PDN's article on the future of film

I thought it was interesting and encouraging that the article pointed out that several magazines and companies will still request film for the certain look that film provides. In this day and age, nearly any straw seems worth grasping.

-Tim

The odd thing is, they're always young people...

Click to expand...

It seems to me that it's a lot of the older folk (speaking about amatuer photographers, here) who have completely jumped to the digtible side. Younger people don't seem to be as intensly committed that side of the fence. My teenage and early twenties daughters will often grab one of our SLR's, head out with a roll of 36 and come back having shot it all and then off with dad to process. And they often shoot some pretty good stuff - imagewise that is. They usually get me to scan the negs to post online, but sometimes they ask to print with the enlarger. Phones, of course, are used for snapshots. Each of them has a nice digisnapper but they don't really seem to get used that much any more.

Ham radio seems to be much the same, the older guys are going for the SDRs and the really high priced gear. Younger guys are often not that impressed and very happy with the older rigs.

Maybe it's like older fellows and vettes.

Has anyone else noticed this trend? Sounds like some of you have.

Moopheus said:

"Lomography, a company that manufactures analogue cameras and film, says its worldwide sales doubled in 2011, when the company sold two million rolls of film."

Back in the day, that wouldn't have seemed very much, but in today's shrunken market for roll film, that's not too shabby, esp. since most of that is probably 120.

Click to expand...

Indeed. I wouldn't mind owning a company which manufactured two million rolls of film per year.


Steve.

Steve Smith said:

Indeed. I wouldn't mind owning a company which manufactured two million rolls of film per year.


Steve.

Click to expand...

Lomography manufactures film? I thought they just re-branded. Where is the Lomography film factory?

bugbugbug said:

Lomography manufactures film? I thought they just re-branded. Where is the Lomography film factory?

Click to expand...

Downtown Lomograd? They rebrand.

kb3lms said:

It seems to me that it's a lot of the older folk (speaking about amatuer photographers, here) who have completely jumped to the digtible side. Younger people don't seem to be as intensly committed that side of the fence. My teenage and early twenties daughters will often grab one of our SLR's, head out with a roll of 36 and come back having shot it all and then off with dad to process. And they often shoot some pretty good stuff - imagewise that is. They usually get me to scan the negs to post online, but sometimes they ask to print with the enlarger. Phones, of course, are used for snapshots. Each of them has a nice digisnapper but they don't really seem to get used that much any more.

Ham radio seems to be much the same, the older guys are going for the SDRs and the really high priced gear. Younger guys are often not that impressed and very happy with the older rigs.

Maybe it's like older fellows and vettes.

Has anyone else noticed this trend? Sounds like some of you have.

Click to expand...

I wonder if one reason might be that digital is just so much faster than doing your own darkroom work. Of course this doesn't matter if you send it out. But I have a HUGE backlog of negatives unprinted going back at least a year - most have been contacted but that's all -and several sheets of 4x5 and at least a half dozen more rolls of 35mm and 120 to develop. Working a full time job AND having a life with a wife now, AND the fact she likes to travel (she also hugely encourages my photography as I encourage her poetry) AND the fact we're visiting two sets of family in two different states on holidays and special occasions AND the fact I have other hobby interests, there's just no TIME. One problem is that with no running water in my darkroom right now set up and clean up times, already long enough, are extended. It's not like many hobbies I can for an hour here and there as I can. An hour is not enough time to get set up and then cleaned up leaving no time for actually printing, and even two hours means maybe half of it devoted to printing and hardly worth the effort. Digital I could, if I were so inclined, shoot away, process a few images a bit at a time on the computer and save my intermediate steps. I'm not doing that, though I expect to get into some hybrid workflow soonish (what else am I going to do with the 4x5 Ektachrome stashed in the freezer now that Ilfochrome is defunct anyway?)

As a middle aged adult I find my life incredibly rich, but incredibly busy and complicated. I love analog photography but it's just really hard to squeeze in time for it.

WRT ham radio - heck, I lost interest in ham radio many years ago mainly because all the other hams were boring old farts. They knew the technology, which had incredible capacity and potential to connect people in the days before the Internet, but had nothing worth saying and there was almost no one I cared to talk to. The exceptions were a few young guys about my age who were all local and we wore out the 2m repeaters (and upset not a few of the stodgy old guys we called Greyfaces (nod to anyone who catches the reference!)

So you mean to tell me there are young people in ham radio now? Wow. I've been wanting to get back into radio, but my attraction is almost completely to the old gear, stuff I wanted and couldn't afford when I got started in the 70s and older stuff yet that I can actually understand and work on. The old stuff to me has heart and soul in a way that a wunderbrick of ICs never will.

bugbugbug said:

Lomography manufactures film? I thought they just re-branded. Where is the Lomography film factory?

Click to expand...

Dirka-Dirkastan, actually. Film, F### YEAH!

could be those older folks are more "blazé" or in otherwords have lost the pride in the process and are more interested in a quick result. They have no interest in needing to work for results anymore.And they defend their current position with biased pixel/grain counting "tests". I can relate to having "lost the passion" with my current job but it's not really a good thing...

I can relate to having "lost the passion" with my current job but it's not really a good thing...

Click to expand...

Me too. Hence, analog photography! Agreed, it's not really a good thing.

So you mean to tell me there are young people in ham radio now?

Click to expand...

No, it is still mostly boring old farts. "Young" people in ham radio are in their early 50's. We do have a few intelligent, enthusiastic souls on our local repeater that I will credit with getting me restarted in analog photography.

Unfortunately, both are dying out dinosaurs of avocations. I would go so far as to say digitable technology has been the downfall of both.

I definitely think the turning one's nose up to film is an old fart thing, I almost never get that from young people, ages 15-30 roughly.

For example, the city of Glenwood Springs, CO built a new high school a few years ago. At the insistence of several teachers, an impressive 7 enlarger station darkroom was built. In the first semester is was 75% full, now there is a waiting list since it is 100% every year. When I talked to some of the students and asked them why they are interested in it several of them said that the whole hype engine behind the digital and internet age is kind of off-putting, one young lady went as far as to say "It all gives me a headache"...

There is now such an enormous difference between what I read on the internet and what I encounter in person that is is almost troubling at times, but for the most part it is a relief. A few months ago, I got invited to become a faculty member of a new media program at a local college who's namesake is that of an author who wrote the book on Mr. Jobs. I met with the Dean of Instruction and while it went well, I implored him to also bring back some form of traditional workflow to the school and told him why I think it is important. He agreed and is looking into it..

Tomorrow I get interviewed by a documentary film maker about Kodachrome, one of the backdrops for B-roll footage will be the now empty store front of what used to be a Wolf Camera, the only place to get a photo printed in one of the most photographed towns on earth. In a town of 6,000 year-round residents, we used to have two full service labs that could turn around up to 8"x10" sheet film in 4 hours, now we have nada.

The winds of change in the industry are still strong enough to push you across the Pacific, it's an all hands on deck kind of thing to keep film around now, but we all know that....

PKM-25 said:

I definitely think the turning one's nose up to film is an old fart thing, I almost never get that from young people, ages 15-30 roughly.

For example, the city of Glenwood Springs, CO built a new high school a few years ago. At the insistence of several teachers, an impressive 7 enlarger station darkroom was built. In the first semester is was 75% full, now there is a waiting list since it is 100% every year. When I talked to some of the students and asked them why they are interested in it several of them said that the whole hype engine behind the digital and internet age is kind of off-putting, one young lady went as far as to say "It all gives me a headache"...

There is now such an enormous difference between what I read on the internet and what I encounter in person that is is almost troubling at times, but for the most part it is a relief. A few months ago, I got invited to become a faculty member of a new media program at a local college who's namesake is that of an author who wrote the book on Mr. Jobs. I met with the Dean of Instruction and while it went well, I implored him to also bring back some form of traditional workflow to the school and told him why I think it is important. He agreed and is looking into it..

Tomorrow I get interviewed by a documentary film maker about Kodachrome, one of the backdrops for B-roll footage will be the now empty store front of what used to be a Wolf Camera, the only place to get a photo printed in one of the most photographed towns on earth. In a town of 6,000 year-round residents, we used to have two full service labs that could turn around up to 8"x10" sheet film in 4 hours, now we have nada.

The winds of change in the industry are still strong enough to push you across the Pacific, it's an all hands on deck kind of thing to keep film around now, but we all know that....

Click to expand...

Thanks for the press release!

CGW said:

Thanks for the press release!

Click to expand...

If you haven't figured out why people are put off by your attitude, those five sarcastic words sum it up nicely.

I'm as realistic as they come with respect to not only photographic technology, but every other aspect of life as well. However, I don't visit pools just to pee in them. Please join Aristophanes, wherever he/she went.

Sal Santamaura said:

If you haven't figured out why people are put off by your attitude, those five sarcastic words sum it up nicely.

I'm as realistic as they come with respect to not only photographic technology, but every other aspect of life as well. However, I don't visit pools just to pee in them. Please join Aristophanes, wherever he/she went.

Click to expand...

It's not costing me any sleep. Honest.

The fact is that within the small film photography market the only section that shows huge growth year after year is the 'toy camera' users. Lomography.org is the world's largest film and film camera retailer by far. Without their financial help we wouldn't have the selection of films available today. I think APUG should take this fact into consideration.

What never seems to be taken into condideration is the massive economic depression the US has been through the past 5 years. This affects luxuries like film and processing immensely.

How many companies didn't survive the 1929 depression?

As the depression winds down, people are having a bit more fun and playing with film photography.

Look at the prices of used film gear. It has shot up in the past year. Many objects like bodies and lenses have doubled. Auctions are drawing multiple bids. People will want film for those cameras.

CGW said:

It's not costing me any sleep. Honest.

Click to expand...

That was obvious from the ongoing behavior. Thus my futile attempt to explain why it should.

Sal Santamaura said:

That was obvious from the ongoing behavior. Thus my futile attempt to explain why it should.

Click to expand...

So why did you even bother?

CGW said:

So why did you even bother?

Click to expand...

Futility wasn't guaranteed in advance. There was a chance, albeit small, that something might get through and it'd start costing you sleep or, better yet, motivate more appropriate interactions.

With futility now confirmed, my miniscule Ignore List will grow by 100%. To others reading this: Please don't feed the troll or quote it in replies!

Sal Santamaura said:

Futility wasn't guaranteed in advance. There was a chance, albeit small, that something might get through and it'd start costing you sleep or, better yet, motivate more appropriate interactions.

With futility now confirmed, my miniscule Ignore List will grow by 100%. To others reading this: Please don't feed the troll or quote it in replies!

Click to expand...

Truly no loss to me.

Film, as a product, suffers from a major problem:

The unit selling price is quite low, but the equipment and infrastructure required to manufacture it economically are quite expensive.

The long-term viability of film will depend ultimately on someone inventing a cost-effective way to manufacture it in smaller quantities.

- Leigh

Leigh B said:

The long-term viability of film will depend ultimately on someone inventing a cost-effective way to manufacture it in smaller quantities.

Click to expand...

A cost-effective way which allows a positive return on investment.

According to the PDN article, Kodak E-6 was no longer commercially viable, so it was discontinued, never to be seen again. I've read that it was 1% to 5% of their film production. The amount of chemicals used to make it had to be mostly wasted, as nothing was shared between E-6 and C-41/ECN processes. The C-41/ECN processes share chemicals, so there's some synergy there.

Lomography is growing, but at 2 million rolls in the last year (of rebranded non-Kodak film), I don't see how it's going to be a serious replacement or source if, say, Kodak reaches the point of non-viability. If Kodak loses, say, 75% of its motion picture footage sales, will that leave it in a position to still be viable? Or will the film division collapse, leaving Kodak with no profit?

It takes millions of dollars of investment and years of development to bring a modern film to market. So far, there's one ex-Kodak engineer in Australia who build a coating machine in his garage, from scrounged parts, and some new parts. Good B&W, but no color. AFAIK, nobody else has built a home coating machine. There are some basic materials that are problematic to purchase, like the base material for coating.

Currently x-ray film is plentiful and cheap, very cheap. But of course you have to shoot LF to take advantage of it, and it can be a problem to work with it.

So far, it appears that the best source in the realm of the established manufacturers. The old Agfa machines are still running, and Fuji's plant is much smaller than Kodak's plant.

It would seem to me, from an uneducated point of view, that there is still a significant amount of people around the world who want to and do shoot film. At the same time, the dinosaur companies like Kodak are just incapable of supporting such a small number of people because they have enormous legacy costs because of the once greater demand.

All film users need is ONE surviving company to be able to make and sell film while remaining a strong profitable company. Hopefully, this one surviving company could produce enough volume to keep costs reasonable and allow this hobby to flourish.

It is very hard, almost impossible to see Kodak being that company, even as a spun off entity. They have been so mismanaged that they are lucky to be around today. Fujifilm, on the other hand, seems to keep making film without very much drama. Sure they discontinue films but that is because of decreased demand. Should Kodak cease to exist, film users will flock to Fujifilm (among others) to get their fix.

For the sake of film, stability is desperately needed. Much like the real estate market, the bottom to this drop has to be found so that the recovery (as it were) could begin.

It would be nice if some legacy of Kodak could remain once they are gone. It appears unlikely due to the specialized nature of film, but if Kodak could sell off their formulations to Fujifilm or who ever is the survivor, that would be best.

Film just cant get the economy of scale needed in the fragmented market of today. The slow consolidation seems to be hurting film use, not helping so acceleration to the bottom is needed.

Just my uneducated thoughts.

Say you have three machines that can make 10,000 of something a week and replace them with one huge machine that can make 50,000 things a week. Of course you melt down the smaller 3 because you can't save money if you store and house them.

The 50,000 machine makes a lot of sense until you can only sell 10,000 Then the 3 little machines make better sense.

Someone lost their sense.

RattyMouse said:

... if Kodak could sell off their formulations to Fujifilm or who ever is the survivor, that would be best.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, sometimes a formulation can't be move between factories in a single company, let alone another company. The process is that full of "magic." When a formulation process is created, it is created for a fixed batch size. Any other batch size is a completely different formulation. Reformulating the E6 process for a small batch size wouldn't see a positive return on investment. It took a long time for the E6 process to come up to par with Kodachrome.

RattyMouse said:

Film just cant get the economy of scale needed in the fragmented market of today.

Click to expand...

Film already has an economy of scale, but it is eroding. People keep picking up digital, and now the movie theaters are faced with getting digital projection rammed down their throats. I read that the theater association is upset about this, but I don't know how well they can push back against the movie producers.

We're sliding OT here. The issue of the economies--and dis-economies--of film production have been beat to death already. Why replay it? Nothing has fundamentally changed--for the better, anyway. Check EK's 2012 Q1 results.

I'd like to see time series data from the PMA on film sales volume(not $)from 2000 to 2011 or later. The oft-cited PMA figure of 1 billion rolls sold in 1999 shrank to shy of 20 million in 2010.

Since film is no longer a high profit, high volume consumer item, will developing countries like Czech Republic take up the slack in making film? It's little money for richer countries like US, UK and Japan, but it's a lot for the Czechs.