Is film dead?

Ricardo Miranda · Dec 12, 2015

aoresteen said:
116 & 620 are dead as is 126 & 110.

110 has resuscitated thanks to Lomography and some Asian factories.

Sirius Glass · Dec 12, 2015

Iluvmycam said:
Nowadays, film is mostly for those that get their pride from saying I shoot film. For many of the film devotees the glory comes from the process, more so than the results. We see people scouring expired film of eBay and the continual discontinuation of favorite films. Film is not dead, but it is on a steady decline. Maybe the decline has settled out, I don't have the numbers. But in all my travels I've only seen 1 person shooting film out of a Leica M3 in Venice CA from as far as I can remember over the last decade.

You need to put away your cell phone and see the world around you. Jes' sayin'

removed account4 · Dec 12, 2015

ive been making paper negatives and soon to be SG and siderotype prints from cellphone images. no need to put the cellphone down at all.
just as there is no need to stop using traditional ways to make prints.

Sirius Glass · Dec 12, 2015

jnanian said:
ive been making paper negatives and soon to be SG and siderotype prints from cellphone images. no need to put the cellphone down at all.
just as there is no need to stop using traditional ways to make prints.

Since you have a lot of experience in paper negatives, how about writing an APUG article about that. Please include: why, why not, recommended paper, determining paper speeds, recommended paper speeds, what one needs to know about developing paper negative, uses for paper negatives, and since even negative [pun] research is important too what does not work.

removed account4 · Dec 12, 2015

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

ME Super · Dec 12, 2015

It's not dead. It's not even pinin' for the fjords. It's alive and kicking!

Ian Grant · Dec 12, 2015

paper breath said:
And also-can analogue photography can relate with vinyl revival?

No the two are very different Vinyl records always suffer from deterioration, scratches etc and just constant playing. Film doesn't have these problems and delivers exceptionally high quality all the time in good hands,

Ian

Sirius Glass · Dec 12, 2015

jnanian said:
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Yes, but one article that is a compendium which has been edited and any conflicting information resolved.

Prof_Pixel · Dec 12, 2015

ME Super said:
It's not dead. It's not even pinin' for the fjords. It's alive and kicking!

That's easy for YOU to say - it's not so easy to say when you live in Rochester, NY and drive by the former Kodak Park frequently. Film isn't dead, but it's close to being on life support.

Ken Nadvornick · Dec 12, 2015

Prof_Pixel said:
That's easy for YOU to say - it's not so easy to say when you live in Rochester, NY and drive by the former Kodak Park frequently. Film isn't dead, but it's close to being on life support.

That's because it's Kodak film that's on life support. Not film in general. Kodak chose to turn away, when others did not. By that choice, Kodak now no longer speaks to the health of the film industry.

Even though they continue to maintain a small vestigial manufacturing capability, they divested themselves of their film business. Others are now moving the industry forward.

Ken

Ian Grant · Dec 12, 2015

Why is the OP posting here ?

Questions like his are puerile and inept. The forum only exists because film photography is alive and thriving . . . . . .

Ian.

Prof_Pixel · Dec 12, 2015

Ken Nadvornick said:
That's because it's Kodak film that's on life support. Not film in general.

You wish.....

Ian Grant · Dec 12, 2015

Prof_Pixel said:
You wish.....

Kodak is a different case. but new films are being re-introduced elsewhere, Adox (Fotoimpex), Ferrania, Type 55 etc. It's more about how Kodak down-scales and their coating line(s) become more flexible. They can coat outside the US where they have a large coating machine Kodak have also talked to other companies about coating their (B&W) emulsions in recent years.

Ian

Prof_Pixel · Dec 12, 2015

There clearly is some demand for film by some users. The question is, can it be manufactured at a price point that the market will be willing to support. We probably won't know for 5 to 10 years what the outcome will be.

Truzi · Dec 12, 2015

Ian Grant said:
Why is the OP posting here ?

Questions like his are puerile and inept. The forum only exists because film photography is alive and thriving . . . . . .

Ian.

(Unless you are referring specifically to the Ethics & Philosophy forum... )
In another thread, the OP states the information is for an article:
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Not sure what kind of article, so more information would be nice. Likely a school paper or news article. I think the question could also have been better stated and explained, but considering the posts together, I think it is a valid question.

fotch · Dec 12, 2015

I choose film for the higher quality and the archival qualities. I have film, both color & B&W, that I can still make prints from, from my family, dating back to at least the 30,s.

Files stored on disc from my first computer, from the mid 70's, forget about it.

On the other hand, if I need a picture for immediate use, instead of using the Polaroid, I use digital. I still prefer a slr camera but mostly use a phone for the convenience.

MHO

Ken Nadvornick · Dec 12, 2015

Prof_Pixel said:
You wish.....

Not wishful at all. The evidence is all around you. Open your eyes. Then take off those darned vision-limiting Kodak glasses.

Kodak has always held the opinion that if it wasn't Kodak, it wasn't film. That no one else in the world could make real film except for Kodak. That if Kodak was doing well, film was doing well. And if Kodak wasn't, film wasn't. That's barely gratuitous at best, and self-delusional at worst.

I've said this before, Kodak is not the only road to film. There are other smart people in the world too. Smarter even than Antonio Perez, although I know that's a hard reality to swallow in what's left of Kodak Park.

As far as market price support goes, here's an interesting data point. Did you know that New55 is currently selling 5-packs of their 4x5 P/N for $85, and can't keep them in stock? That won't always be the price of course, as they are currently blending into that cost a continuing fund raising premium. But still...

Have you seen the cool New55 images that have begun to show up in the APUG gallery? Very nice. And not a mention of Kodak anywhere in that brand new film system.

Ken

Sirius Glass · Dec 12, 2015

Ken Nadvornick said:
That's because it's Kodak film that's on life support. Not film in general.

Not true. You can disagree with me, but you would be wrong. Where is the shovel, it need to dig my way out of that pile.

removed account4 · Dec 12, 2015

85$ for 5 sheets ??

17$ a pop, and they can't keep enough of it on the shelf?
a great product, but that's awfully expensive,
another product i will never be able to afford to use.

===

getting back to the OP

asking the question here is like asking
people at a vegitarian's anonymous meeting
if meat eating has gone out of style.

you would probably get a better feel for REALITY
if you asked the same question on photo.net or insagram or flicker
where there is actually a mix of reality based photographers, not
just people here ... this really isn't a place to ask if film is dead
cause if there was only 1 maker of film, paper and chemicals
and it cost 200$ for a roll of 35mm film, and 500$ for a 10pack of paper
people would still claim it was alive because it is being sold and used.

don't get me wrong, i love film, i use film, i love paper, &c &c ..
but as i said this really isn't the place to ask.

pentaxuser · Dec 12, 2015

I thought that Truzi made some very valid empathetic comments but the OP needs to help us to help him by telling us what he is trying to achieve in his paper.

He needs us to be on his side in terms of giving help. The thread's title on an analogue site like this with a zillion "Is film dead?" threads already, is only slightly less provocative than the red rag being waved in any Spanish bull ring.

pentaxuser

Ken Nadvornick · Dec 12, 2015

85$ for 5 sheets ??

Dead Link Removed

Again, bear in mind that the prices reflect the addition of a fund raising premium to help get this new industrial capacity up and running on a permanent basis. Purchasing items now thus carries the implication that purchaser intent is also to help fund new production infrastructure, not just purchase sheets of film.

There are more New55 products for sale at the above link than just the 4x5 P/N.

Ken

aoresteen · Dec 12, 2015

Ricardo Miranda said:
110 has resuscitated thanks to Lomography and some Asian factories.

Thanks! I'll have to get a couple of rolls for use with my Pentax 110

removed account4 · Dec 12, 2015

Ken Nadvornick said:
Dead Link Removed

Again, bear in mind that the prices reflect the addition of a fund raising premium to help get this new industrial capacity up and running on a permanent basis. Purchasing items now thus carries the implication that purchaser intent is also to help fund new production infrastructure, not just purchase sheets of film.

There are more New55 products for sale at the above link than just the 4x5 P/N.

Ken

i wish them all the luck in the world getting this product made and in the hands of people who can afford it, but as i said
it willbe a product i will never buy and never use because of its expense. I can't even justify buying 100 sheets of
kodak tmy400 at $236/100 sheets.

Ken Nadvornick · Dec 15, 2015

Prof_Pixel said:
You wish.....

Did you see this link from Suzanne?

(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Heck, the growing overall strength of film is so obvious now that even a company that has tried for years to walk away from it, a company that sold it's still film business because they were sure that business was dead, a company that gleefully dynamited its film infrastructure for the benefit of Wall Street and the evening news, even the CEO of that company just had this to say:

"The film manufacturer was considering pulling the plug until roughly a year ago, when filmmakers including Abrams, Tarantino and Christopher Nolan worked with all of the major studios to see that they inked supplier deals with Kodak, ensuring films existence for the foreseeable future.

"'We are no longer limited by these deals,' Clarke claimed, noting that its overall film business across industries is up. 'We are building and investing in it to grow, including supporting and building labs around the world. There's so much artistic interest, and renewed support from studios. When artists spoke, it saved an art form.'

"Kodak efforts include expanding availability of lab capabilities in production hubs such as New York, whose last motion picture lab closed this past year. Clarke noted this past year, Kodak partnered with Alpha Grips to expand its mobile lab program, and is currently working with cinematographer Ed Lachman and other partners to bring a lab presence to major cities such as New York.

"Thanks to filmmakers such as J.J. Abrams, Quentin Tarantino and Christopher Nolan, Hollywood 'doesn't have to worry about film going away anymore,'" Jeff Clarke, Kodak CEO

Will this upward trend hold over time? I don't know. But denying it's a trend right at this moment is just... perverse.

Ken

Ricardo Miranda · Dec 16, 2015

Here in the UK there aren't many mini-labs available any more on the high street.
But, there are still quite a few.
One is near my house, another is near a market which I use on the weekends.
I went to one to pick up 2 rolls of C41 and while I was there, early afternoon on a Friday, a lady and her dog came in with 2 rolls of Portra to develop. As I was leaving a young man came in to drop a roll for development.
The machines seemed to be busy.

Is film dead?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency