Resurgence?

[glockman99]

I really believe digital P&S cameras are what is hurting the non pro film market...they're easily transportable.

That's for DARN sure. It was tough watching all those folks with their very small, very light-weight P&S digital cameras, while I was lugging-around my Nikon F4s, Nikon F3HP with MD-4, 28-105mm & 50mm lenses, and 2 speedlights for 4 hours...(Yup, ALL of that equipment was around my neck.).

 

[markbarendt]

Okay,

We've established that the value of the average snap-shot (film or digital) isn't much, I'd say nearly nothing, if it's never printed. This is a good thing considering how unforgiving any given digital shot is. Once we enter the world of printing though, film and labs start to have real value.

So, who might be interested enough in a particular shot or a print to start using film?

I think there are a huge set of film prospects, like hoffy and his buddies who have the potential to become avid film users. One point I will concede to digital is that the instant feed back available makes a great tool for learning and experimenting. The narrow latitude of the medium is actually a plus in "good feed-back's" respect, fancy software that auto-fixes lousy shots is not.

I've heard the comment made that "one day I hope to be good enough to use film". But I don't believe that.

When I first learned about the latitude inherent in negatives it was a true OMG epiphany moment. It not only meant that I could have both shadow and highlight detail, it meant that I could relax more when I was shooting. If I missed the "perfect" exposure on a grab shot by a full stop, so what. No more bracketing, no more HDR.

So where do we find more hoffy's?

 

[Chazzy]

......
I believe it's curiosity.....

Took a trip to Rocky Mtn. Ntl. Park last year.After getting my pictures and returning to my vehicle, a young, 21ish Navy seal saw my film camera and started really asking questions.Told him I could get really good 16x20's and if larger wall prints were desired, good 20x30" prints were possible from 35mm.He was amazed that a 35mm FILM camera could do that well.Said he would have to give film a try.

I'm amazed too. I can't imagine displaying anything larger than an 11x14 enlargement from a 35mm original, even under the best of circumstances.

 

[Excalibur2]

I'm amazed too. I can't imagine displaying anything larger than an 11x14 enlargement from a 35mm original, even under the best of circumstances.

Canon FD 28mm, Fuji 200asa superior..a shot of my photo enlarged that I've posted here before. And the pic is cropped slighly and not the full neg.

 

[3 Olives]

My son finished a film camp called Basic Photography and Darkroom (grades 9-12) at the Light Factory in Charlotte on Friday. It is interesting to note that it was the first summer camp to fill up and had a wailtlist. They had a show of the students' work on Friday and I was very impressed. It was obvious that the instructor and her assistant loved what they were doing. She told my son she would set up an advanced course if he can find a minimum of four friends who would like to participate.
My son attends the School Of The Arts in Charlotte and they can declare Visual Arts: Photography as a major in the ninth grade. The entire first year is film and darkroom.
Their are kids out there who like film, but their are a number of obstacles. Equipment is hard to come by unless you you Know what to look for and where to find it. Charlotte is a fairly big city, but only Biggs Camera can really help if you want to buy film equipment. Fortunately, Biggs is first rate in every way. There is a steep learning curve for film compared to digital. A kid needs to be self motivated to want to use film. Access to a darkroom is not a necessity, but it is a huge bonus.

 

[rusty71]

I've been teaching a course in B&W photography this summer at a local community college. This is a full on, 3 credit hour 8 week class. I can tell you that a LOT of younger (24-30) year old photographers are getting back into film, and love the darkroom. I also have students doing Photo I digitally (don't ask how the curriculum got this mucked up...). But the film students are much happier overall with their work. I have one digital guy who is serious about his print craft. The rest are barely able to compose a shot with their crappy P&S digicams. One of my film students found a used FM2 at a local camera store. A few days later she had the money and went back to buy. It was gone. The sales guy said they "cannot keep used 35mm cameras in stock!" More encouraging is that he noted an increase in sales of B&W paper, chems, and supplies. He told her it was "mostly high school and college kids, working at home."

Hard to say if this trend will continue given the wretched world economy. But at least the outlook is encouraging.

 

[Prest_400]

There is a steep learning curve for film compared to digital. A kid needs to be self motivated to want to use film. Access to a darkroom is not a necessity, but it is a huge bonus.

That's completely right.
Our medium fulfilled what I wanted as a result; I loved my first results. Since yesterday, when Sirius said that It would be nice to extend the medium, I began to think: "would I find anyone with enough patience to go through this?"
My learning process started 10 months ago, and it still continues.
The digi convenience is a candy that is hard to leave, I decided to "throw myself to the pool" and I'm glad to have done this action; using film as my photographic medium. The results were enough motivation for using film.
Considering how horrible are film services around here. I've been very motivated. One "Lab" brings back nice prints but scratched negatives, and the drugstore has a 2/3 week turnaround
If I had a darkroom, or at least, some kind of developing equipment, I believe that I would be able to shoot more, and learn faster. The last roll that went into my camera late may is still there, around exp. 25. I'm experimenting with some inverted lens macros. Because outdoor shooting doesn't seem to be my type of photography at the moment.
I have to ask my father about borrowing his card, "just for a moment"

 

[Cropline]

I'm amazed too. I can't imagine displaying anything larger than an 11x14 enlargement from a 35mm original, even under the best of circumstances.

I knew somebody would be and you're not alone.The 16x20 referred to was shot on Kodak 160 VC before Kodak improved the grain and enhanced the negatives for better scanning.I don't know if the lab is using a one shot dip & dunk process,but I do know their images are quite good and the grain was very minimal.I'm critical where grain is concerned;to me,the finer the better.I can't speak to Fuji films as I use only Kodak pro films and professional labs.Try the same in your area and see if you get similar results.Sometimes the limits of a product must be tested to find its real capabilities.I have seen quite a few optical 35mm 20x30s.Some looked OK,some looked much better.Placed on a wall and viewed at say 6-8 feet,critical issues fade from perception.

 

[clayne]

One point I will concede to digital is that the instant feed back available makes a great tool for learning and experimenting. The narrow latitude of the medium is actually a plus in "good feed-back's" respect, fancy software that auto-fixes lousy shots is not.

I believe this is a myth in digital. Quick results does not equal quick learning. The cost of a mistake and potential cost of redoing it lends a lot more to learning and reflecting on mistakes than "delete photo."

Baptism by fire has always been extremely effective as it requires greater user commitment.

 

[BetterSense]

I believe this is a myth in digital. Quick results does not equal quick learning. The cost of a mistake and potential cost of redoing it lends a lot more to learning and reflecting on mistakes than "delete photo."

Baptism by fire has always been extremely effective as it requires greater user commitment.

I agree that the whole "digital is good for teaching (film) photography skills" thing is overblown, and for another different reason. While there is no doubt some overlap in how cameras work, film capture and digital capture are completely different. So learning with digital teaches you a lot about digital, not necessarily about film. You are just putting off learning film; you are going to have start at the beginning when you start shooting film anyway.

Sure, with digital you can shoot away and adjust your lighting and flash until it looks good on the LCD screen. But you can't do that when you are shooting film, so how is this helping you learn to shoot film? If anything, it's teaching you to be lazy, and shooting film is going to be even harder.

Digitography teaches you a lot about digitography, fast. Photography teaches you a lot about photography, fast. Especially when you pull a roll of film off the reel and realize that you adjusted your exposure the correct amount for your filter factor...but in the wrong direction.

 

[hoffy]

.....

Sure, with digital you can shoot away and adjust your lighting and flash until it looks good on the LCD screen. But you can't do that when you are shooting film, so how is this helping you learn to shoot film? If anything, it's teaching you to be lazy, and shooting film is going to be even harder.

I disagree. It all depends on the mentality of the person who is learning photography.

Sure, I chimp when I shoot digital (why not use the tools available to you. Who uses (or used to use) a Polaroid back when setting up shots?), but why fill up my card with useless images, unless I have to. I bracket in film as much as I bracket in Digital, generally. The only main difference that I would reshoot a shot in Digital is on sharpness of the image, which at times you have to trust that you got right in film.

Why do I bracket? In digital, its because I want to have the choice of the best image I can have, based on the different exposures (& No, I don’t HDR). In film, funnily enough, its exactly the same reason. Yes, Film has different characteristics (the old “3D quality of a film slide rings so true”) and these need to be learnt, but what does it matter whether its film or digital if you are trying to teach someone about DOF, composition, capturing action?

I find this real funny. On the digicentric forums that I spend times on, I find myself defending film all the time. Now I cannot believe that I am now defending digital.

And like I said on a digi forum once before, maybe, just maybe if people concerned themselves about the final output, we wouldn’t have to deal with arguments on what is better. Both have their place, deal with it and get out there and shoot!

 

[PKM-25]

I believe the second driver is peer pressure. Nobody wants to be left behind or left out of the conversation.

The big topics at the camera club I'm in all end up in PS. Fix it in PS is the norm and camera work is reduced to a wild and loose 9-frames-per-second in auto bracket with matrix metering shot in raw so it's fixable spray and pray style.

Nothing wrong with being social around a common interest but most of these people came to the club to get better at photography.

I am willing to come down to your neck of the woods for a meeting if you like, give my take on the industry, what the well known pros are doing and Even talk about the Kodachrome Project, put on a slideshow with my Leica projector if you think it would interest your club.

Just let me know, I have a flexible schedule.

 

[clayne]

And like I said on a digi forum once before, maybe, just maybe if people concerned themselves about the final output, we wouldn’t have to deal with arguments on what is better. Both have their place, deal with it and get out there and shoot!

Hoffy, that's just the thing, I AM concerning myself with the final output. It's why I choose to limit my "options" and focus on producing quality photography from the start. Your approach is based on shoot a bunch of things and sort it out after the fact - taking what works. Regardless of doing it in a piecemeal fashion or at the end, it's the same thing.

Get it right the first time, pay dearly for your mistakes, and reflect on what worked and didn't work.

In reality, some photographers reach a higher level of understanding and execution and some never do (perhaps were never meant to do, on that note).

 

[markbarendt]

I am willing to come down to your neck of the woods for a meeting if you like, give my take on the industry, what the well known pros are doing and Even talk about the Kodachrome Project, put on a slideshow with my Leica projector if you think it would interest your club.

Just let me know, I have a flexible schedule.

I'll ask on Thursday.

Thanks

 

[markbarendt]

Get it right the first time, pay dearly for your mistakes, and reflect on what worked and didn't work.

clayne,

As much as I believe in what you are promoting here for myself, people are different in how they learn.

When shooting slides, which admittedly is rare (and frustrating) for me now, I will bracket because 1) there is so little latitude and the normal exposure methods I practice all the time for my 400nc and my Tri-X won't work and; 2) I find that I like a slightly darker slide in the projector and a slightly lighter slide if I want to get a print.

If somebody wants to burn more film I say let them, their wallet will teach them a lesson too.

 

[markbarendt]

... but what does it matter whether its film or digital if you are trying to teach someone about DOF, composition, capturing action?

At the most elementary levels it doesn't.

When you switch from a DSLR to film though, you are generally changing format size. This affects DOF and lens purchases that will be made significantly.

As to capturing action, the metering techniques I used for digital are way different than what I use now for C-41. The techniques are completely incompatible.

On composition with digital I found myself composing and exposing by experimentation, clicking and chimping. I see my digital buddies do this all the time, it's the norm. We don't have that ability with film (I know, duh).

This is what I believe clayne is getting at, with film you actually need to decide on composition with the viewfinder and set a workable exposure before the shutter drops.

It is possible for digital to demonstrate a concept but really tough for digital to teach or apply that lesson in the real world.

Example;

I generally "shoot to the shadows" for negative film of any type (which is about all I shoot anymore) and I regularly and intentionally overexpose a stop or two depending on the shot. This style of shooting works for negatives but for digital or slides it's almost a guaranteed failure. I can show somebody the shadows I can get digitally but the highlights will be toast and they can't replicate the real effect themselves without shooting negative themselves.

 

[winjeel]

From looking through some great thinking in earlier posts, the only things that I can add is that:
1. Photography (film or otherwise) has not replaced oil painting
2. Similarly, pencils are still in stock in stationary stores
3. Art stores and camera stores co-exist
4. I'm sure that film will continue in various capacities
5. It takes an independent mind to go against the flow to try something "different" (as in, not always following the current trend)
6. I still want a Minolta Alpha 7 (aka Dynax 7)

 

[unohuu]

From looking through some great thinking in earlier posts, the only things that I can add is that:
1. Photography (film or otherwise) has not replaced oil painting
Or even watercolor or crayons or charcoal.

2. Similarly, pencils are still in stock in stationary stores
Use them everyday.

3. Art stores and camera stores co-exist
Thankfully!

4. I'm sure that film will continue in various capacities
I hope so and if it doesn't we will adjust. Some entrepreneur will find a way to create something we can use with all these bodies we have been acquiriing.

5. It takes an independent mind to go against the flow to try something "different" (as in, not always following the current trend)
Amen to this!
6. I still want a Minolta Alpha 7 (aka Dynax 7)

Great body, especially when it is used with good Minolta/KM lenses. I just bought my third one of these bodies. I always wanted a Nikon F100 and and F4 so I bought them too. I also just acquired a Nikon N90s. Now I can go and enjoy all of them.

My digital body has a non-functioning LCD. I still take it out with my film bodies to shoot (location and studio). I just set the ISO and shoot it with small modifications. I do not get to see the results until I get home. I don't get to chimp. I use my IV-F flash meter to set exposure. I do not bracket.

I have to make adjustments for the F100 when I shoot transparencies. I just do. I don't squawk about it, I just make the adjustments. I do not own APS lenses.

We can talk about this or we can shoot and have fun.

 

[Screwdriver]

I love shooting film...and will for the rest of my life. But as much as I hate it, digital is where photography is heading. Film will be a medium in photography just as oil is to painting.

I jump between film and digital.....film is my current bug.....but in reality what I really care about is the final image...and most people that see my work printed cannot tell if the final was made in a darkroom, or flopped out of an inkjet. As long as they like it, who cares where it comes from.....

except me....

My 8 year old niece has never seen a vinyl record....yet still loves her music.

But I will say that I love you folks for keeping the analog world alive...so dorks like me can still get a little film fix now and again....

Did I mention I love 2-Strokes.....

 

[sangetsu]

I also live in Japan, and there is no shortage of people who carry film cameras. Photography is probably the most popular hobby in Japan, and there are countless camera and photography clubs. One of the good sides to this phenomena is that there is a huge amount of film equipment of all types available in the numerous used gear shops.

Nikon of course has the largest following, followed by Canon, and then the rest. There are a few Nikon House stores in Tokyo which carry every imaginable Nikon camera, lens, and accessory, but other shops specialize in rangefinders, medium format, and large format.

Being the nut I am, I visit these stores at least a couple times a month. They sell almost nothing that doesn't use film, and they do a brisk business. I have yet to visit such a shop and not see several other customers there.

 

[winjeel]

I also live in Japan, and there is no shortage of people who carry film cameras. Photography is probably the most popular hobby in Japan, and there are countless camera and photography clubs. One of the good sides to this phenomena is that there is a huge amount of film equipment of all types available in the numerous used gear shops.

Nikon of course has the largest following, followed by Canon, and then the rest. There are a few Nikon House stores in Tokyo which carry every imaginable Nikon camera, lens, and accessory, but other shops specialize in rangefinders, medium format, and large format.

Being the nut I am, I visit these stores at least a couple times a month. They sell almost nothing that doesn't use film, and they do a brisk business. I have yet to visit such a shop and not see several other customers there.

I've lived in Japan for a few years, but in other Asian countries for about 10 years in total, now. So I didn't know that comparatively speaking things were pretty vibrant here. I'm in Nagoya, so there's only really some ma and pa stores here and Top Camera to go to for second hand gear... that I know of so far.

 

[Nikanon]

In terms of using computers for everything, I tried once writing
down memories and information I require but after about 10 minutes I stopped, erased it and picked up a moleskine pocket journal, everything I've learned, studied, reviewed, Or thought about concerning
photography goes in them, I've filled up 6 so far and nothing beats having physical writing in a physical book that won't get deleted.

 

[abstraxion]

There's a lot of emotion in this thread, and much I can relate to.

But there's a lot of concrete reasons why film kicks ass. I can go on eBay with $100 or $200 and come back with a damn treasure trove of 35mm rangefinders with faster-than-f/2 lenses, Mamiya TLRs, and tack-sharp Minolta Rokkor-X lenses. The rangefinder is quieter, quicker, and shoots in lower light than any compact digi (load up Neopan 1600 in it and, if you can see it, you can shoot it), the Mamiya TLR gives better quality than any DSLR, and the Rokkor-X lenses give L glass a run for its money. Plus, I don't have to worry about my sensor being shit, or having poor dynamic range, or lots of noise... I can just buy a different film and see what suits me.

Film is just more fun, especially if you enjoy the process at ALL. I'm way more excited carrying Neopan 1600, Tri-X, Efke 25, Ektar 100 and Superia 400 than a digital because there's just so many possibilities there. Don't even get me started on doing your own developing and the flexibility there!

 

[dynachrome]

Last month I was in England for a week. My wife and son had digital p&s cameras. I had a Konica FT-1 with six lenses. I shot nine rolls of slide film and about five rolls of print film. The whole time I was there the only other person I saw with a film camera was someone with a disposable camera at Windsor Castle. What about Stonehenge, the London Eye, Big Ben, the Gherkin building, a boat ride on the Thames, Picadilly Circus, Trafalgar Square, the Tower Of London, the Royal Gardens at Kew, the Tower Bridge, St. Paul's church, Winchester Cathedral, Buckingham Palace? No film cameras in sight.

 

[John Hermanson]

This week I got the following in for repair: (2) OM-1, OM-1N, OM-3, (2) OM-4Ti, 35sp. People still love their OMs. John