The comeback?

CMoore · Feb 15, 2019

Agulliver said:
Tell that to someone who is polyamorous....and why does society have this toxic idea that we must shun our exes? Personally I'm still good friends with most of mine. One of my exes is my wife's best friend. And yes, they have compared notes...

A few Odd/Regressive posts in this thread.
I divorced my first wife because she was schizophrenic, not because i did not "love" her. Her illness made it impossible to continue with her in life. I still do not see her for that reason. But I still worry about her.....to the point of tears. It is not her fault.
I am "good" friends with my wife's ex-husband. He is a decent Guy/Person.
They have both taken a FEW cheap-shots at each other over these last 20 years. Nothing horrible, just normal stuff.
It amazes me, the number of people, that think every divorce is some type of Celebrity Level and Tabloid Worthy blow-out.
Many times it is simply two people that got together at 23 years of age, and by the time they hit 40.....had become different people, with different Interests/Hobbies...and simply grew apart.

Berkeley Mike · Feb 15, 2019

Agulliver said:
Anyway....I definitely see more people around shooting film than a few years ago. Especially in the warmer months. This applies to England mostly. It will be interesting to see if I note any other film shooters in Malta next week. Last time I went there was said to be one shop on the island selling film. Now I note a traditional darkroom business has started there.

Wow, film use is exploding in Europe.

jtk · Feb 15, 2019

faberryman said:
Walker Evans, Minor White, and Gary Winogrand, just to name three off the top of my head, taught. I don't think it is a fair generalization to say that those who can do, don't teach.

I said "most." And you've cited ghosts from very different eras. But you might want to consider Penn, Platon, and Avedon.

faberryman · Feb 15, 2019

jtk said:
I said "most." And you've cited ghosts from very different eras. But you might want to consider Penn, Platon, and Avedon.

Well, if you are going to rely on your "most" qualifier, you are right. There are always going to be more professional photographers than photography teachers, so there are always going to be more that do than teach. Given a choice between making more money doing than teaching, "most" are going to choose making more money.

Wayne · Feb 15, 2019

jtk · Feb 16, 2019

Wayne said:

Ghastly.

jtk · Feb 16, 2019

faberryman said:
Well, if you are going to rely on your "most" qualifier, you are right. There are always going to be more professional photographers than photography teachers, so there are always going to be more that do than teach. Given a choice between making more money doing than teaching, "most" are going to choose making more money.[/QUOTE

True. My only teacher was one of Minor Whites personal students. That has been very important to my photo life, much like the indirect teaching of E Weston in Daybook 2. I mentioned Avedon in the same context: something about a committed life. Nobody has taught me much about technical stuff or "art." Maybe that's obvious in my work.

Agulliver · Feb 17, 2019

Berkeley Mike said:
Wow, film use is exploding in Europe.

Certainly a visible increase, though I'm not sure I'd say it's exploding. The days of seeing several one hour C41 labs in every town are long gone but people are shooting film again.

jvo · Feb 17, 2019

film is dead! long live film!

Agulliver · May 3, 2019

Last weekend I visited Cardiff with my partner in photography...we visited the world's oldest record shop (open since 1894 when they sold wax cylinders) and round the corner a lovely camera shop. My friend happened to ask "Do you sell 120 colour film?" and the guy behind the counter replied "Yes! Of course! We sell practically every film available" and showed us to the spot in the shop where they do just that. Only Adox, Silberra and Bergger weren't there from the brands I know.They had every conceivable Ilford, Kodak, Fuji, Foma and even Agfa APX and some Rollei Retro. Got into a lovely conversation about TLR cameras with the two sales guys who were very much younger than me and very enthusiastic about film. When I briefly mentioned my Kiev 6 (not with me at the time) one instantly commented "That must be a pain around your neck" knowing how heavy it is.

Moreover my photo friend let it slip that she'd like to develop her own B&W film instead of asking me to do it. So I conspired with her husband and for her birthday yesterday we bought her all the essentials to get started.

From owning just one Pentax 35mm film camera 18 months ago which hadn't been used in a decade she now has five film cameras, a fridge drawer full of film and a home dark room.

I've helped guide another friend who is in the USA through purchasing of three film cameras and film and she's also looking at developing her own.

Something's in the air. These same people wouldn't have been so enthusiastic five years ago.

BTW the camera shop....I was easily the oldest person in there. It's the kind of place with four bargain bins of old screw mount lenses, hand grips, filters etc....huge glass cases of used cameras from £50 into the thoudands...heavy on film and paper availability....and there were young people in there! Young people with knowledge and enthusiasm.

Berkeley Mike · May 3, 2019

These are the survivors; what do you expect? "Young people" are not infilling, statistically, at a rate to make up for those Leaving this mortal coil.

Luckless · May 3, 2019

Berkeley Mike said:
These are the survivors; what do you expect? "Young people" are not infilling, statistically, at a rate to make up for those Leaving this mortal coil.

I'm not sure the mortal coil really factors into statistical rates for this - I'm in my 30s, and I run into a lot of old guys toting digital cameras who stop to talk to me about "The good old days of film". And yet I keep running into younger people actually out and still using film. [Mind you, I do live in a university town, so local courses that are still using film probably artificially inflate the youth numbers that I see.]

Photographers sure don't have to die to stop using film.

Kino · May 3, 2019

Ah, stop wasting your time trying to convince those who cannot be convinced. Go shoot your film and let them reside in their room full of mirrors...

Berkeley Mike · May 3, 2019

It is a simple matter of infilling what has been lost and that rate is too low to sustain film at this rate. And, yeah, you are in a University town so the sample is radically skewed..

Agulliver · May 3, 2019

Oh I have no illusions of film sales ever reaching those of the 1990s, or even of a revival on the scale of vinyl records.....but the nadir has been reached and a recovery of sorts has begun.

Berkeley Mike · Jun 12, 2019

I think, rather, of a new stasis and not recovery or growth. Given the rate of "boomers" disappearing along with their film disciplines and the statistically lower infill from generations that follow, it would be no surprise to see that stasis could readjust downward in the next decade.

Theo Sulphate · Jun 12, 2019

The youngest people who are starting to earn their own money are teenagers - which means they were born and grew up in an era where 95+% of cameras were digital, 99% of all new cars had automatic transmissions (in the U.S. at least), and microprocessors were embedded in almost all consumer electronic devices. They've probably never seen a typewriter. There were few things they used (of some complexity) that were fully "analog".

So, to them, film cameras are something of a novelty, especially a non-electronic one like a Pentax H3v or Leica M3. Some may be intrigued by this novelty and explore it, but as stated above, the numbers aren't there to sustain any growth or maintain the services (e.g. repair, film production) we have today.

Vaughn · Jun 12, 2019

I agree, Mike. As long as we have a viable society, we'll have non-digital photography, along with hybrid photography. As long as wet-processed prints are shown in museums, there will be someone along who will think, "I'd like to give that a try.", Even if that means making their own film (or plates), or making their own printing material (silver gelatin or the other processes)...or buying from small home-based manufacturers.

Universities that totally eliminate wet photographic processes from their art curriculum will be doing the world of art a dis-service, like those who have eliminated the 'out-dated' art forms of silk-screening, lithography, and etching from their programs.

Based on the technological growth of society, IMO, digital photography (as we know it now) might be 'dead' within a couple of decades -- if we do not have a global meltdown before then.

RPC · Jun 12, 2019

Berkeley Mike said:
I think, rather, of a new stasis and not recovery or growth. Given the rate of "boomers" disappearing along with their film disciplines and the statistically lower infill from generations that follow, it would be no surprise to see that stasis could readjust downward in the next decade.

Yes, if all the young hear and learn about is digital, and not analog.

Exposing them to analog as well as digital is doing a service to the entire photographic community as well as the art world, and doing so will help keep analog alive. There is no reason whatsoever for it to die, being a viable photographic medium and art form, nor the young to not be exposed to it, but this is generally and sadly what is happening.

So many young people here who have done digital then heard of analog methods and decided to try them generally like them and have no regrets.

A comeback may or may not happen but what is most important is that analog stay alive, and it won't if society continues to push digital and suppress analog.

And who knows, as was said, digital itself may disappear someday for the same reason.

Theo Sulphate · Jun 12, 2019

One way to "campaign" for the value of analog photography is to exhibit prints which demonstrate its virtues.

Occasionally I'll be somewhere - a building or shop - that has a few old, very large, prints on the wall which were made from the early or middle 20th century - long before digital. The large size, high resolution, and good tonal qualities of these prints get people's attention. Any young person interested in photography will wonder about the cameras and processes which made such a print possible.

eddie · Jun 12, 2019

My 23 year old niece just asked me to help her get started in film photography. She's only interested in documenting her life (nothing "artistic") in color. I told her her phone will do a better job, but she says she's bored with phone photos. Apparently, a few of her friends have made the same decision. I realize it's not a large sampling (and who knows how long her interest lasts) but I'm glad she's giving it a try. I'm going to give her a 35mm SLR, once I pick up some batteries and test it.

Luckless · Jun 13, 2019

Has anyone ever dug up any recent and reasonably reliable market research on the subject matter?

How much of the current market for film is actually still in the hands of the boomer or older generations? (That is, how much film is actually being sold today to such generations vs how much is being sold to younger ones, and not "Who has the most film squirreled away in a freezer..."?)

I'm in my early 30's, and the only people I've known to be buying and using more than a handful of Instax film are 35 and younger.

I know a reasonably even spread of photographers ranging from teenagers through to retirees who use film, but the bulk of the volume purchased and used seems to center closer to 25, not 55.

(Except large format. Of the handful of photographers I've talked to personally who use large format, the film volume seems to drift towards those older than me, but photographer count with 4x5's that have been used in the last year is higher among my age or younger. But I would hazard a guess that the cost-per-pop keeps the shot count down maybe?)

[Is the community view that "Young people aren't using film" possibly tainted by said young people running into some of the crustier old grumpy members, and they are finding other places to talk about film? Or do I have just that weird of a social circle to be far outside the actual market norm?]

jamesaz · Jun 15, 2019

Luckless said:
Has anyone ever dug up any recent and reasonably reliable market research on the subject matter?

How much of the current market for film is actually still in the hands of the boomer or older generations? (That is, how much film is actually being sold today to such generations vs how much is being sold to younger ones, and not "Who has the most film squirreled away in a freezer..."?)

I'm in my early 30's, and the only people I've known to be buying and using more than a handful of Instax film are 35 and younger.

I know a reasonably even spread of photographers ranging from teenagers through to retirees who use film, but the bulk of the volume purchased and used seems to center closer to 25, not 55.

(Except large format. Of the handful of photographers I've talked to personally who use large format, the film volume seems to drift towards those older than me, but photographer count with 4x5's that have been used in the last year is higher among my age or younger. But I would hazard a guess that the cost-per-pop keeps the shot count down maybe?)

[Is the community view that "Young people aren't using film" possibly tainted by said young people running into some of the crustier old grumpy members, and they are finding other places to talk about film? Or do I have just that weird of a social circle to be far outside the actual market norm?]

I've not done market research. Anecdotally however, my 6 year old grand daughter has an instax and my 18 year old grand daughter has a K-1000. There is also a film photography gallery/workshop/hangout that was opened by college age folks (20-30 year olds) in my neighborhood. What they have in common is that, being young, they have busy lives. They also have to make a living, (not the 6 Y.O.) meaning day jobs.
Now, if you figure 4 hours of lab work for every 1 hour of shooting work (and I had a supervisor in a corporate photography job that used that ratio as a general guide for budgeting purposes) its fairly easy to see why only the truly interested are involved. Even then, their final product is likely to be scanned and distributed digitally. They also, for the most part, don't draw sharp demarcation lines between film and digital (or as I think of it, chemical and electronic) photography but rather using different materials to achieve different results.
This from one of the crusty old guys. (I hope I'm not grumpy though)

Berkeley Mike · Jun 16, 2019

The idea that we can shape a film investment in our younger shooters and increase films market viability into the future is a mistaken notion. Young people will embrace film for it most obvious values; the craft, the elegance, the ability to carry their dynamic and lyrical values which we old folk have long lost. There is definite cache. It has nothing to do with some truth, but with an immediacy of experience and, in the young, such a thing can cement a sense of belonging, of meaning.

The briskness, not shortcuts, but alacrity and immediacy across a breadth of modalities is what attract the younger photographer to digital. As such, a smaller percentage of a small segment of the population will be attracted to film. And, as the time for experimentation starts to wane and energies are more channeled, when the identity with film is no longer so important, when they develop a sense of self and confidence in their vision independent of medium, they may put it down. They will leave film behind. We have always done that ourselves with former passions.

For us, the adherence to process is as close as we can get to that free-flowing lyrical experience; it is all we know. It is much the same in other disciplines; the effect of age. We have other strengths that come over time. Yet those hard won values are not bound by the process; often expressed but not part and parcel. The curiosity is that those values, understood through decades of experience, can find their wing in digital; variety and insight, not some twisted perversion.

blockend · Jun 16, 2019

Vaughn said:
Based on the technological growth of society, IMO, digital photography (as we know it now) might be 'dead' within a couple of decades

There's something in that. Seen from the present, the digital photography timeline stretches forever. Just as it did for CDs and cassettes. Truth is it may not outlast our personal evolution never mind the culture. Connectivity will go first. In retrospect USB ports will have the life of a Mayfly, and SD cards will be as common as reel to reel tape.

The comeback?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency