If you are talking shoestring budget movies, then yes. But those where always made with the cheapest method available.Movies shot on film are really expensive compared to still film.
Especially if you talk like that on public forums.
Casual members and random people from Google searches will see these posts for years and have various amount of FUD induced, which they will spread to others.
You only have to Google simple terms like “digital vs. analog” or “film revival” to see how sticky and meme like some forum posts and texts can become, seemingly at random. Becoming gospel and copied.
I would not worry about cameras at all yet. There are plenty to go around for years. Perhaps even more if we could stop the pest of mirrorless tards leaching off lenses that were made for and work best on film SLRs.
Good scanners are a much, much bigger problem.
It’s what is keeping many people from realizing that film is really not a quaint, whimsical retro fad, to score authenticity points off. But an incredibly sophisticated, unequaled image sensor.
Even if they do know that, it’s academic to them, because they are not ready to invest in and deal with a macro’n stitch camera scanning rig (mostly because of imagined ideas and false anecdotal evidence that it’s cumbersome and takes up more space than a scanner).
Then we need to get many more people into optical/wet printing. We need to make it easier and more accessible.
Only then, as a third priority, should we look at cameras.
In another camp it’s also very important to show support and enthusiasm around, is movies shot on film.
Having steady production of cine film makes it much easier to justify having still film as a side business.
A single roll of 1000 foot cine film contains about 11 min worth of footage. But about 186 rolls of 135 film.
That’s more than what even the most ardent amateur will shoot in a year. And 180 rolls more than what the casually interested will shoot in a year.
And this is in opposition to what I wrote how?My mirrorless works wonders in this regard. Wearing an F mount lens on the adapter no less.
Just sayin'...
No one is ever, ever going to give you hard numbers.other than google searches with those things as key words do you have any real evidence that there are now thousands and thousands of people now using film ? I think as others have mentioned its important to rely the area of film sold. I realize there ARE people who are very enthusiastic, there are people posting images all over the internet, there are people buying film online and buying cameras galore but do those numbers really mean there are that many more people using and buying and processing film ? sorry to seem a skeptic. but im not one for "I heard" or "someone told me" or "I did a google search". but actual hard evidence like square feet or feet of film sold. I know any increase is fantastic and I am all for that, but IDK I don't really see an increase where I am and I am inbetween NYC and Boston 2 east coast USA hubs of art film and commerce ... maybe I'm blind to what's really going on but it seems like a big fat nothing burger and I am OK with that, because my life isn't tied to film sales... ( I can't afford to buy new film btw )
No one is ever, ever going to give you hard numbers.
They are tightly guarded sales secrets.
Of course.
Under NDAs and tightly controlled.
Even if you should hit upon such numbers why should you believe them?
Look at the prices of Mju IIs or Contax Point and Shoots. And indeed other popular cameras.
I ask at my local labs and shops, and they give encouraging answers. And can see the traffic with my own eyes.
I can see people with tight lips, flocking around flea market stands with camera equipment all over Europe.
It’s big.
What is big enough though?
Big enough is a hobby that is self sustaining. People can still buy electric train sets. And even if Drones have stolen much of the market, RC flyers are also still a viable market, with consumables being manufactured.
Same with home speaker building and classic cars to mention a few other techy hobbies with special needs.
Well, that's what we're talking about. What amateurs and prosumers are doing and spending.If you are talking shoestring budget movies, then yes. But those where always made with the cheapest method available.
For even a small Hollywood movie of today the film budget is negligible. Easily covered by not feeling obliged to over-shoot as much and not having to work so hard in post.
For tent pole movies, it’s a drop in the ocean.
The usual $150 to 400 million production cost is just so insane that film is not even a dot in the budget.
Well, you can actually shoot black and white regular 8 quite cheaply. But over a hundred dollars for 3.5 minutes of Ektachrome or scanable Vision stock is not going to win many people over.Well, that's what we're talking about. What amateurs and prosumers are doing and spending.
And this is in opposition to what I wrote how?
How much is 8mm film and the cost to develop? How much to scan 50 foot roll?Well, you can actually shoot black and white regular 8 quite cheaply. But over a hundred dollars for 3.5 minutes of Ektachrome or scanable Vision stock is not going to win many people over.
There are however markets that love Super8 and regular 8. And even 16mm.
Skaters and graffiti artists love the aesthetic and hard to copy nature of film and have for decades.
Mid budget professional filmmakers could definitely shoot 16mm if they wanted to.
In fact I know a few who have recently.
But obviously you are not leaching if you are using it to scan film.>if we could stop the pest of mirrorless tards leaching off lenses that were made for and work best on film SLRs.
But obviously you are not leaching if you are using it to scan film.
You might even own a Nikon body or own one in the future.
You get a big spiral tank and do it yourself. Reverse process it and project it.How much is 8mm film and the cost to develop? How much to scan 50 foot roll?
You identify as a tard?I more identify with the "tards" portion of this comment.
I wonder why film sales are tightly guarded secrets? We regularly get car sales numbers, don't we? Or indeed tonnage of newly launched ships etcNo one is ever, ever going to give you hard numbers.
They are tightly guarded sales secrets.
Of course.
Under NDAs and tightly controlled.
Even if you should hit upon such numbers why should you believe them?
.
Both Kodak and Fuji are rolling the film sales indecipherably into the whole corporate book and dividend.I wonder why film sales are tightly guarded secrets? We regularly get car sales numbers, don't we? Or indeed tonnage of newly launched ships etc
People like Matt King, as I recall things, are able to say what the number of feet of film produced by Kodak was in the past and there has to be graphs showing the trends of film sales as there are showing cars sales etc
So is Henning the only person outside of a small number of senior film-makers' executives who is privy to this information? I'd have thought at film-makers are required to submit this info to the IRS or its equivalent in the country of the film production's origin, otherwise what's to stop any company not revealing its real sales to avoid taxes levied on such sales?
pentaxuser
The only reason that I know anything about some of the historic figures is because very tiny bits of that information have been released long after they were current, and to provide historical references.People like Matt King, as I recall things, are able to say what the number of feet of film produced by Kodak was in the past and there has to be graphs showing the trends of film sales as there are showing cars sales etc
Isn't that true of pro photographers. The smart ones never show their photos that failed.The only reason that I know anything about some of the historic figures is because very tiny bits of that information have been released long after they were current, and to provide historical references.
...
While you may be able to easily access sales numbers for vehicles, good luck accessing the cost and gross profit on individual models. That number is a very closely guarded secret. A long time ago - long prior to 2008 - when Chrysler sought bankruptcy protection and was essentially bailed out, they were forced to disclose those cost and profit figures. They were very interesting.
You shouldn't expect to ever know. It will stay a trade secret for as long as there is both an industry and competition.So based on Matt's and Helge's replies, my question now is: Where is the information to come from that gives a reasonably accurate picture of what the trend is in terms of film sales and if this exists then we can start to extrapolate future sales figures etc?
Where is the information to come from that gives a reasonably accurate picture of what the trend is in terms of film sales and if this exists then we can start to extrapolate future sales figures etc?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?