Thank you.
The comeback?
-
- Thread starter marcofimages
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale FS: Gundlach-Manhattan Hyperion Diffusion 7in f/4 Lens
- Started by B.S.Kumar
-
For Sale FS: Linhof Recessed lens board
- Started by dirkfletcher
-
For Sale Leica M4-2
- Started by chriscrawfordphoto
Forum statistics
To get back on the rails, this thread is the frontier of re-establishing film.
To answer on topic.
I don't think film is coming back, in the sense that is was ever gone.
What I think, is that it's in transition towards a niche.
That does not imply that it will be small and insignificant, unless you compare it to the days of film-only.
I would think that maybe 1-2 out of 10 photographers will be shooting film/both from this day forward (when we are talking about people that has some interest in photography above phone-snaps).
But, this depends on the influx of new gear, old cameras are going pretty strong still, but they do not last forever.
Anecdotal evidence? Not sure, but the main bulk of analog-related videos on youtube are from people under 30, which is a very good sign.
Not sure how large format and alternative processing will fare in the future. Large format demands strange equipment and processing options that go beyond what most enthusiasts tend to venture into. Alternative-processing is hampered by ever stricter customs and transport regulations, as well as an increasing terror-paranoia. Ordering chemicals (toxic and potential dangerous ones) can get you on a list you don't want to be on.
I'd disagree there and say large format will be around longer than 35mm or medium format given the current status quo.
Judging by the number of kickstarters for large format cameras it appears they're easier to diy/cottage industry than other formats. Glass plate doesn't even need the film companies to be around.
Given that things like the Contax T2 are fetching ridiculous prices, surely one of the major players must be looking at launching a new 35mm compact camera ? Heck, if Fuji have still got the materials/processes for the Klasse they could start knocking those out again.
I see a marked tendency to over-value the presence of younger people into the craft. This is nothing new to any craft. How many times have you heard someone say "children are our future" in relation to just about anything. As to the most videos made by people under 30 idea...remember these are the kids who used to program our VCR for us oldsters. Perhaps they are simply more comfortable with video production.
I don't get this at all.
So, according to you two who answered me here, large format and old people is the future of analog then?
Give me a break
It is VERY significant that people between 20 and 30 (and younger) take up analog as a way to express themselves and spread the very idea to their peers, my experience is that they shoot small format to medium-format, I have yet to see someone younger fiddle with large-format.
I am giving my impression here, the alive and present part that I see online (not on photrio, but various social media) is actually driven by younger people, not by people of 50-60 and above.
Take that as a positive, the young are actually the future, they are also the ones who spend most money and set trends and is exactly what the film-community needs to survive as a meaningful business for film and equipment-manufacturers in the long term.
MattKing
Moderator
I think the youtube data shows more that young people are the future of youtube rather then young people are the future of film.
It would be really weird if most of the youtube (and online generally) presence for film was old people, but that wouldn't have much to do with film.
But I am heartened by the youthful enthusiasm for film seen on the internet, and think that it bodes very well for film. It just is hard to measure the effect and extent of that enthusiasm.
It would be really weird if most of the youtube (and online generally) presence for film was old people, but that wouldn't have much to do with film.
But I am heartened by the youthful enthusiasm for film seen on the internet, and think that it bodes very well for film. It just is hard to measure the effect and extent of that enthusiasm.
I see how you got here; not my intention at all. Let me clarify.
My comment is that the analogue-is-growing supporters often point to the influx of "young people" as a major indication of growth. Sales people, vendors and manufacturers like to say this.
No, this is a common event in most interest groups and what is happening in analogue is unexceptional. Statistically while their presence is sustaining, as normal fall-off of interest occurs it is not nearly enough to infill as current users ...uh...pass on. I've posted this data before.
I think you misunderstand me. As it stands with no one making new 35mm cameras and with film supply reliant on manufacturers who may be in financial trouble and/or trying to pull out of film, 35mm isn't sustainable in the long term.
Large format is, purely because it's easier to cottage industry / diy.
The majority of film photography videos on youtube is by a younger demographic (let's go with <35 yo), but it isn't overwhelmingly so. I can think of many youtubers who are more seasoned and produce content that regularly or exclusively shows film photography content. Steve O'nions, the Slanted lens, Shoot film like a boss, Craig Sheaks, Azriel Knight, Darkroom Dave (maybe stopped a year ago), Tim Layton, Trangent, Hood's photography (maybe stopped), and on and on. I am really missing others, I know. I just can't come up with their channel names at the moment.
Actually, now that I think about the film channels I'm struck by a couple of things: more newer channels pop up than older channels drop out, the range of demographics of content providers is varied, too. It's male dominated, but not exclusively so. (I don't know of any older women with film channels.) Lina Bessonova has an excellent channel. These channels also span a wide range of experiences from newcomers, returners, to former Ilford employees (Steve O'nions and Darkroom Dave) and college photography professors (Trangent).
Film isn't going to be a billion roll a year enterprise again, but the tea leaves seem to show that there is a resurgence of public interest in film photography. I'm happy about it.
Actually, now that I think about the film channels I'm struck by a couple of things: more newer channels pop up than older channels drop out, the range of demographics of content providers is varied, too. It's male dominated, but not exclusively so. (I don't know of any older women with film channels.) Lina Bessonova has an excellent channel. These channels also span a wide range of experiences from newcomers, returners, to former Ilford employees (Steve O'nions and Darkroom Dave) and college photography professors (Trangent).
Film isn't going to be a billion roll a year enterprise again, but the tea leaves seem to show that there is a resurgence of public interest in film photography. I'm happy about it.
A few observations.. Until last year Poundshops in the UK sold film. The majority was sold to young people, based on my admittedly anecdotal experience. I suspect a lot went to re-sellers, student cities ran out as soon as it hit the shelves. It's difficult to say whether those who want to try the film experience stick with it, but I think the older demographic of this board is the exception. Most people my age (mature ; ) adopted digital with great enthusiasm and without a backward glance. Some of the take up is people who are surprised film still exists and want to try it again.
What data there is suggests a steady rise in film use, but no bonanza. The aspirations are different now, you would never find a Leica M owner shooting out of date stock exclusively. Today, that is unremarkable. It's more of a scene now. I'm not sure how healthy that model is for long term film use.
Last edited:
This paragraph sums up my worries exactly. It is an adventure, something new to try, even a little quirky and forms a phase. Adventures, newness, quirkiness, phases etc tend not to last.
pentaxuser
Don't worry, be happy ...
Not everyone who tries film photography for the first time ever or the first time in a decade will stick with it. On the other hand, not everyone will quit it after year either. No one person can will film photography into a stable state...forever. This 'scene' or fad with the youth has been going on for a decade now, which means many of those 20-somethings a decade ago are now 30 somethings and still sticking with it.
Or it could all end tomorrow. Then photography becomes everyone making their own emulsions and developing negs in coffee.
The one thing I can say for sure is that it is better for me (and you, I presume) that there is a resurgence of some kind, instead of a decline. Enjoy the upside.
Spot on!
"Digital is predictable and boring"
When I sit down to write it has never occurred to me to say the alphabet is "predictable and boring."
Do you think good technical skills and good tools make film photography "predictable and boring"
Is it ever honest to blame boredom on anything other than oneself?
Analog is instinctive. It's comforting. A five year old gets analog, if you want to be warmer sit closer to the fireplace. It's the way people are wired. The most successful digital devices mimic analog, case in point the iPhone, iPod etc.
The most encouraging sign to me is looking at what the new ownership of Ilford is doing. The web presence is alive and well. Beseler coming out with a new light source, they are definitely putting more effort into the photo side of the business. Kodak managed to produce a hit with the new Ektachrome .
Schools are finding out that film photography is a great tool to teach human interaction, awareness of the non-virtual (real?) world . Film requires some planning, there are physical barriers of light intensity, vibration, depth of field.
There's still far too much used equipment to see new pro cameras. But there will come a time.
The most encouraging sign to me is looking at what the new ownership of Ilford is doing. The web presence is alive and well. Beseler coming out with a new light source, they are definitely putting more effort into the photo side of the business. Kodak managed to produce a hit with the new Ektachrome .
Schools are finding out that film photography is a great tool to teach human interaction, awareness of the non-virtual (real?) world . Film requires some planning, there are physical barriers of light intensity, vibration, depth of field.
There's still far too much used equipment to see new pro cameras. But there will come a time.
I would prefer if we used hieroglyphics. I am much more comfortable at illustrating my thoughts in pictures than I am with writing.
Yes, defiantly. Thats why Im making my 14x17 pinhole camera. A camera is just a box with a lens up one end and a sheet of film/ sensor up the other end.
Im more stimulated by things that dont follow the usual formula and things obviously made by people.
Society has largely become seduced by convenience, congratulate each other on our shopping, take photos of meals others have prepared and liking pictures that are similar to our own.
This thread is do banal. I've been on the east coast and the west and some places in between..there's lots of wet plate and alternate process photography going on. Even cameraless photography...almost every major city is opening darkroom spaces. Film is never going to be what it was that's a fact but it's not going and the first manufacturer to make new decent 35mm or medium format camera is going to do very well...digital has only helped analog so now you can make digital negatives
I teach both; neither is instinctive but digital is a more refined learning tool.
- Joined
- Feb 17, 2014
- Messages
- 142
- Format
- Multi Format
To some. As a teacher you must know that not everyone learns the same way.
Digital is a better learning-tool for basic photography, because you can see the effects on your settings immediately.
(some people actually have a hard time figuring out stuff like aperture, shutter-speed, ISO and focal lengths)
The setting you used are also stored in the RAW data, so you can go back any time to see exactly what you shot a particular photo at.
With film, unless you write things down, you have no idea what you did to achieve something particular.
For processing and composition etc, neither are better or worse as a learning-tool I guess. (different processing, same issue regarding composition and expression)
Ansel Adams and other shooters used a polaroid to see what the hell they were doing, before inserting a sheet of real film in the field, I am sure if he lived today, he would at least use some digital camera instead of the (non existing) Polaroids..
An anecdote from last week. I'm again in grad school and so, live in a student town. Became a member of the town's photography club, whom have a traditional film group.
Every month an open darkroom meeting is held and on the last few there were some teenagers becoming regulars. Some of them just shot their first films the last summer. The established members noted a surge of young people.
Some student associations have a camera club, and so, went to one last week. 10 people of the room, of which 3-4 recently picked up film and liked its characteristics and slower philosophy. There was infact a small darkroom within premises that sat in disuse the last 5 years and is being recommisioned now.
Every month an open darkroom meeting is held and on the last few there were some teenagers becoming regulars. Some of them just shot their first films the last summer. The established members noted a surge of young people.
Some student associations have a camera club, and so, went to one last week. 10 people of the room, of which 3-4 recently picked up film and liked its characteristics and slower philosophy. There was infact a small darkroom within premises that sat in disuse the last 5 years and is being recommisioned now.
He probably would.
In the preface of "The Negative"(1982) he wrote: "I eagerly await new concepts and processes. I believe that the electronic image will be the next major advance. Such systems will have their own inherent and inescapable structural characteristics, and the artist and functional practitioner will again strive to comprehend and control them"
+1
Can you explain what this means? Can you also explain how a five year old “gets” analog?
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |