Tired of film-users bashing

Phillip P. Dimor · Aug 25, 2008

Drew B. said:
I was at a large photography business in Providence, RI a few weeks ago..and asked about used LF equipment. the young clerk, standing in front of the film sales rack, said, Are you kidding me; We give that equipment a couple of days to sell, then if it is still around, one of us buys it! He was a student of RISD. Film is not dead...its just going to take a while for others to realize it is alive and well.

Was it Hunt's on Point. St? That is my all-time favorite place. Where else can you buy an Omega D2 Reduction Bellows for $5.. I ran to an older gentleman and asked 'How much?'. He looked at it and shrugged.. and said five bucks!

Plus the people who work there (mostly RISD students) actually like photography, are pleasant to deal with and know what they are talking about. I bought 5 Kodak C41 Rapid Fixer kits for $10!! Love that place!

36cm2 · Aug 25, 2008

AutumnJazz said:
the average person's eyesight peaks during their mid-thirties, then starts declining.

Wow, I better get out there and see the world before it starts looking like a daggeurotype.

Market economics, word-of-mouth and B&H Photo will take care of the store that instigated this thread soon enough. For me, like life in general, this boils down to quality, convenience and personal perspective. I can't imagine carrying around an 8x10 view camera, but I'll bet many of you do to produce prints of incredible quality that make you happy. The digital evangelist in one of these posts would snicker at my Rolleiflex and old rangefinder folder, but they are the best combination I've found to get the quality of prints I want and keep me happy while doing it. Hopefully he feels the same way about his D300.

Film's rich history and tradition, its mechanical and tactile allure, its foundation in practical chemistry and its slower and more methodical pacing are all elements of photography that the digital world leaves behind in the name of efficiency and convenience. While my eyesight may be declining, I can't help but see that these are the very elements that draw me to photography. The clerk in any store that I give my business to will always have to understand that. Judging from this forum, he'll have to understand that for many others as well.

David Brown · Aug 25, 2008

AutumnJazz said:
I'm 16, ... I assume that the people who bash film to no end do so because their eyesight is going (the average person's eyesight peaks during their mid-thirties, then starts declining).

No, in my experience is it's more likely people closer to your age.

BTW, our "eyesight" may be weaker, but our "vision" only gets better.

AutumnJazz · Aug 25, 2008

Oh, my eyesight is already crap -- I've had an astygmatism since I was in the womb. I only made that corrleation because of what I witnessed with obsessively crazy audiophiles.

Ever notice how bad a crazy gear nuts photography is (whether digital or film)? I can't think of anyone off of the top of my head, because their crap isn't usually memorable.

Oh, and vision can be clouded by ignorance, arrogance, and a disdain for others.

Phillip P. Dimor · Aug 25, 2008

My first real camera was my parents Pentax K1000. When I was 5 or 6 I would play with it.. When I got to high school and took photography, that is what I learned on and used. I learned how to print in a darkroom. This was before digital was inexpensive. This was also before digital could even compete with film. All the time I spent learning how to do something and get good at it would be wasted by loading paper in an inkjet printer and clicking a button on the computer. I spend all day long in front of a computer, why would I want a hobby that involved spending more time on my ass in front of a computer?

R W Penn · Aug 25, 2008

If salesmam is not polite CALL Freestyle Photo and order anything you want!!

Marco B · Aug 25, 2008

Phillip P. Dimor said:
This was before digital was inexpensive.

Have I missed something? Since when is digital inexpensive??? :confused:

Each time I need to buy a new cartridge for my color printer, I almost choke hearing 10ml of inks costs 15 euro's... that's 1500 euro's for 1 liter of ink!

And when the darn E***n printer starts wasting ink cleaning it's ink channels, I nearly faint thinking "There goes another 10 euros down the drain..." I hate it...

I rarely print anything digitally, except for the odd color shot that I make in between all of the other analog BW work, as I don't have the equipment nor space for color printing in my darkroom...

Rest of the time, the printer is on continuous "Economy" setting to save ink and the environment (the pile of cartridges all humans have waisted probably reaches to the moon by now), or dead, as it should be!

benjiboy · Aug 25, 2008

I think the photographic industry has excelled itself, in a master-stroke of marketing genius, by reinventing photography to ensure it's future existence by making people dissatisfied with the cameras they already own, and replace them with digital models with planned obsolescence built in.
I do say this Tongue in cheek , to some extent , but still think there is a germ of truth in it.

Poisson Du Jour · Aug 25, 2008

benjiboy said:
I think the photographic industry has excelled itself, in a master-stroke of marketing genius, by reinventing photography to ensure it's future existence by making people dissatisfied with the cameras they already own, and replace them with digital models with planned obsolescence built in.
I do say this Tongue in cheek , to some extent , but still think there is a germ of truth in it.

It's not tongue-in-cheek. What you've said is factual and correct. I am using a camera that first came out in 1994 (others are using decades old cameras) and love it; I'll never want another unless I move up to large format entirely (doubtful given sheet film is not even available where I live!). But buyers nowadays are not interested in traditional photographic imaging skills and more concerned with pixels and palettes, capture and eventual capitulation to the ultimately persuasive arguments of sales people (who by and large are not photographers where I come from!).

The whole thing is just sick.

Moopheus · Aug 25, 2008

Drew B. said:
I was at a large photography business in Providence, RI a few weeks ago..and asked about used LF equipment. the young clerk, standing in front of the film sales rack, said, Are you kidding me; We give that equipment a couple of days to sell, then if it is still around, one of us buys it!

That's not unlike the way used bookstores operate. I've had friends who worked behind the counters, and the good stuff that people bring in to sell often doesn't even make it onto the shelves.

benjiboy · Aug 25, 2008

Poisson Du Jour said:
It's not tongue-in-cheek. What you've said is factual and correct. I am using a camera that first came out in 1994 (others are using decades old cameras) and love it; I'll never want another unless I move up to large format entirely (doubtful given sheet film is not even available where I live!). But buyers nowadays are not interested in traditional photographic imaging skills and more concerned with pixels and palettes, capture and eventual capitulation to the ultimately persuasive arguments of sales people (who by and large are not photographers where I come from!).

The whole thing is just sick.

The thing I hate most is how the art,science and history of photography has become an adjunct of the consumer electronics industry, and has become just as disposable. I personally after shooting film for over fifty years still marvel at the beauty and simplicity of the action of light on film, I have spent most of my adult life trying to more fully understand the medium we use, and become a better practitioner , I have no interest in starting all over again .

cmacd123 · Aug 25, 2008

Pinholemaster said:
"Ottawa is bad for ALL of Canada. !!"
There are plenty of stores (through their on-line presence) that will gladly help you.
Wipe the dust from your shoes and walk out.

I have seen limited stock of Film related products at Both Henry's and Galaxy Camera in the Ottawa area. I always found Blacks to be aiming at the 126 crowd even back before digital. And what is a digital camera for most folks but the promise of the 126 Instamatic fulfilled., push the button, hand in the little menory card and get in focus pictures that are almost corectly exposed back.

PKM-25 · Aug 25, 2008

benjiboy said:
I think the photographic industry has excelled itself, in a master-stroke of marketing genius, by reinventing photography to ensure it's future existence by making people dissatisfied with the cameras they already own, and replace them with digital models with planned obsolescence built in.
I do say this Tongue in cheek , to some extent , but still think there is a germ of truth in it.

I have a love / hate relationship with the "D" word.

I shoot on the order of 100,000 still digital and 200,000 time lapse frames per year. When one is rather trend setting in how they go about taking advantage of that technology, well lets just say the profits make it easy to pour thousands into film equipment, film and related items.

Every time I upgrade digital, all the compatibility goes out the window at least for a little while, but I manage.

But nothing gets me more excited than shooting film, so I pour a lot into those resources. The goal is to be shooting 80% film in 5 years.

wildbillbugman · Aug 25, 2008

Check out www.thelightfarm.com and the silver-gelatin forum on apug. I not only refuse to go digital. I refuse to use anything that I cannot make myself. Color film? Check out Color Separation.
You live in a beautiful place!
Bill

Phillip P. Dimor · Aug 26, 2008

Marco B said:
Have I missed something? Since when is digital inexpensive??? :confused:

Good point Marco. The consumer-grade cameras seem inexpensive and a lot of people settle for quick drugstore prints. The pricing on digital cameras has gone down but it is more than likely a false economy as they murder you with the pricing on consumables.

Reminds me of those fancy Gillette disposable razor cartridges.. King Gillette gives you a razor cheap and charges you $20 for blades for the rest of your life.

benjiboy · Aug 26, 2008

You mean like I recently checked the price of a new ink jet printer for my computer,and a pair of replacement ink cartridges cost more than the printer !

TheDreadPirateRobins · Aug 26, 2008

arigram said:
Just flip them the bird and move on.
Life's too short to be wasted and too sweat to be spoiled by assholes.

I think Arigram summed up my feelings best of all.

I find myself fortunate to live close to an excellent camera shop. The owner of the place is a shade older than I am... I think he's 36 or 37, and the employees there are all about my age or younger, and they are ALL film and classic camera enthusiasts. One is a big pinhole enthusiast who also shoots Holgas and Pentax 6 x 7 cameras, another is a view camera portrait maker, another is a TLR nut and appreciator of classic folders... it just goes on and on. Plus, they dispense all sorts of helpful advice on request.

That place is always busy, despite only having two or three digital cameras in the display case, and I hope that continues. As a local business owner (my wife and I own the bookshop a few blocks from this store), I know how difficult it can be to run a local, independent business, so I make sure I buy my film and supplies and whatever else I can think of there to help them pay the bills and keep going.

Don't waste your time with cranky store clerks who won't even give you the time of day.

TheDreadPirateRobins · Aug 26, 2008

benjiboy said:
You mean like I recently checked the price of a new ink jet printer for my computer,and a pair of replacement ink cartridges cost more than the printer !

Yeah... what's up with that?

Then people wonder why we are such a throw-it-away society.

Aurum · Aug 26, 2008

The REAL money is in the consumables for inkjetting and laser printing. The printer itself is the loss leader, or more accurately the low margin sale to get you to locki in to buying a certain brand of cartridge.

These days if a printer of mine breaks, its stripped for parts I can use later and the rest is down the tip in the WEE bin, with all the other trashed electrical equipment I've collected

ajuk · Aug 28, 2008

Edit: oops Deleted

msuchan · Aug 28, 2008

Well all this talk about camera stores pushing digi is nothing new. Sadly its what people think they want in this consumer driven world where the newest thing is always thought of as best. I am lucky to live near a small camera store where the guys really do still love film though most of their customers now use and buy digi from them. They still stock film, paper, and chems. They process film and when I stopped in last weekend they still had a brick of eir in the fridge.

Nigel · Sep 1, 2008

gr82bart said:
I took a friend of mine to Downtown Camera in Toronto, Canada last summer. She wanted to buy a Nikon F6 plus some accessories for it. This would have been a $3000 purchase at least. The idiotic, moronic, wingnut of a salesman (ask me how I really feel about that guy) tried to convince her and me that Nikon doesn't make any film cameras any more and even if they did why would she want to "waste that much money on a film camera" (he actually believed he was helping her!). When the other sales guys also jumped on the bandwagon, that really got us going. Pissed us off to no end. I have never walked into that store since and encourage all film shooters in Toronto not to bother as well. She eventually bought the camera online at B&H Photo in NYC. I am all for Canadian companies doing well, but I could care less if Downtown Camera went under.

Regards, Art.

For the most part, I do my own processing; E-6 & B&W. But for a certain project, I am using C-41 and Downtown Camera will give me a 60 minute turn around on develop only. I also am reasonably sure that they do enough volume to have fresh chemistry, as on successive days last week, I had twin check number 7051 and 7201. As the film was taken in roughly the same time each day, I expect they are doing about 150 films daily.

And, for what it is worth, we tried a few times to do the pictures digitally, but shooting white on white is simply best done with film.

AutumnJazz · Sep 1, 2008

What I don't get is why these stores pushed digital so hard in the beginning. Did they not expect to lose so much printing and processing business?

Phillip P. Dimor · Sep 1, 2008

My local store used to run about 100-150 rolls a day. Digital killed that, namely from Walgreens and Walmart. People would rather go to walmart and shop for everything and have their 4x6's printed while they shop.

For enlargements and retouching this place is the only game in town. A fair number of wedding and commercial photographers still use this place.
As far as I remember, digital camera sales weren't the bread and butter (and never have been).. If they promised to sell only canon (and proved it by having a canon rep come down and confirm this) and advertise canon.. they would get a slight discount on canon equipment. I don't believe the owner made much off each camera sold. He did like to move them as it looked good on paper.

While I worked for this lab, I was encouraged to 'sell cameras'. I was pretty good at it. I didn't lie to people or persuade them. If they came in specifically looking for a digital camera I pointed them in the right direction. I gained more satisfaction out of helping people choose what worked best for them than selling someone something that was overpriced/overkill/over their heads.

I had many people come in with dirty slr cameras from the 70s and 80s.. Olympus, Nikon, Canon, Pentax.. I often cleaned them for free while they waited, loaded film and explained that they all take pictures and for some people, their old cameras produced equal or better results than anything that was new or digital. I never once told a customer that digital was better. Only more convenient if you are emailing photographs or using it for ebay.

Sorry that your shop pulled that but i'm glad she went elsewhere. I would have.

Paul Goutiere · Sep 1, 2008

About this time last year I was hiking with my Hasselblad stuff, tripod etc. at a very special place in the Canadian Rockies called Lake Ohara. You should take your best camera to this place it's worth it. (but be advised, power is only
available at the Lodge. So make sure you have good batteries if you need them.)

When I had hiked for about 2 hours, I again met, two gentlemen I'd seen earlier taking digital pics of everything they could see. We got into a inevitable discussion about cameras. One fellow asked me in all sincerity why I'd take
film gear to a place like this. He told me, gently, as one would a child, about pixels, color rendition, sharpness, lightness. Film isn't really what one should use anymore, apparently. "You can capture so much here, without loading film all the time." "Film stuff is really nice, but out here it just isn't really enough for me."

They had each taken about 200 shots apparently,(in about 2 hours!) while on their way up this trail. I'd only taken 10 so far.

Later, it had begun to snow. Absolutely exquisite scenery now. Snow laden on bright yellow larches. Looming mountains in mist, all that. This is when I saw these two guys fellows again.

They were going back down "dammit". Two batteries had given out on one camera and that was it for him. The other camera had developed an issue with the autofocus.

My camera was on the tripod, it was just fine. It was a very nice day, over all.

Tired of film-users bashing

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency