban areas more; I live in a far suburb, bordering rural areas. We never had a camera store in our city - just grocery stores, drug stores, and at one time a Fotomat. You'd have to travel to get anything that wasn't a consumer film.

Nowadays, you can get anything on the internet - and shipping is faster than the mail-order catalog days (and I'm talking time from the order reaching the carrier).

It's not just photography, though. It's harder to find many things today as most stores go for cheap/disposable or "in-style" items.

For example:
I'd have to put in hours of research to find a shovel that doesn't break in two years. It used to be that any store had quality shovels.
Also, our family has always loved La Florentine Torrones (Stone, you'd better know these, lol), but they have become difficult to get at brick-and-mortar stores, where they have been reduced to a seasonal item.

Richard Man · Jan 5, 2015

I have one of the finest digital camera ever made, the Leica M9 - but I am shooting more film again. First starting with 4x5, which got me to tame processing and scanning the color neg beast, which got me to shoot 35mm color negs again on my XPan... May be I would even start shooting with the OM-4T and the Leica M7 again...

Great fun.

NJH · Jan 5, 2015

Truzi said:
It's not just photography, though. It's harder to find many things today as most stores go for cheap/disposable or "in-style" items.

This is the UK now in a nutshell. We very rarely shop locally any more as it just got silly making trips into town and coming home empty handed, they have many of the branded stores but just little provincial versions that don't carry anything like the range of those in major towns and cities. This is sadly nothing like independents used to be, my family used to have a grocery store many years ago we carried as many lines as bigger supermarkets. Such shops are becoming a real rarity in the UK these days and its killing the smaller town centres as they are effectively in retail terms pointless. Film is no different to anything else I buy, I can either drive to the Poole/Bournemouth area, Robert White's and SnapsPhotoServices pretty much cover me for analog equipment/supplies or I can mail order. Given how good the deals are online it seems crazy to me that anyone who can contribute to this thread wouldn't be stocking up via deals found online.

blockend · Jan 5, 2015

At the risk of sounding like a cheapskate, film is becoming very expensive compared to the alternatives. In the UK a roll of one of my favourite colour films, Fuji Pro 400H in 35mm, costs £9.49 - £10.49, plus postage. When I used it regularly I could easily get through five rolls over a weekend - fifty quid before processing costs. That's too rich for my tastes and I use cheaper film, with regret.

Does Pro400H have to cost that much per roll to keep being produced? I have no idea, but unit cost and demand are linked. Companies can't keep blaming consumers for not buying enough film while prices keep rising.

Tom Kershaw · Jan 5, 2015

Kodak Portra 400 is less expensive:

http://www.ag-photographic.co.uk/portra-400-35mm-36-5-pack-2078-p.asp

Tom

Arctic amateur · Jan 5, 2015

You should be able to get 400H for £7.50 apiece incl. shipping if you buy 10 at http://www.mailshotsuk.co.uk/acatalog/FUJI_PRO_H_400__135-36.html

Roger Cole · Jan 5, 2015

tnabbott said:
I tried to enjoy film photography for the past 5 years. The experience ends up being one of never ending supply chain problems such that little time is left for art. Film is not dying; it is essentially dead already.

What? I have ZERO problems with such in black and white. I did have to go from TMZ to D3200 in 35mm but that's been it, and I already used it in 120 so it was no issue.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and 100% recycled electrons - because I care.

Richard S. (rich815) · Jan 5, 2015

Roger Cole said:
What? I have ZERO problems with such in black and white. I did have to go from TMZ to D3200 in 35mm but that's been it, and I already used it in 120 so it was no issue.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk and 100% recycled electrons - because I care.

Yeah me neither. I did sort of see the trend and planned ahead and loaded up on a decent amount of B&W film during a period when many pros were emptying their freezers back when digital finally became "good enough" for a lot of commercial uses (so glad I did, I often got rolls of 120 for $1 per or less, best score was 87 rolls of Plus-X for $85! Bulk rolls of 35mm often had for $20 or less: best score was two bulk rolls of Agfa APX25 for $18 a bulk roll) but even that aside I've never had issue getting any Ilford or Kodak films from either Amazon or B&H. I've bought most of my film from B&H for many years anyway. Sure locally not so easy to score at drug stores and the like anymore but if I ever want to overpay for film I can still get it at more than a few places locally around the San Francisco Bay Area.

StoneNYC · Jan 5, 2015

I predict people will still complain about the price of film.

Digital is free so people forget somehow that film has always cost a lot, I remember growing up lamenting about the cost of film, and even more the kodak processing send away, but we did it because we had to, and I had $10/week allowance and it went to film and Magic the Gathering cards (dating myself here if you can figure out when the game began) and that's where my money was split.

Now that digital is "free" we seem to forget that film always cost a lot, if I could shoot more than 2 rolls of 35mm in a month, that was a lot.

We also forget to choose our images carefully and indeed blow through 5 rolls in a weekend, do you really need that many images if you're only shooting a personal event? Probably not.

Gotta put it in perspective...

removedacct1 · Jan 5, 2015

Richard Sintchak (rich815) said:
I've never had issue getting any Ilford or Kodak films from either Amazon or B&H. I've bought most of my film from B&H for many years anyway

As do I. B&H ships for free if you buy $50 worth of film, which is a bonus. For people like me who like to keep the pantry well-stocked (so to speak), the 7 - 10 day free shipping is no big deal since I'm planning way ahead anyway. And prices! HP5 for example is $4.09 a roll of 120. Try getting it for anything close to that from Amazon.
No, there are no options for buying B&W film closer than an hours drive away (and its much more expensive at the "local" shops), but that doesn't mean my supply chain is deficient.

Roger Cole · Jan 5, 2015

When I was into photography in the 90s I had to look at ads in the back of magazines or in Shutterbug and pick up the phone, during business hours, to order my supplies. When I got back into it circa 2010 I was able to order anything I want, any time I want, even at 3 AM, with a few mouse clicks. I've ALWAYS had to order. Back then I lived in a small town with only consumer C41 available OTC, no chemicals, no paper, no black and white ANYTHING. I could drive 20-30 miles and get black and white film, SOME paper, and SOME chemicals, mostly the most popular Kodak stuff, if I could go during business hours and wanted to pay a lot more, so I ordered then. I order now. The only black and white item I use that's been discontinued was TMZ and I like D3200 as well, better in the sense I can get it in 120. Efke is gone but that was only infrared for me and I stocked my freezer with IR820.

Now color is a bit different in the sense that we are losing E6 films, and one after another my favorites - Astia, E100G, and Provia 400X, all gone. But in negative film when I came back to photography I immediately settled on Portra 400 and Ektar 100 and I can still get all of those I want too.

What problem? There simply isn't one unless you insist on walking to the neighborhood brick and mortar to buy which I have NEVER been able to do for paper and chemicals, and only some film, even in the 70s where I lived at the time and was getting started.

Richard S. (rich815) · Jan 5, 2015

StoneNYC said:
I predict people will still complain about the price of film.

Digital is free so people forget somehow that film has always cost a lot, I remember growing up lamenting about the cost of film, and even more the kodak processing send away, but we did it because we had to, and I had $10/week allowance and it went to film and Magic the Gathering cards (dating myself here if you can figure out when the game began) and that's where my money was split.

Now that digital is "free" we seem to forget that film always cost a lot, if I could shoot more than 2 rolls of 35mm in a month, that was a lot.

We also forget to choose our images carefully and indeed blow through 5 rolls in a weekend, do you really need that many images if you're only shooting a personal event? Probably not.

Gotta put it in perspective...

Digital free? I shoot color with a Sony NEX-6 and on iPhone 6. It's far from free once I add in the cost for digital storage, back ups, etc.

As for film cost? Do the math but take inflation and purchasing power parity into account. How much was film per roll back in your Magic the Gathering days? I'd say it's cheaper today in relative comparison. Heck if it increased in price like most things have since then it should be $15 or more per roll today!

Roger Cole · Jan 5, 2015

That spray and pray approach is a bad habit that I thankfully never developed in digital even though I've shot some of that (not much.) Habits already formed by decades in film I guess.

For the ultimate slow down, get into large format. Even at over a buck a shot I find the film (black and white - color is quite hideous so when I do shoot color in my view camera I use a roll film back) turns out cheaper for an outing, or at least no more. An afternoon's shooting might see me make three or four images, with maybe a couple of sheets exposed for each.

Film photography predictions for 2015

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency