Future of medium format film

Steve Smith · Oct 10, 2009

Sirius Glass said:
Kodak Ultracolor 400 was discontinued in 120, but Ektar 100 was added.

Just to add to that, Kodak introduced Ektar 100 in 35mm only. Due to popular demand, they added it in 120 size.

i.e. we asked for it and got it!

Steve.

Ian David · Oct 10, 2009

JBrunner said:
Film will never be completely replaced because it isn't a quality issue for most the folks still using it, it is an aesthetic issue, and an issue of taste.

Exactly. An enormous part of the attraction of the analogue path is the nature of the whole process. There is tradition and soul there that simply cannot be replaced by (indeed is incompatible with) speed and convenience.

If you like film, get into film. It will still be there for you.

Ian

Ektagraphic · Oct 10, 2009

Jeff Searust said:
My childrens' children will be able to buy film.

Maybe black and white but I doubt they will be able to get Ektachrome or any slide film for that matter.

Nikanon · Oct 10, 2009

Black and white is all i need, as long as thats around in a number of different kinds of films and sizes ill be able to breathe.

Jeff Kubach · Oct 10, 2009

Film is on the down slide, but I think it is going to out live all of us.(especially me!)

Jeff

Prest_400 · Oct 10, 2009

I don't worry at all for B&W, I worry about color materials, specially slide film.
Color is complex stuff. If Kodak and Fuji fall, bye bye color. I wonder if Ilford could manufacture color films.

ntenny · Oct 10, 2009

iandavid said:
I even waste quite a lot of film just to help keep Ilford in business. Every bit helps

That's it! *That's* why I keep taking all those terrible pictures---it's an altruistic gesture towards the manufacturers! Thanks for clarifying it for me.

-NT

Darkroom317 · Oct 10, 2009

I tried some in camera black and white digital today. I was disgusted. It does not begin to compete with my Rolleicord, nor with any of the black and white films I have used. The tonality is not there. Also, I like my grain. Even when I scan my negatives they need a minimal of post processing. I even messed with the in camera contrast and a "red" filter, it didn't help. This all assures me that at least black and white film will be around for a long time. Besides, TLRs are a lot of fun to use.

Steve Smith · Oct 10, 2009

Prest_400 said:
Color is complex stuff. If Kodak and Fuji fall, bye bye color. I wonder if Ilford could manufacture color films.

They have done it before, I'm sure they could do it again (but it would be colour, not color!).

Steve.

nc5p · Oct 10, 2009

I was in one of the local camera shops today. There were other customers coming and going. Except for one they were buying black and white film. These were not students, but rather middle to older aged men. They also had a good supply of darkroom stuff, though some of the used items were overpriced.

Q.G. · Oct 11, 2009

Steve Smith said:
They have done it before, I'm sure they could do it again (but it would be colour, not color!).

Just curious about this: i always thought it was a relabeled product they sold, but not made themselves. Not so?

Ian Grant · Oct 11, 2009

Ilford made Ilfocolor until the 60's, they also took over Dufay & so Dufaycolor additive fims. The re-branding late 70s-80's was in the hope of building up enough sales to warrant building a colour coating facility.

Of course they also made Cibachrome/Ilfochrome and kept up research, I think the MD has a Patent for colour work.

Ian

seawolf66 · Oct 11, 2009

Well: I do not know about the rest of you folks But I made my small donation to the film companys to help keep them around this month :
10-rolls plus-x 10-rolls of ilford FP-4 and 5 rolls of 120mm Ektar 100 : so till next month :

herb · Oct 11, 2009

Death of MF Film is greatly exaggerated!

As one can still buy 5x7 cut film, I am not worried about 120 film. I have messed around with scanning mf film so as to be able to make digital negatives suitable for contact printing on AZO (and Lodima), The tests I have done so far show the resultan prints superior to an all digital b/w print even considering the Epson 3800 printer.

Digital is not worse or better, it is just different, and to us geezers who grew up in film, we can see the difference. That is why we continue to buy film, and 120 film cameras are very portable-I don't lug my 8x10 out too much anymore.

Colin Corneau · Oct 11, 2009

Check out the Massive Development Chart (or the fantastic app for iPhone/iPod Touch) for a list of how many films there are.

Tony-S · Oct 11, 2009

herb said:
The tests I have done so far show the resultan prints superior to an all digital b/w print even considering the Epson 3800 printer.

Herb, could you elaborate on this? I'm considering this printer at the moment and am in "information gathering mode." Thanks.

stradibarrius · Oct 11, 2009

I agree with all that has been said but one more point to add. I have an unusual business...I am a violin maker. 90% of my work comes from the internet. One thing I realized is that every type of forum I can post in becomes another place to spread my name. If I shoot 35mm, I can post in the 35mm forums. If I shoot 6x6, 6x7, 4x5 etc. I can post in those forums as well. If I didn't shoot MF I would not be able to post here.
I love my MF cameras so much that this is really a rationalization but still it is true. As you have already stated the more you can saperate yourself from your competition the better off you are. look at this shot...LOL!!!!

xtolsniffer · Oct 13, 2009

Ask yourself how long digital photography (as in true photography) is going to be around rather than wonder about MF film. Most new digital cameras have got a 'movie' function, it won't be long before you just film everything in high resolution at 30 frames per second and pick the frame you like. Most high end digital cameras will be in the recycling in a few years time, so huge depreciation even though they can take quite nice pictures, while most film cameras will still produce superb images for decades to come. I think that MF and LF is less at risk than 35mm, plus using film is a whole different way of looking and creating. Each frame is precious because it is expensive, you get the best out of each one, you look at it, evaluate it, and improve next time. I was in a bird hide at the weekend with someone using some monster digibeast with a huge lens on it, and in the 10 minutes I was in there he took 50 pictures of the same squirrel sitting in the same place. What is he going to do with 50 pictures of a squirrel? I didn't take any because it as a pretty scruffy looking squrrel in a bad composition. I'd call that pre-visualisation.

Darkroom317 · Oct 13, 2009

herb said:
to us geezers who grew up in film, we can see the difference.

I'm 19. Most of my prints are made from scans actually. The difference can be easily seen.

seawolf66 · Oct 13, 2009

Darkroom317 said:
I tried some in camera black and white digital today. I was disgusted. It does not begin to compete with my Rolleicord, nor with any of the black and white films I have used. The tonality is not there. Also, I like my grain. Even when I scan my negatives they need a minimal of post processing. I even messed with the in camera contrast and a "red" filter, it didn't help. This all assures me that at least black and white film will be around for a long time. Besides, TLRs are a lot of fun to use.

First of all to do digital B&W you should shoot raw and then convert in to B&W in your processing software like Lightroom , PS elements of the regular Photoshop !

Pumal · Oct 13, 2009

I started with film at 12 and I'll die with film.

Darkroom317 · Oct 13, 2009

seawolf66 said:
First of all to do digital B&W you should shoot raw and then convert in to B&W in your processing software like Lightroom , PS elements of the regular Photoshop !

I was just explaining why I think that medium format film will be around for awhile.

If one has to do that much in computer in order to emulate film, you might as well just shoot film.

Sirius Glass · Oct 13, 2009

seawolf66 said:
First of all to do digital B&W you should shoot raw and then convert in to B&W in your processing software like Lightroom , PS elements of the regular Photoshop !

And it still looks like crap. It will have no life to it. Digital does not replace film yet.

Steve

Ian David · Oct 13, 2009

It seems this thread has, inevitably, become another film v digital debate...
The "quality" of the two are not as far apart as many would suggest. But the processes are worlds apart. Shooting with film is like boating with sails. That is why film will be around for a long time.

Darkroom317 · Oct 13, 2009

iandavid;876569 Shooting with film is like boating with sails. That is why film will be around for a long time.[/QUOTE said:
True, just think of all the wonderful and different film cameras that one can use.

Future of medium format film

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency