What happens after ISO 800 is gone?

[B&Wpositive]

Maybe film will all of the sudden become extremely popular and they will have more new films of all speeds than ever before ....I WISH

I think that to some degree that is happening. It is becoming more popular than it was with certain age groups than it was in the early 2000s. Unfortunately, it's not enough to offset declining sales. There just isn't the market there was in teh late 1990s.

However popular film gets with new users, I think the best we can ask for is to not lose many more types, and occasional upgrades or additions to best-selling emulsion lines, such as Ektar, Portra, etc. However, I still think that anything over 400 ISO is potentially in danger. How many new film users are using 800 or 1600 speed color film? I'll bet most are using ISO 100 and 400. I still say (speculating based on past experience) that Kodak E200/Elite Chrome 200 will be the next slide film(s) to go away (though hopefully not this year).

 

[fschifano]

So, you could take the two aforementioned ISOed color films (800 and 50) and process them in the same tank and they would come out right? Asking because I don't process color film but this sounds wrong to my thinking.

Yes, that's exactly right. The process is standardized. You can extend development for a "push" with C-41, and the results look like it too. The process for box speed with any C-41 film regardless of speed or manufacture is standardized. So an ISO 800 color negative film really is and ISO 800 speed film. It is not "pushed" ISO 400 speed film.

 

[Tim Gray]

I think one of the problems with the high speed films is not that digital has killed them, but they don't keep as well. Digital has obviously surpassed film a long time ago in terms of getting grain-free images at speeds higher than 800. Nobody is using T-Max 3200 because of the lack of grain. However, those films don't keep as long, so a coating run has to be used up faster than say something like Plus-X. If it doesn't get used up fast enough, Kodak dumps the rest, and loses money on that run.

It is a shame, because I rather like TMZ and Portra 800. Hope they stick around. I'm buying them and using them.

I really do wish I could get something like Vision 3 500T in 35mm. That'd be great.

 

[B&Wpositive]

I think one of the problems with the high speed films is not that digital has killed them, but they don't keep as well. Digital has obviously surpassed film a long time ago in terms of getting grain-free images at speeds higher than 800. Nobody is using T-Max 3200 because of the lack of grain. However, those films don't keep as long, so a coating run has to be used up faster than say something like Plus-X. If it doesn't get used up fast enough, Kodak dumps the rest, and loses money on that run.

It is a shame, because I rather like TMZ and Portra 800. Hope they stick around. I'm buying them and using them.

I really do wish I could get something like Vision 3 500T in 35mm. That'd be great.

Tim: Yes. Keeping stability was talked about in one of the recent interviews that Scott Sheppard did. That, to me, is one of the main reasons that ISOs over 400 are more in danger.

 

[Ektagraphic]

I'll have to take a look at my films and see if the higher speeds seem to expire quicker.....

 

[B&Wpositive]

I'll have to take a look at my films and see if the higher speeds seem to expire quicker.....

They do...even if they're not marked as such. I remember someone here saying he throws away film ISO 800 or higher that has under a year left till expiration date. I think that's extreme though. You can simply add a stop of exposure compensation and use it if it's slightly outdated.

 

[IloveTLRs]

Superia 1600 and Natura 1600 aren't the same things, are they? Natura seems to be quite popular over here.

 

[2F/2F]

Five years is a long-ass time in terms of technology, economics, and other things that will influence the future of film materials.

Five years ago, things were still pretty cool, as far as what materials one could get. Five years before that, we were just a little way into the film-to-digital switch in the journalism/magazine industry, and we still had a huge selection of analog materials. Five more years, and I think color film photography will either be totally dead, very close to dead (give it another five if not dead yet), or literally on its last legs.

Even though digital cameras have not, IMHO, improved in any hugely significant way from a practical standpoint in five years now (I would say ten, but I don't want to start any craziness here), we have lost tons of analog materials. Of course, the ones that go first are the ones that digital largely replaces for most shooters. Tungsten films (white balancing in camera takes care of that), high-speed films (high ISO settings take care of that), instant prints (LCD previews and tethering/wireless take care of that), transparency films (speed of digital work flow renders the entire reason for their near-total dominance in commercial photography moot), etc.

In other words, the coolest of the cool analog $hit is what is the "most replaced" by digital!

It is not any one specification of any one digital camera that has killed the films we have lost so far, but the innate ability of the digital medium to provide the things that these special, unique, and esoteric materials provided...and that were the very reason for their existence in the first place. The loss of the largest variety of instant prints has already occurred, after a gradual picking away at selection. The loss of all tungsten films (sans MP films) has already occurred, after a gradual picking away at selection. High speed films have been gradually picked away. They are even removing Tri-X Professional now, of all the damned things! Fuji Pro 800 was axed, and amid complaints, was brought back. The way I see this, it now must be hanging by a thread; a money-losing product kept on board just to keep people from getting too pissed off at the company at large. (Take a hint from this, Kodak.) It is bound to go again, as I can't see the market changing much. (Lots of complaints to Fuji, but how many of those complaining will actually buy huge quantities of the film on a regular basis?) Where else do you see high speed films going except for bye bye?

However, a medium speed daylight film has actually been added recently...as if we need more of them! The irony to me is that what I view as the most unique and special analog materials, the ones that give the results the most different from digital, are the very ones that digital has killed off. I would gladly see all the low, medium speed, and daylight film go away long before all the tungsten, high-speed, and transparency stuff that we have lost, and that we will soon lose totally. I would much more gladly use digital as a replacement for these lower-speed daylight materials (which I rarely use in comparison to the higher speed stuff) than for what has already been lost, or will be soon. I see less difference there. It is not about maximum ISO speed (higher with digital for sure now), or instancy (new word, BTW ), or easier color balancing, but about the individual properties and character of these lost products; fundamental aspects of an image's aesthetic and hence emotional qualities, not mere details of workflow, convenience, and ease. The focus on detailed, consumer-oriented specs as opposed to over all aesthetic effect by most shooters is a vapid judgment of materials, IMO, and has killed all these cool films and papers.

All of this is why I see the run-of-the mill stuff that 90% of plain-ol' photographers use (100/160 daylight color neg films, and a few 400s, maybe) sticking around longer than the cool unique stuff, that has already largely made its exit. The reason for these special analog materials existing in the first place is nullified by the very existence of digital (instant previews, in-camera white balancing, and high ISOs). The very existence of digital does not nullify anything that the lower-speed daylight films provide. Therefore, there is less for these materials to fight against; just details of whether the market for film in general is big enough to support their existence. Meanwhile, the high-speed/tungsten/instant/transparency stuff has to fight against something that, for most people, nullifies the entire reason for their existence (which was originally to do all the cool stuff that digital now does for most people).

 

[B&Wpositive]

All of this is why I see the run-of-the mill stuff that 90% of plain-ol' photographers use (100/160 daylight color neg films, and a few 400s, maybe) sticking around longer than the cool unique stuff, that has already largely made its exit. These reason for these special analog materials existing in the first place is nullified by the very existence of digital (instant previews, in-camera white balancing, and high ISOs). The very existence of digital does not nullify anything that the lower-speed daylight films provide. Therefore, there is less for these materials to fight against; just details of whether the market is big enough to support their existence, not the entire reason for their existence (which was originally to do all the cool stuff that digital now does for most people), like the high-speed/tungsten/instant/transparency stuff has to do.

That about sums it up. A self-fulfilling prophecy for certain. Twenty years from now, students will ironically be saying "Man, color film is so cool!", even though all we will have left in color is Gold 400 and Ektar 100. LOL! Nearly all serious film shooters will probably be using primarily black and white by that time.

 

[2F/2F]

That about sums it up. A self-fulfilling prophecy for certain. Twenty years from now, students will ironically be saying "Man, color film is so cool!", even though all we will have left in color is Gold 400 and Ektar 100. LOL! Nearly all serious film shooters will probably be using primarily black and white by that time.

Sorry to be a downer, but I think we will be hard pressed to find much b/w in 20 years, let alone color! Just one man's opinion...and not a happy one at that. If Ilford survives, we may have some films then. We shall see.

 

[Athiril]

I'll have to get into coating plates then...

In any case, when I finish being a student and get some reasonable $ aside, a few thousand+ on a big freezer and a bunch of film sounds good

 

[perkeleellinen]

Superia 1600 and Natura 1600 aren't the same things, are they? Natura seems to be quite popular over here.

This was a hot topic on a flickr film group once. Some people claimed they were different, another claimed he had a letter from Fuji that said they were the same.

I looked at both data sheets and couldn't spot where they differed.

 

[hrst]

Sorry to be a downer, but I think we will be hard pressed to find much b/w in 20 years, let alone color! Just one man's opinion...and not a happy one at that. If Ilford survives, we may have some films then. We shall see.

Sorry, but I just can't see your logic no matter what. You are just repeating... "film will die film will die no I don't want it but film will die boohoohoo"... Giving no arguments.

People are buying film and want to use it, like you and me.

So, it is made.

It is indeed logical that 5 years ago people went digital. It was a new medium that time and gave new possibilities to many.

But exactly what makes people abandon film now or in 2015, in large scale??

 

[AgX]

I don't consider keeping stability that a problem. In times when at least special films will be sold via postorder companies and not via the photo shop next street, keeping films in cold, very cold storage should not be that a problem logistically and financially for a major dealer.

 

[hrst]

Yes, I agree. And for manufacturers, storage problems of more sensitive films mean simply that there is less choices. That doesn't mean it wouldn't be wise to manufacture one or two good ISO 800-1600 films. If it is now profitable to manufacture even 8 different ISO800-1600 films, it is 2x more profitable to select 4 from them and manufacture them. Then it's also more difficult to make a decision to discontinue them, because it's always more difficult when there is no substitute. I just can't understand the "chain reaction" theory. It's just the opposite; by discontinuing less used products, a manufacturer can restore the balance and get more profit from the remaining ones and keep them in production. That's the very basics of any industrial process.

 

[Athiril]

But exactly what makes people abandon film now or in 2015, in large scale??

A full 6x7cm digital back 30mp+, 14 stop sensor, the ISO quality of 35mm sensors, capability to shoot movie mode as well for $1k?

The low light sensor from a dSLR (7D, 5DII, other etc) placed into a 100ft magazine, with implemented bicubic filtering down rather than nearest neighbour, and 14-bit 4:4:4 encoding for the H.264 codec? Or same sensor in a 400ft or 1000ft magazine, with 4:4:4/14-bit no down-rezzing compressed losslessly with something like FFV1 to a fast magazine internal SSD RAID setup?


Dont think we'll be seeing those for a while... but the magic lantern guys going for the codec replacement, so we may get to configure the H.264 into the 4:4:4/14-bit profile after all.

 

[hrst]

Athiril,

What you describe is far away and will take a ridiculous amount of R&D cash, especially the cheap 6x7 sensor you mention. Work is in progress, I know, but it's still too far. I don't know if it's possible at all in the near future because of the economic recession, and we cannot predict the future so in detail. I happen to know a bit about the underlying silicon manufacture process and its problems. As you know, it was a huge step to be able to make a affordable 36x24mm sensor and it took many more years than was expected. On the other hand, these 36x24mm digital cameras were such good that most of those who had considered "going digital" and was just waiting for better cameras, were convinced and went digital. We, who remain, will either remain in film forever (seeing something in film that digital just cannot provide; it can be rational and/or irrational), or wait for something really big happen in the digital world. I can't see it yet at all.

Personally, I find that I often use argument "film has better resolution and dynamic range" when asked why I prefer film over digital. But, that's just an excuse. I would continue shooting film even if that kind of digital camera came up, because it wouldn't take away these features from film, and film is a different way to make the same things; photograph -- and it's up to personal taste which way you prefer. I believe that many of us are like that.

(Sorry about talking digital, but this has a strong relation to the original question from the economical and marketing point of view and has to be discussed if we want to talk about the subject and not just scream our fears out irrationally. However, it seems to me that the whole topic is on the wrong forum. If we want to discuss about pushing color films to higher EI's, the OP posting and title is way too misleading.)

 

[Athiril]

I'd continue shooting film too, I wish I could get my hands on the ancient Fuji SuperCCD Medium Format back (Japan only) though still.. that'd be amazing.

 

[Ektagraphic]

We should try to convince them for Ektar 1000.

 

[kadath]

I find 800 to be my favourite speed (for both black and white and colour), so I hope not. Usually 800z for colour. I don't really get the argument about digital replacing colour films for high ISO. That's usually where digital falls apart, to my eyes. I can't tell the difference (on first glance) for bright well exposed daylight, with low contrast, between film and digital at ISO100. In situation where one is using a high ISO, it's often in a scene with a lot of contrast, and perhaps mixed lighting etc. In those situtations, you often get those weird colour shifts on digital, especially around lights, together with a 'flat' colour rendition. Looks awful to me. Doesn't seem to bother most people, as it's rarely mentioned. Given the choice between digital and not taking the picture, I wouldn't bother taking the picture. What's the point if it doesn't give you the result you like? So if ISO 800 film is gone, my answer would be that I just wouldn't take pictures in that situation.

 

[B&Wpositive]

Sorry, but I just can't see your logic no matter what. You are just repeating... "film will die film will die no I don't want it but film will die boohoohoo"... Giving no arguments.

People are buying film and want to use it, like you and me.

So, it is made.

It is indeed logical that 5 years ago people went digital. It was a new medium that time and gave new possibilities to many.

But exactly what makes people abandon film now or in 2015, in large scale??

At this juncture, I disagree with you. I firmly believe that b&w will survive almost indefinitely. Maybe not all of the different types we have today, but the basic selection will be intact. Tri-X 400 will be available for the forseable future.

 

[B&Wpositive]

I just can't understand the "chain reaction" theory. It's just the opposite; by discontinuing less used products, a manufacturer can restore the balance and get more profit from the remaining ones and keep them in production. That's the very basics of any industrial process.

As C-41 usage declines (if it declines any further, that is) good processing would become more expensive, leading to less usage. That is the chain reaction. Moreover, Kodak has demonstrated that it does not care about specific emulsions if they do not sell well. Fuji as a whole company appears to care, as demonstrated by their withdrawl of the 800Z discontinuation, and their revival of Velvia 50. However, neither company can keep selling products if the processing architecture is not profitable. Therefore, if Kodak and Fuji were to discontinue their ISO 800+ color films at nearly the same time just by chance, we would be left with only ISO 400 and under.

A full 6x7cm digital back 30mp+, 14 stop sensor, the ISO quality of 35mm sensors, capability to shoot movie mode as well for $1k?

The low light sensor from a dSLR (7D, 5DII, other etc) placed into a 100ft magazine, with implemented bicubic filtering down rather than nearest neighbour, and 14-bit 4:4:4 encoding for the H.264 codec? Or same sensor in a 400ft or 1000ft magazine, with 4:4:4/14-bit no down-rezzing compressed losslessly with something like FFV1 to a fast magazine internal SSD RAID setup?


Dont think we'll be seeing those for a while... but the magic lantern guys going for the codec replacement, so we may get to configure the H.264 into the 4:4:4/14-bit profile after all.

And the average photographer has the money to buy this sort of equipment???

I find 800 to be my favourite speed (for both black and white and colour), so I hope not. Usually 800z for colour. I don't really get the argument about digital replacing colour films for high ISO. That's usually where digital falls apart, to my eyes. I can't tell the difference (on first glance) for bright well exposed daylight, with low contrast, between film and digital at ISO100. In situation where one is using a high ISO, it's often in a scene with a lot of contrast, and perhaps mixed lighting etc. In those situtations, you often get those weird colour shifts on digital, especially around lights, together with a 'flat' colour rendition. Looks awful to me. Doesn't seem to bother most people, as it's rarely mentioned. Given the choice between digital and not taking the picture, I wouldn't bother taking the picture. What's the point if it doesn't give you the result you like? So if ISO 800 film is gone, my answer would be that I just wouldn't take pictures in that situation.

Clearly, many of us do not have an interest in keeping up with the latest digital advances. If our eyes were open, we would have already noticed that the latest digital looks good at high ISO. Good is subjective, of course; film can also look good at high ISO, but only if you like the "look" as many of us do.

 

[perkeleellinen]

Gloomy topic.

I use 800 colour films, 800Z and Superia, I print them onto Endura (another threatened product). I like 800ASA because it allows me to stop down a bit more or to choose a higher shutter speed, this allows me to be a little less accurate with focusing or a little less rigid when I brace, this means I can shoot a bit more sloppy than with slower films. Over time I've found the people I shoot (family & friends) don't like to wait for me to take a picture, they get bored. Being a sloppy shooter means people tolerate the camera more and I can get nicer pictures.

I think it's impossible to know what will happen when/if the fast films go. We have no idea what alternatives will be sold at that point. Worrying about the future is a deadly game, more so when it's based on speculation.

 

[hrst]

I'm surprised how gloomy, negative, even irrational and unrealistic you people can be at times. Get a grip, please !

Strongly related to the subject, Finnish Broadcasting Company today brought out some interesting news in national news broadcast;
http://www.yle.fi/uutiset/kotimaa/2...-_varifilmit_loppuneet_kaupoista_1469873.html
A quick translation (I noticed again how difficult English becomes when you have to actually translate a given text....):

Surprised by eagerness to photograph -- color films sold out

Video [showing a nice Hasselblad ]: Picturesque cold winter recorded also with film cameras.

Snowy, cold winter has inspired people to record the nature with traditional film cameras, in addition to digital cameras. To stores and wholesalers this peak has been a complete surprise. Color films are almost sold out in the whole Europe.

Businesswoman Marita Schuvalow from Helios Lappeenranta is astonished as she monitors her clients who come to buy film.

- Color film cameras are used very much, a last few months have been a clear demand peak, Schuvalow says and shows her small remaining film selection.

Increasing demand for film has been a surprise for stores, wholesalers and even manufacturers. In the last few years, shooting film has declined as digital photography has increased, so no one couldn't prepare for the increase in market. Many film types are sold out in the whole Europe.

Recarding to Fuji Finland Ltd., films would have been sold more than 40% more than usual, if they had been available. More film is ordered, but getting them from the Japanese manufacturers takes several months.

Exceptional circumstances inspire

According to businesswoman Marita Schuvalow, especially older people who haven't moved to digital photography have unearthed their film cameras.

- I use film because it's easier to make prints, says Teuvo Luntinen from Taipalsaari, bringing a film for development.

- This winter I've had to unearth my old camera simply because I have to record fantastic snowy nature as photographs.

Marita Schuvalow encourages people to continue using their film cameras, even if there was a temporary lack of films.

- Many people erroneously think that there are no kind of films available or developed anymore. Our minilab have been working this winter more than in many years, says Schuvalow. She says many people have invested in their camera systems so much that it would be unwise not to use them at all.

Film becoming a subculture

Film is still used much in Finnish camera clubs. Chairman of Saimaa Camera Club, Tatu Kosonen, has also an economical reason to use film camera.

- I don't have money or desire to move to digital SLR's, as I have acquired good film cameras with the years, says Kosonen, photographing snowy granite quarry in Ylämaa.

- Moreover, digital hasn't reached the quality of film yet!

Kosonen compares film and digital photography to art. - Digital photography is like sketching with pencil, whereas shooting film is carefully planned and actualized oil painting, he says.

Kosonen has also noticed that photographing with film is not only a declining hobby of aging people, but there is a whole new subculture of young people shooting film, who for example like to reproduce the grainy look of old press photographs.

- For example skaters and graffiti gangs value black-and-white film as some kind of cult product, says Tatu Kosonen.

YLE News / Marja Manninen

 

[peri24]

thanks for the info hrst i enjoyed!
has anyone know where is 35mm fuji 400H in europe?? i couldn't find not even a single roll the other day in any shop here, but after checking european providers there is seems to be out of stock everywhere.
Blame it to the snow??