The comeback?

[faberryman]

What I hear every time is, "Film is cool! I want to do film. How do you do film?" Soon in the conversation, usually when I talk about buying chemicals, the tone changes. So I think a lot of people like the idea but get bumped from the experience due to lack of resources and knowledge.

I suspect there is a lot more dropping/mailing film off for processing and scanning than there is doing it yourself, so I doubt the mere mention of chemicals is enough to put people off. It is more likely that, after buying a film camera, the film/processing/scanning costs $20 for 36 images which are free with your phone. A lot of things are cool until you actually have to go to the time, effort, and expense of doing them.

 

[warden]

Exactly!! You've nailed it.
Photrio with all its permanent negativity, grumpy old men declaring the 'doom and gloom of film', discouraging comments to young film beginners is not representative at all for the current film photography scene. Fortunately!
What is going on out there can be clearly seen by all the numerous activities of the manufacturers, labs, film and used gear stores.
It is obvious to all looking at the hundreds of different film photography groups on facebook. For example the Vietnam film photographer group there is bigger than photrio, has more daily activity, and is growing by more than 4.000 members every month! And that is Vietnam only.
On instagram professional film photographer José Villa has 366.000 followers. Richard Photo Lab has more than 89.000 followers there. Ilford has 107.000 followers there. John Sypal (Tokyocamerastyle) has 113.000 followers. Just some examples. The total number of film photographers there is in the several hundreds of thousands range. And significantly increasing.

That's a breath of fresh air. Thank you.

I'm seeing lots of positive energy in the world about various film products, the large and small companies making them, and the new ways of communicating that excitement, which includes this site but is mainly elsewhere. There is good activity and enormous technical knowledge right here, but yeah the grumpy old man shit gets old fast.

I'm not worried about comebacks. Film is here, likely to stay, and that feels good. Now if we can just get Nikon to make a great 35mm rangefinder...

 

[faberryman]

Photrio with all its permanent negativity, grumpy old men declaring the 'doom and gloom of film', discouraging comments to young film beginners is not representative at all for the current film photography scene.

Funny, I thought all the grumpy old men around here were complaining about digital.

 

[Kodachromeguy]

That's a breath of fresh air. Thank you.
I'm seeing lots of positive energy in the world about various film products, the large and small companies making them, and the new ways of communicating that excitement, which includes this site but is mainly elsewhere. There is good activity and enormous technical knowledge right here, but yeah the grumpy old man shit gets old fast.
I'm not worried about comebacks. Film is here, likely to stay, and that feels good. Now if we can just get Nikon to make a great 35mm rangefinder...

Odd, I have not encountered too many grumpy old men here. If you want to read comments from anti-film bigots, mention the word "film" in Dpreview. Some of those so-called "photographers" go obsessive-hostile when certain buzzwords set them off. "Leica" is another one of their hate topics.

As for a Nikon rangefinder, you can occasionally find the gorgeous 2005 re-release of the Nikon SP: https://www.cameraquest.com/nrfblsp2005.htm
There is also the 2000 re-release of the S3: https://www.cameraquest.com/NRFS3 2000.htm

 

[Nodda Duma]

Right.. my intent with the original phrase wasn't meant to infer Photrio is a pack of grumpy old men. While a great technical resource, Photrio simply isn't the central hub for all the latest trends in film photography nor is it frequented by the huge number of millennial-aged (or older) film photographers out there. Some, but not nearly all. To be honest, I'm not exactly sure what that "hub" is outside of Instagram.

 

[warden]

Odd, I have not encountered too many grumpy old men here. If you want to read comments from anti-film bigots, mention the word "film" in Dpreview. Some of those so-called "photographers" go obsessive-hostile when certain buzzwords set them off. "Leica" is another one of their hate topics.

As for a Nikon rangefinder, you can occasionally find the gorgeous 2005 re-release of the Nikon SP: https://www.cameraquest.com/nrfblsp2005.htm
There is also the 2000 re-release of the S3: https://www.cameraquest.com/NRFS3 2000.htm

Holy cow, that SP is just lovely. I'd never heard of that re-release.

 

[blockend]

It's emotionally OK to be happy with our limitations.

I'm pleased you found your aesthetic boundaries.

 

[jtk]

I suspect there is a lot more dropping/mailing film off for processing and scanning than there is doing it yourself, so I doubt the mere mention of chemicals is enough to put people off. It is more likely that, after buying a film camera, the film/processing/scanning costs $20 for 36 images which are free with your phone. A lot of things are cool until you actually have to go to the time, effort, and expense of doing them.

Absolutely right.

 

[removed account4]

Right.. my intent with the original phrase wasn't meant to infer Photrio is a pack of grumpy old men. While a great technical resource, Photrio simply isn't the central hub for all the latest trends in film photography nor is it frequented by the huge number of millennial-aged (or older) film photographers out there. Some, but not nearly all. To be honest, I'm not exactly sure what that "hub" is outside of Instagram.

IDK this place as well as everywhere else has cranky people. i think its a sign of the times ...
the centrex, my uneducated guess is its probably without a nucleus like an amoeba and spread out between a handful of different interwebular spaces ..

If you want to read comments from anti-film bigots, mention the word "film" in Dpreview. Some of those so-called "photographers" go obsessive-hostile when certain buzzwords set them off.

thats really sad, there used to be an anti digital group i encountered once in a while at a place i visited often
and it could be said to be similar and the exact opposite .. its too bad people just can't just not give a hoot what someone else uses
and what they do but unfortunately as soon as words are said the tribes are formed without an understanding that film or sensor its kinda similar
its a drag and unfortunately there are people that just like to drive wedges and exploit differences.

 

[jtk]

I'm pleased you found your aesthetic boundaries.

.

I won't ask you to re-read,

I'll just remind you that I posted in response to the dust and focus problems you reported. Aesthetics are a different matter. You can see some of mine on Photrio's "Media."

Maybe you'll share some of your work on Photrio's "Media." I've only shared hints of mine, will add more before the year is out.

 

[jtk]

.

fwiw tribalism isn't universal in online groups. I participate in a very old and highly active group where tribalism is minimal...it's an archery group.

I know of (but don't spend time on ) a couple of other archery groups that are non- tribal. Might have to do with archery being an automatic truth detector, and with the desire of archers to learn and/or help. A personal values kind of thing.

BS isn't as effective in archery as it is in photography because the arrow either does the job or it doesn't. I imagine the same is true of other participant-oriented groups (as opposed to fanboys).

 

[faberryman]

BS isn't as effective in archery as it is in photography because the arrow either does the job or it doesn't.

I imagine there is a fair amount of discussion about which bows and arrows are the best. Less controversy about which archer is the best. Little subjectively involved in the latter determination. BTW, is there a group of old guard archers who only use yew bows and decry the new-fangled contraptions? Forums like Bowtrio where you can opt out of seeing discussions of current technology?

 

[jtk]

I imagine there is a fair amount of discussion about which bows and arrows are the best. Less controversy about which archer is the best. Little subjectively involved in the latter determination.

True...though we're cautious about the word "best" out of mutual respect and because archery is mostly highly personal/variable. There's some debate about carbon arrows Vs cedar arrows (cedar arrows smell good when busted, carbon arrows tend not to bust) and about shooting form as it relates to accuracy. Stuff like that.

 

[jtk]

I imagine there is a fair amount of discussion about which bows and arrows are the best. Less controversy about which archer is the best. Little subjectively involved in the latter determination. BTW, is there a group of old guard archers who only use yew bows and decry the new-fangled contraptions? Forums like Bowtrio where you can opt out of seeing discussions of current technology?

More American archers like osage than like yew (that tree is the source of a common chemo for breast cancer fyi).. yes, there is some prejudice against "compound bows" by "traditional shooters" like me, but it's mostly good humored. I doubt anybody wants Photrio-style opt-outs.

The oldest of my bows is a Lemonwood longbow marked 1929. My favorite is a recurve built right here in Albuquerque, maybe 1975...maple/fiberglass limbs. I also shoot the kind of bow American athletes used to win Olympics decades ago... very high tech: two carbon layers with some sort of foam in between. Got em' all used (the 1929 was my grandfather's).

 

[jim10219]

.

fwiw tribalism isn't universal in online groups. I participate in a very old and highly active group where tribalism is minimal...it's an archery group.

I know of (but don't spend time on ) a couple of other archery groups that are non- tribal. Might have to do with archery being an automatic truth detector, and with the desire of archers to learn and/or help. A personal values kind of thing.

BS isn't as effective in archery as it is in photography because the arrow either does the job or it doesn't. I imagine the same is true of other participant-oriented groups (as opposed to fanboys).

I find this to be the case with many smaller niche market forums. If the group is small enough, everyone seems to band together and work on helping everyone else. But as the group grows in size, pissing contests break out and people start to feel disrespected and then the next thing you know, it seems as though it's filled up with nothing but a bunch of "grumpy, old men" whether or not they be old or men.

For example, several of the musical instrument forums I've been on are full of the "grumpy, old men" stereotype. Lots of people can play musical instruments. That's not a small group. But the professional music recording forum is much more tame and helpful. They're a lot smaller of a group, because while there are a lot of musicians in the world, there aren't near a many people who are interested in seriously recording music. Either that, or to be a good recording engineer, you kind of have to have that type of personality that's into helping others more than promoting yourself. My fiancé is big into cosplay. She can tell you that as cosplay has exploded over the last 10 years, the forums that surround it have gone from small, supportive groups, to collections of "grumpy, old men" (even though in reality there are very few old men involved). But the same "everyone's doing everything wrong and everything's being ruined by these new people who just arrived and didn't pay their dues and we all just need to admit the end is here" mentality is still poisoning the water.

Same thing with photography forums. This one has a lot of people in it. And a lot of those people are not very polite. Don't get me wrong, I'll still argue that most of the people here are kind, decent, helpful people. It's just hard for kind, decent, helpful people to overtake a thread like one A-hole can. Now if you go over to the large format photography forum, you'll notice that even though it's made up of almost exclusively old men, it has very few of the "grumpy, old men" type. It's a lot smaller group, and as typical of small groups, they tend to be a lot more closely knit.

 

[jrhilton]

Harman Technologies Ltd's accounts are the only ones I am aware of that actually give any stats on the film and paper market that you know have been subject to an audit.

The below is just taken from their publically available annual accounts at UK Companies House - e.g. anyone can have a read of them for free.

Year	Total Turnover GBP	Film Sales Growth %	Paper regression %
2017	20,119,203	9	7
2016	18,798,309	5	2.8
2015	17,530,208	4	7.5
2014	18,888,645	1.8	7.5
2013	19,680,829	0.5	7.5

Clearly there are moving parts in the turnover number but there is growth in film but let's be honest, it's not a huge number and i don't read that as a massive global resurgence in film because the numbers don't support it. In summary film volume has increased each year while paper volume has decreased.

I suspect the reality is people have switched to Ilford film as their stockpiles have run out, or as other films have become discontinued or hard to get in local markets. Of all the B&W films you can buy an Ilford film is the easiest to find in a high street shop in my personal experience.

 

[blockend]

.

I won't ask you to re-read,

I'll just remind you that I posted in response to the dust and focus problems you reported. Aesthetics are a different matter. You can see some of mine on Photrio's "Media."

Maybe you'll share some of your work on Photrio's "Media." I've only shared hints of mine, will add more before the year is out.

I haven't shared serious work online for years, and can't post in Photrio's picture section. I use printed books as my outcome, and silver prints as wall art. Nor do I look at the links in anyone's post. The validity of someone's opinion is not dependent on their work without knowing what they are trying to achieve. I've posted the work of photographers I admire before, and they do not fall within conventional boundaries of technical image quality, though they are art of very high standard.

 

[Berkeley Mike]

I'm not sure threads that comment on the film market, that do not support the idea of film comeback, are talking doom and gloom, or that they are from grumpy old men. That comment is tactically dismissive of all comments not on board with the comeback belief. Perhaps it is because the idea of "comeback" is poorly defined somewhere between hope and true gains in an evolving market.

Remember that film sales peaked in about 2001 at 1 billion rolls. Estimates by Kodak insiders suggested that 98% of that film was C41; mom, dad, sis, bub and my Aunt Betty with Kodak moments processed at the local Photomat. That leaves about 20 million rolls for a variety of shooters of BW, C41, E6, and Kodachrome. In that context 10-20% increases, cited in this site from industry mixers, since 2015, is not huge. At 10-20% it doubles to 40 million in 5-10 years...compared to 1 billion.

It is a reset, a stabilization, at a place and rate from which potential entrepreneurs and downscaled manufacturers can make plans to exploit a known market. It is a comeback or less generously, spin, if you are selling film and associated gear and supplies, looking for investors, on a mission to make film a success into the future, encouraging the community, or simply a passionate community.

As I have reported from our photo department that serves 22,000 students at 4 colleges in the district, our traditional 3 sections of BW have been reduced to 2 with a total enrollment of 25. 2 sections of Intro to Digital had 59. As an update, with the usual fall-off in photo classes in general as the semester settles, we are at 19 (-24%) and 51 (-14%). If drop rates follow the usual rates (consistent for the last 5 years), film will deliver 8-15 (-67%-60%) and Digital 34-40 (-42%-32%) to the finish line (the retention rate). Importantly, only 18% of film students go on to take more photo classes compared to 38% from Digital classes (the Persistence rate). That means film will contribute 1-3 students and Digital 12-15 students to further classes in the department.

In broad strokes we have gone from 5 to 2 sections of film since 2011. Next semester there will be only 1 section of Film. It doesn't stand up to any fiscal scrutiny. Even our film MFA sees that and supports the change.

Note; while we provide all the darkroom stuff, the cost of film and paper is a real stress. We just had a nice donation of film and paper and we budget for a certain amount of that to give out. (Added 9/13/18) I just requested that we buy 50 rolls of film with a small amount of surplus money in our budget. Additionally, the availability of cameras and cameras that do not break down is an issue. I just donated one of my FM2s with an 85 f2; not done lightly. The only way that the camera issue changes is if we have an effective film crusader. We do have one in the department, who teaches at the Pro level and is a former lab owner and Brookie, and film use in his classes is exceedingly rare.

Not a comeback, a reset. You may sit on my lawn.

 

[blockend]

Many hobbies and crafts act as though their bubble is the norm. Inside the audio niche, valves are a mainstream topic. In the rest of (UK) society they died with Round the Horne and the Vox AC30. Film photography is such a bubble. Surrounded by people who think nothing of ordering sheet film formats that were last popular when aircraft had three wings, it can seem normal to debate the formuli of hypo and the disappearance of paper backed emulsions. In our world 42 megapixel sensors are somewhere between an irrelevance and a form of madness. Outside the silo, they're the thing people are buying.

The truth is the general public don't care what people like us take pictures with.

 

[faberryman]

Note; while we provide all the darkroom stuff, the cost of film and paper is a real stress.

This is my experience as well. I took B&W I, B&W II, and Alternative Processes at my local community college to gain access to a darkroom before I completed mine and to keep my hand in the game, and students were buying film by the single roll and sharing 25 sheet packages of paper. The test strips they used were so small as to be counter-productive. Money was tight after buying a film camera. Film photography is an expensive proposition to community college students who are at the same time working to keep a roof over their head and food on the table. Don't think that doesn't play into course selection.

 

[Lee Rust]

... It's unfortunate the change to digital was so rapid destroying much of the film infrastructure we all took for granted. Film can't really "come back" because no one will ever invest in the necessary infrastructure. At best film will survive but only if all those curious people have a cost effective means of exploration like community darkrooms, high school arts programs, undergrad programs. On this level there is at least as much as building outdoor wood fired kilns or glass blowing. Painting while drinking wine is quite popular in my parts...an example of interest coupled with easy access creating a cottage industry.

The manufacture and processing of commercial color film is so complicated and expensive that it's a miracle we can still do it at all. Without a mass market, there's simply no way to support it. There may yet be some niche success with Instax and hopeful efforts from Polaroid Originals or Ferrania, but the clock is ticking. When Hollywood finally stops using color film, that will signal the end of chemical color for most of us, aside from a few stubborn Autochrome alchemists.

Monochrome emulsions are much easier to make and will be around as long as the craft of photography is practiced, whether they be available on flexible film from small manufacturers or hand-coated on glass plates or paper. Digital imaging will spin off into an infinity of petapixels and terabytes, but chemical photography will endure.

 

[warden]

I'm not sure threads that comment on the film market, that do not support the idea of film comeback, are talking doom and gloom, or that they are from grumpy old men. That comment is tactically dismissive of all comments not on board with the comeback belief. Perhaps it is because the idea of "comeback" is poorly defined somewhere between hope and true gains in an evolving market.

Remember that film sales peaked in about 2001 at 1 billion rolls. Estimates by Kodak insiders suggested that 98% of that film was C41; mom, dad, sis, bub and my Aunt Betty with Kodak moments processed at the local Photomat. That leaves about 20 million rolls for a variety of shooters of BW, C41, E6, and Kodachrome. In that context 10-20% increases, cited in this site from industry mixers, since 2015, is not huge. At 10-20% it doubles to 40 million in 5-10 years...compared to 1 billion.

It is a reset, a stabilization, at a place and rate from which potential entrepreneurs and downscaled manufacturers can make plans to exploit a known market. It is a comeback or less generously, spin, if you are selling film and associated gear and supplies, looking for investors, on a mission to make film a success into the future, encouraging the community, or simply a passionate community.

As I have reported from our photo department that serves 22,000 students at 4 colleges in the district, our traditional 3 sections of BW have been reduced to 2 with a total enrollment of 25. 2 sections of Intro to Digital had 59. As an update, with the usual fall-off in photo classes in general as the semester settles, we are at 19 (-24%) and 51 (-14%). If drop rates follow the usual rates (consistent for the last 5 years), film will deliver (the retention rate) 8-15 (-67%-60%) and Digital 34-40 (-42%-32%) to the finish line. Importantly, only 18% of film students go on to take more photo classes compared to 38% from Digital classes. That means film will contribute 1-3 students and Digital 12-15 students to further classes in the department.

In broad strokes we have gone from 5 to 2 sections of film since 2011. Next semester there will be only 1 section of Film. It doesn't stand up to any fiscal scrutiny. Even our film MFA sees that and supports the change.

Note; while we provide all the darkroom stuff, the cost of film and paper is a real stress. We just had a nice donation of film and paper and we budget for a certain amount of that to give out. Additionally, the availability of cameras and cameras that do not break down is an issue. I just donated one of my FM2s with an 85 f2; not done lightly. The only way that the camera issue changes is if we have an effective film crusader. We do have one in the department, who teaches at the Pro level and is a former lab owner and Brookie, and film use in his classes is exceedingly rare.

Not a comeback, a reset. You may sit on my lawn.

That was a fascinating post, and I appreciate the actual numbers shared. Thanks.

 

[Cholentpot]

They never left.

Nor did film.

 

[jtk]

I find this to be the case with many smaller niche market forums. If the group is small enough, everyone seems to band together and work on helping everyone else. But as the group grows in size, pissing contests break out and people start to feel disrespected and then the next thing you know, it seems as though it's filled up with nothing but a bunch of "grumpy, old men" whether or not they be old or men.

For example, several of the musical instrument forums I've been on are full of the "grumpy, old men" stereotype. Lots of people can play musical instruments. That's not a small group. But the professional music recording forum is much more tame and helpful. They're a lot smaller of a group, because while there are a lot of musicians in the world, there aren't near a many people who are interested in seriously recording music. Either that, or to be a good recording engineer, you kind of have to have that type of personality that's into helping others more than promoting yourself. My fiancé is big into cosplay. She can tell you that as cosplay has exploded over the last 10 years, the forums that surround it have gone from small, supportive groups, to collections of "grumpy, old men" (even though in reality there are very few old men involved). But the same "everyone's doing everything wrong and everything's being ruined by these new people who just arrived and didn't pay their dues and we all just need to admit the end is here" mentality is still poisoning the water.

Same thing with photography forums. This one has a lot of people in it. And a lot of those people are not very polite. Don't get me wrong, I'll still argue that most of the people here are kind, decent, helpful people. It's just hard for kind, decent, helpful people to overtake a thread like one A-hole can. Now if you go over to the large format photography forum, you'll notice that even though it's made up of almost exclusively old men, it has very few of the "grumpy, old men" type. It's a lot smaller group, and as typical of small groups, they tend to be a lot more closely knit.

...

Makes sense. Well expressed, too.

 

[jtk]

This is my experience as well. I took B&W I, B&W II, and Alternative Processes at my local community college to gain access to a darkroom before I completed mine and to keep my hand in the game, and students were buying film by the single roll and sharing 25 sheet packages of paper. The test strips they used were so small as to be counter-productive. Money was tight after buying a film camera. Film photography is an expensive proposition to community college students who are at the same time working to keep a roof over their head and food on the table. Don't think that doesn't play into course selection.

Yes.

And at least some of those students are hoping to step out of their current, perhaps miserable bill-paying jobs, and into some sort of photo utopia.

Locally, the biggest photo studios hire wedding photo second DSLR camera shooters (second Vs primary and Vs video). A small regional newspaper wants a combo editor and photographer. All newspaper writing jobs require digital and video, along with digital editing...no problem, just about everybody can do that.