The comeback?

[4season]

David Sax has done a fine overview of modern analog businesses:
https://www.publicaffairsbooks.com/titles/david-sax/the-revenge-of-analog/9781610395724/

The impression that I came away with was: No, things (the phonograph record included) are not returning to their former heights. But for those people able to operate on a smaller scale, there's the potential to carve out a lucrative niche.

Camera-wise, my impression is that there's a good deal of interest, but trends rise and fall seemingly overnight, and that most of the action is in the lower end of the market, like $300 or less.

 

[jim10219]

Here's your film revival, the "film revival" put KODAK in bankruptcy!

for amateurs fortunately this is not an either-or-choice because both are available

my photographic skills have improved dramatically since adopting digital, immediate feedback is something I find very helpful

Film didn't put Kodak into bankruptcy. Film isn't even a large part of their business anymore, and hasn't been for quite some time. Kodak's problem is mismanagement. They don't know how to position themselves in a market. Just look at Kodakcoin. It was a terrible idea from the beginning and why anyone would have thought getting mixed up in that would have been a good idea for them is beyond anything I can imagine. Their main source of income these days comes from commercial printing equipment, associated consumables, and software. Even in that market they pump out new product after new product without making any meaningful improvements.

In any case, I can tell you from the rising costs of used camera and darkroom equipment that film is under a revival of sorts. It'll never return to it's glory days, but it's no longer in danger of becoming extinct. At least not anytime soon.

 

[moose10101]

I think that you are absolutely right that the dig folks don't give a second though to film, which is fine. The thing that digital photographers will care about is the disruptions that are taking place in the digital camera world. I have bought a half of dozen point and shoot digital cameras over the years, a nikon d90, and a fuji X100s. More or less, they are all disposable cameras. My d90 is now electronically flaky, but it did well for many years. The Fuji worked for several years, but now can no longer properly retain the memory card. My satisfaction with Fujifilm in repairing it is nil (another story).

Quality film cameras can last a very long time (a real benefit to us dinosaurs). I do not believe the same can be said about modern cameras. Therefore, I believe the modern dig cameras are (like all electronics) semi-durable goods. A scheduled replacement cost of a dig camera body every 5 years is pretty steep in my opinion. I guess I will be looking to replace the X100s, but with what? I'm not excited about laying out $1000+ for what might well be a 5 year camera. I might just keep shooting film and get by with my old iphone for dig pics.

I doubt current digital photographers will migrate to film because of dissatisfaction with the state of the digital marketplace. I bet that there will just be an overall contraction in the world of amateur photographers.

I agree that digital gear won’t last as long as film cameras, due to complexity and build quality. However, adjusted for inflation, my current camera cost me about 20% of what my first SLR did. Even if I have to replace it every 5 years (which is unlikely), the equivalent $ would keep me going for 25 years. That’s a reasonable trade-off.

 

[wyofilm]

I'm not sure everyone has the same expectation that you do that a digital camera will last more than five years. It is an electronic device like a cell phone or laptop or tablet. Upgrading a camera body (but keeping your lenses) is assumed. Look how readily many digital photographers replace their working digital cameras. There sure is a buzz about the new mirrorless cameras announced in the last two weeks. How many photographers are going to buy a Canon R or Nikon Z6/Z7 when they have something working perfectly in the bag. This is nothing new. Back in the day, photographers upgraded their film cameras all the time to the latest model.

I have quickly lost the expectation that a digital camera will last more than five years. That was my point. Cameras are to be replaced very frequently which will hurt the photographic world. Double and triple down with photography specific items such as large storage devices and cards, expensive and ephemeral printers, and software subscriptions (the new normal), then I believe many will walk away from what has become an expensive hobby.

I guess photographers will buy a Nikon z7 when their D800 dies in the next year or two (or a bit longer). When I was in high school photography wasn't too expensive for me because I used an at that time 20 year old camera and lens (the sensor was replaced frequently!). I don't think that there are too many 20 year Nikon D1 cameras handed down today to novice photographers.

There was a useful used market when photographers back in the day when photographers with means upgraded to the latest and greatest. That is a much diminished world for digital cameras. The disposability of cameras is what is new. My guess is that camera companies don't feel warm fuzzies when thinking about the future market of stand alone cameras.

 

[pbromaghin]

The greatest myth in every one of these film-vs-digital threads is the idea that digital users give a rat’s ass about the status of film.

What myth? I can't remember ever seeing anybody say on apug/photrio that any digital user ever cared about film. Not commenting on the rest of your post.

 

[wyofilm]

I agree that digital gear won’t last as long as film cameras, due to complexity and build quality. However, adjusted for inflation, my current camera cost me about 20% of what my first SLR did. Even if I have to replace it every 5 years (which is unlikely), the equivalent $ would keep me going for 25 years. That’s a reasonable trade-off.

The problem for camera manufacturers is that you are in the minority. As evidenced by the falling sales of DSLRs, which is not offset by the slowly rising sales of mirrorless (with exchangeable lenses), the stand alone camera world is shrinking, even for non-point and shoot cameras. I'm guessing mirrorless will help Nikon/Canon/Sony for the next few years, but the same disposable nature of mirrorless cameras will turn photographers off.

I'm sure we are well off track now, but the point I'm making is that today's dig photographers don't care about film, but they might soon not care about digital either.

 

[faberryman]

How ridiculous. I shoot film up to 4x5 and digital. There are plenty of others that shoot both. Denigrating digital is childish. Photography should be a big tent.

 

[wyofilm]

How ridiculous. I shoot film up to film up to 4x5 and digital. There are plenty of others that shoot both.

Was your comment direct to my comment above yours?

I will take on your last statement though. In relative terms there aren't many photographers that shoot both film and digital. If there were, we wouldn't be having this conversation about the comeback of film. Films wouldn't be disappearing and manufacturers would still be making new film cameras. Dslr and mirrorless cameras with exchangeable lenses accounted for around 11 million units sold in 2017. Even using the low bar of 10% as plenty, wouldn't we seen SLR and rangefinder sales around 1 million units per year? There would still be manufacturers at even 1% (a very low bar for plenty). How did you define plenty?

 

[moose10101]

What myth? I can't remember ever seeing anybody say on apug/photrio that any digital user ever cared about film. Not commenting on the rest of your post.

You could, at a minimum, read the post I replied to, which is full of such statements. And it's quite common in other a-vs-d threads.

 

[faberryman]

Was your comment direct to my comment above yours?

No, I was responding to pbromaghin.

I will take on your last statement though. In relative terms there aren't many photographers that shoot both film and digital. If there were, we wouldn't be having this conversation about the comeback of film. Films wouldn't be disappearing and manufacturers would still be making new film cameras. Dslr and mirrorless cameras with exchangeable lenses accounted for around 11 million units sold in 2017. Even using the low bar of 10% as plenty, wouldn't we seen SLR and rangefinder sales around 1 million units per year? There would still be manufacturers at even 1% (a very low bar for plenty). How did you define plenty?

I think there are plenty of film shooters that also shoot digital. Not so many digital shooters that also shoot film.

 

[jim10219]

Was your comment direct to my comment above yours?

I will take on your last statement though. In relative terms there aren't many photographers that shoot both film and digital. If there were, we wouldn't be having this conversation about the comeback of film. Films wouldn't be disappearing and manufacturers would still be making new film cameras. Dslr and mirrorless cameras with exchangeable lenses accounted for around 11 million units sold in 2017. Even using the low bar of 10% as plenty, wouldn't we seen SLR and rangefinder sales around 1 million units per year? There would still be manufacturers at even 1% (a very low bar for plenty). How did you define plenty?

We live in different worlds, you and I. Every photographer I know shoots both digital and film. That's probably 30 people. Some shoot primarily film. Some shoot primarily digital. But they all shoot both.

The reason why there aren't many companies currently manufacturing cameras is because they're expensive to make, and thus will cost the consumer more than they are likely willing to pay. And there's little point in making a new film camera in this day and age when you would have to compete with over 100 years worth of cameras on the used market. Even then, there are still companies making film cameras like Intrepid, Wista, Toyo, Arca-Swiss, Leica, and many more. They tend to specialize in higher end cameras, which makes sense in this market.

 

[Helios 1984]

The "film is dead" prayers only demonstrate their lack of knowledge of the current photography market developments.

Until 3 years ago, I thought the dSLR industry was still flourishing.
Until 2 years ago, I had no idea that Kodak went bankrupt.
Some folks are just out of the loop :-/

i don't think that if
film ( includingprocessing ) costs go up to 100$ a roll anyone's gonna buy it...

Maybe if it's Kodachrome... *wink wink ;-)

 

[pbromaghin]

You could, at a minimum, read the post I replied to, which is full of such statements. And it's quite common in other a-vs-d threads.

Hmm. After rethinking this, I stand partly corrected.

However, while it has pretty much gone away in the last year or 2, I suffered nearly a decade of digital users telling me I needed to quit film and shoot digital. As if my hobby was any of their damned business. I don't take those busybodyisms to come from a concern about the state of film. Complaints like mine have been very common, but expressions like the one to which you were replying are, I believe, exceedingly rare.

 

[jtk]

The problem for camera manufacturers is that you are in the minority. As evidenced by the falling sales of DSLRs, which is not offset by the slowly rising sales of mirrorless (with exchangeable lenses), the stand alone camera world is shrinking, even for non-point and shoot cameras. I'm guessing mirrorless will help Nikon/Canon/Sony for the next few years, but the same disposable nature of mirrorless cameras will turn photographers off.

I'm sure we are well off track now, but the point I'm making is that today's dig photographers don't care about film, but they might soon not care about digital either.

"today's dig photographers don't care about film, but they might soon not care about digital either."

Various responses to that quote:

#1 Wedding photographers mostly have to be into digital because the clients insist on video. Most digital cameras shoot video. Weddings are typically shot with at least two camera operators...the poorly paid one of them shoots still.
.
#2 Amateur photographers shoot digital video of events, travels, etc. Phones are still and video and Facebook is, in addition to sickness and addiction, a video presentation medium. Digital cameras shoot video as well as still. If you have a smartphone you have a digital video camera and a digital still camera.

#3 I shoot digital as well as film..which I scan and print.

 

[jtk]

No, I was responding to pbromaghin.

I think there are plenty of film shooters that also shoot digital. Not so many digital shooters that also shoot film.

Yes. Remember this: everybody with a smartphone also has a digital video and still camera an audio recorder a BBC player etc etc etc... Inexorable realty.

 

[wyofilm]

We live in different worlds, you and I. Every photographer I know shoots both digital and film. That's probably 30 people. Some shoot primarily film. Some shoot primarily digital. But they all shoot both.

The reason why there aren't many companies currently manufacturing cameras is because they're expensive to make, and thus will cost the consumer more than they are likely willing to pay. And there's little point in making a new film camera in this day and age when you would have to compete with over 100 years worth of cameras on the used market. Even then, there are still companies making film cameras like Intrepid, Wista, Toyo, Arca-Swiss, Leica, and many more. They tend to specialize in higher end cameras, which makes sense in this market.

I agree that we must live in different worlds. To be sure that since I live in a town of 150 and the nearest big town is a whopping 1500, there aren't many people that shoot film. However, you must be living in film bliss, because if every photographer here on photrio knew only other photographers that shoot film or both film and digital, I doubt we would have much worry about film stocks. My experiences differ greatly.

Regarding used cameras ... I am interested to see what happens over the next few years. There is a sweet spot of cameras from the 1960s to 1980s that are of modern design and not too complicated with electronics. Don't get me wrong I love buying used cameras, but most every used camera I've purchased has required servicing. Still a good value, but I don't believe there are mountains of used and usable cameras ready to go. Again this might be my rural life, but even when I visit stores that sell used films cameras in Salt Lake City, I don't see a mountain of used film cameras ready to go. Ebay is the route I nearly always go and it works, but not without risks. KEH is a good resource because there is a warranty with their cameras. They have a hard time keeping some higher end models in stock. (I would really like to buy a back up Mamiya 7II body from them, but I haven't seen one in some time.)

Film photography is a niche. A niche that I hope remains large enough to keep Ilford and the like going. Last fall I was speaking with a professor who teaches photography in the fine arts department at the University of Wyoming. In her intro to photography course the topic of film isn't even mentioned. We are so many years past the introduction of mainstream digital cameras that kids grew up in houses where film cameras never existed during their childhoods. But groups like lomography, emulsive, youtube channels. etc. are doing a great job at exposing (sorry!) the next generations to the wonders of film. I am in their debt.

 

[wyofilm]

Most digital cameras shoot video

Newer, mirrorless cameras are getting to the point where they basically only shoot video. Our ranch is being featured by a local outfit and after the photography shot his drone videos he grabbed his camera off his Inspire 2 (I think) drone and as said he wanted a still of me. But then corrected himself - he need to just shot video from which he'd grab a still. A better way to acquire a still image if the demands for resolution aren't too great. I don't pay too much attention to the frames rates of stills of some of the higher end mirrorless cameras, but it seems to me that they are approaching the rates of video, but only at much higher resolution.

 

[markjwyatt]

Are fountain pens, typewriters and vinyl records making a comeback?

vinyl records for sure.

 

[faberryman]

vinyl records for sure.

Vinyl records have been making a comeback for a at least dozen years. It is not a new phenomenon. With the rise first in downloads and now in streaming, with the emphasis on the single, and the resulting decline in CD sales, vinyl now accounts for something like 10% of album sales. It is a healthy niche market. Lots of people have a few albums, just like lots of people shoot a few rolls of film.

 

[markjwyatt]

Fact is that the market for digital cameras has collapsed by 85% in the last years. Lots of digital OEM camera manufacturers had to stop production, and even the first big player (Samsung) left the digital camera market...

This is not due to film, but rather to smart phones that have cameras (and somewhat decent ones) built in.

 

[Michael Firstlight]

Yes, everything except for the typewriters and they might if we could find someone to work on them.....Regards!

Hey, my IBM Selectric III works just fine, thank you!

Mike

 

[Luckless]

Film, especially black and white film, will likely never be any more dead than painting is.

Sure, you're not likely to ever see it become the mainstream go-to tool of choice that everyone snaps away during a birthday or for holiday photos, but it will remain firmly entrenched within the field of art.

We're at a point in time where photography as a whole is readily accessible and easy to learn, and what more we have a growing body of easily accessible knowledge on the use and benefits of larger formats than the traditional 35mm and smaller consumer capture mediums.


As for typewriters... Well I'm strongly considering getting one, or possibly building a dedicated old school single task 'word processor' to use as a writing platform, as I really should be working on some rewrites on a technical manual, but here I am skimming a web forum while totally mulling over things before I get back to serious writing...

 

[markjwyatt]

All I can say is that I am glad that I did not dump my film cameras! In fact I am finding myself acquiring more. That being said, I love digital also.

 

[markjwyatt]

David Sax has done a fine overview of modern analog businesses:
https://www.publicaffairsbooks.com/titles/david-sax/the-revenge-of-analog/9781610395724/...

Nothing like good Sax.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

Are fountain pens, typewriters and vinyl records making a comeback?

Where are three stores in Toronto for typewriters. I don't know how many stores with vynil in Ontario. Even Walmart here sells LPs and turntables.
Fontaine pens sold at every Michael's store.

As for film I have two teenagers who started using film this year.
I'm giving one of them bulk film and developing kit this weekend. Better camera as well.