When all of the used film cameras are gone...

[ic-racer]

Most mechanical cameras can be repaired. How much do people want to spend. Today, if it is worthwhile to spend $300 to $500, repair centers would thrive.

 

[Berkeley Mike]

Someone will put out a digital camera that replicates the feel of using a film camera. Film advance and all.

Remember, it has to make the winding sound and the shutter and mirror sounds.

 

[Alan Johnson]

Here is a geared mechanism dating to ancient Greece, about 2100 years old :
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antikythera_mechanism

 

[Sirius Glass]

For you maybe. I feel a bit used. This kind of thread that asks questions but don’t seem to have much reciprocal participation is quickly becoming something I’ll be ignoring. I’m glad your happy but I feel (collectively) like I’m just getting my brain picked with little mutual benefit. But that’s okay... it’s the way of the internet and I’ve, so far, voluntarily participated. I just felt a need to let you know.

+1

 

[Sirius Glass]

There is no demand because of the still large inventory of usable used cameras. Once those cameras are gone there will be market for a new camera. Ilford and Foma will not just pack up and close shop without a fight. The market will be small, but world wide, someone will make a profit. It's not that they need to reinvent the 35mm camera. Backwards engineer a Nikormate, Spotmatic, K1000, the patents are now expired. It a matter of tooling and assembly.

There are some signs of equipment becoming unavailable. For example look at the prices for Nikon and Canon lenses that are 500mm or longer. Those prices are already in the thousands of US dollars and slowly climbing.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Which must prompt the response that if they are using them on digital cameras, then that must surely speak volumes on the quality on the older lenses. New is not always better may be very true.

Even that market is losing to cell phone cameras.

 

[Cholentpot]

Remember, it has to make the winding sound and the shutter and mirror sounds.

Epson got close with a camera like this around 2004 or something.

 

[faberryman]

I suspect we'll be out of film before we are out of film cameras in which case it wwon't make any difference.

 

[removed account4]

Film will "disappear" only if people stop making it. Fortunately, it's as easy as baking a layer cake from scratch to make excellent quality film.
d

couldn't agree more !

 

[Theo Sulphate]

... four-, three-, and two-perf. advance ....

You are far more knowledgeable about ciné equipment than I am, but I do not understand the need for anything beyond two-perf. Perhaps you are making a clever joke that I don't understand.

Someone will put out a digital camera that replicates the feel of using a film camera. Film advance and all.

In 20 years there will be so few people who remember what a film camera was that instead what you will have is a cell phone, or some wearable device, which emulates a digital camera, since all cameras as a dedicated device will have disappeared. The selling-point of the device is that you can go to a touristy spot and "make a photo", but what really happens is that it downloads a stock image made long ago.

 

[Berkeley Mike]

The selling-point of the device is that you can go to a touristy spot and "make a photo", but what really happens is that it downloads a stock image made long ago.

This is brilliant. I had a friend who was somewhat onto Astrophotography. Between the limits of his gear and skills he learned that it made more sense to simply buy the slides that already existed.

 

[ReginaldSMith]

The selling-point of the device is that you can go to a touristy spot and "make a photo", but what really happens is that it downloads a stock image made long ago.

Indeed. I suggested as much a few weeks ago. Photography, or for the purists - cameras- will be virtual. Type words into a program, photographs emerge. Variation only limited by one's vocabulary. The advanced photographers having read Pynchon or Joyce?

Of course there is always a rump legion, scavenging film, dark rooms stacked with every camera body found over years of hoarding, bright lamps, eye shades, magnifying lights, boxes of fittings and fasteners. Specialists with legendary reputations and so on. I'm told there are enthusiasts who fix ancient typewriters just for sending personal correspondence. What Internet!?

 

[MattKing]

For you maybe. I feel a bit used. This kind of thread that asks questions but don’t seem to have much reciprocal participation is quickly becoming something I’ll be ignoring. I’m glad your happy but I feel (collectively) like I’m just getting my brain picked with little mutual benefit. But that’s okay... it’s the way of the internet and I’ve, so far, voluntarily participated. I just felt a need to let you know.

I see where you are coming from, but would just say that this request for other people's input on a subject is way better than those threads where someone asks a question and then argues when the answers are different than what the OP was hoping for.

 

[MattKing]

Thank you Matt. I haven't met many APUGers in person, but I'm very glad you are among them. It's always an inspiration and boost to talk with people who love, and understand, photography and its history. Best to you and your wife, and great fun on your photographic journey. d

Thanks Denise - it was a pleasure meeting you as well.

 

[Berkeley Mike]

I see where you are coming from, but would just say that this request for other people's input on a subject is way better than those threads where someone asks a question and then argues when the answers are different than what the OP was hoping for.

Matt,

I am glad you appreciate this. Further, the first 10 or so comments helped me to refine my question.

 

[Pentode]

I am not asking for input on the program; this is definitely NOT about the academic program. There have been some useful ideas floated however. See post #13.

The program was simply used to make the point that if you look at a fleet of machines and a large body of users, a larger sample of machines and users than most shooters experience, you come to see how they fail. (Others in the community such as Camera shops, repairers, clubs and such have this larger view as well). That done, it got me to thinking about the greater community and the exhaustion of cameras, and what it might mean. So I asked the question, asked for opinions, even predictions, from the users on this site.

Thanks for the clarification. Makes perfect sense.

 

[BrianShaw]

I see where you are coming from, but would just say that this request for other people's input on a subject is way better than those threads where someone asks a question and then argues when the answers are different than what the OP was hoping for.

I quite agree. Mike has a great nack for interesting and thought provoking questions in his threads.

 

[CMoore]

If they all wore out, and there is a demand, then someone will make more. That’s how free markets work.

Are you that Someone.?
Define "demand".
So called "Free Markets" work more on the principle of profit, not demand. Just because 31,000 photographers want a Nikon F3 does not mean somebody will start a business to make them.
There are LOTS of obstacles in the way of Making and Selling a film camera, that far out weigh "demand"

There is probably a large stash of film cameras hidden away which cameras at present have such a low value that the owners cannot be bothered to sell them.
I have quite a few like that.

Yeah, all of my Canon A-Series that are in good shape, have had a CLA, and are worth very little money at present.

 

[ReginaldSMith]

So called "Free Markets" work more on the principle of profit, not demand. Just because 31,000 photographers want a Nikon F3 does not mean somebody will start a business to make them.
There are LOTS of obstacles in the way of Making and Selling a film camera, that far out weigh "demand"

Bingo! I might add "growth" to your principle of profit. In today's world, only GROWTH POTENTIAL excites investors and capital. Consider if you will that the total market capitalization of FORD motor company, a truly massive industrial giant, is less than TESLA, which make about 85,000 cars a year compared to SIX MILLION for Ford. Ford is a no growth company with a weenie stock price.

I don't think any serious capitalist would do anything but laugh at the proposal to invest in a film camera line.

 

[RattyMouse]

Bingo! I might add "growth" to your principle of profit. In today's world, only GROWTH POTENTIAL excites investors and capital. Consider if you will that the total market capitalization of FORD motor company, a truly massive industrial giant, is less than TESLA, which make about 85,000 cars a year compared to SIX MILLION for Ford. Ford is a no growth company with a weenie stock price.

I don't think any serious capitalist would do anything but laugh at the proposal to invest in a film camera line.

Well said. There is ZERO growth in film cameras. None. Zip. Nada. Not even a little bit. Only niche camera makers can survive in today's market.

 

[Nodda Duma]

Are you that Someone.?
Define "demand".
So called "Free Markets" work more on the principle of profit, not demand. Just because 31,000 photographers want a Nikon F3 does not mean somebody will start a business to make them.
There are LOTS of obstacles in the way of Making and Selling a film camera, that far out weigh "demand"

Yeah, all of my Canon A-Series that are in good shape, have had a CLA, and are worth very little money at present.

I disagree on what you think drives someone to participate in a free market, not that there's anything wrong with disagreement. Opinions obviously reflect inner motivation on a topic like this. However, even if I did agree with you, your thought exercise is out of touch with the reality of the analog photography market: You can't compare the current market to that of the 1990s... it's just not a realistic comparison. Perhaps you're just not aware of the type of activity which is actually happening out there Dead Link Removed.

As Ratty Mouse correctly points out above, this is a niche market we're talking about, with no real opportunity to make real money. Ambitious people out to simply make money -- those who want to generate profit -- don't gravitate to a niche market like this. The people who provide products to a niche market do so because they don't want to see that niche die, and are in a position to provide the stuff that their fellow enthusiasts want.

Here's a simple analogy: 120+ years after the invention of the automobile, horseback riding is still a widespread activity. Ask around and you'll discover that most folks don't manage horse stables nor did they start because they thought they could get rich off it ... they do it because they love horses and there's a demand for horse stables, allowing them to earn a living at something they love. More power to them if they can make a living off it.

Dumb analogy, yes, but I don't know of any billionaires who made their money mucking horse stables if you get my point.

 

[Berkeley Mike]

I am pausing at #93 to gather and assess. 40 discrete posters posted 76 discrete contributions, with 22 commenting once in the thread and 18 multiple times. The balance, to total 93, are my comments and comments not necessarily relevant. This is not a survey but an open query whose proportions are self-defining. This only describes what participants chose to focus on.

Few 35mm cameras are made anymore. Medium and Large format seem to be holding at about 5000 to 6000 units per year. Overall, in 2000, approximately 20 million cameras were sold. Only Leica and Nikon still make quality 35mm cameras. Currently the number of film cameras sold, over all, barely shows on any graph. At this time the most accessible stock is used in nature. 32% comment that there are plenty of cameras to last. 8% suggest they will outlast many of us.

Film production has dropped from a high of about 1 billion rolls and 2003 to less than 20 million rolls. Major manufacturers have either ceased participating in the market or downscaled. Small and flexible producers are working hard to exploit a smaller market.10% believe that we will run out of film before we run out of cameras. 13% expressed concerns for the loss of technical skills and technology for creating film and emulsions.

Key to making the ambient supply of used cameras useful demands care in handling. After that, 50% present concern for the issue of maintenance, adjustment, and repair. 13% suggest that confronting that is a questionable ability or desire to do that work and incur that subsequent expense.

As for future repair and maintenance, 18% look to new attitudes about working on cameras and suggest kits for common repairs and an increase in YouTube instructional videos. 18% suggest that the mechanical durability of these cameras is high, and that parts should be available into the future through 3D printing methods. 8% expressed further concern for the loss of technicians.

Going forward, where are the cameras of the future? How many used cameras are there? While direct statistics are not at hand, experts suggest it is somewhere near one or two gazillion. But where are they? 16% suggest that they are stashed away and are recycled in thrift shops of various kinds.

As far as new cameras go we have the traditional markets but these will work on a much smaller scale feeding a much smaller population, much as has happened with film. 13% suggest that demand will define future markets and the oft cited resurgence predicts growth. 5% challenge that model suggesting that the demand in the future, while it may have substance, is static. Absent growth dynamics investors may be hard to find.

Personally, I do not believe that there has been a resurgence but a stabilization of the analog market, having risen from some rock-bottom position. As such, I don't predict much growth. On the contrary, numbers will go down if only due to the statistical demonstration that people quit things over time.

Some folks, 18%, suggest that certain kinds of cameras are still regularly constructed, such as large-format. Others,5%, suggest that cameras can be made by hand. 8% suggest that the phone camera, on the other hand, will absorb users some users.

Two of our participants, 5%, suggest that the ultimate disappearance of the analog camera in any significant numbers will happen 12 to 20 years in the future.

That is what I have so far. Analysis may come later. MM

(OT) Of interest to me was an analogy used by one participant that suggested the model for understanding this change was similar to the model of the reduced use of petroleum as we arrive at its end. While not in this thread, people often use the vinyl record analogy suggesting a robust presence and growth. Data suggests that vinyl sales peaked in 1978 at just under $3 billion, crashing to below $100 million by 1991. The final resurgence as of 2015 is up to 350 million, or 12% of the all-time high. I was struck by this quote: "don't get us wrong, we are pleased as punch that the long player is enjoying this Renaissance, but it might not do us or the industry any good to act like it's a massive revolution."

 

[markjwyatt]

 

[mshchem]

Film will morph into some hybrid technology we can't imagine. It must be some kind of universally appealing product . Kodak was in the late 19th and first half of the 20th century what Apple is and has been over the last 40 years.
The current technology will exist as long as there are artists and practitoners . The camera will not be a limiting factor if interest is there. Hell in 10 years you may be able to 3D print a Hassleblad. I've been working with 4 young adults that are diving in with both feet.
New cameras? They won't look like what was available new in 2000 anymore than today's cars look like a 1950 Buick Roadmaster

 

[AgX]

Perhaps you're just not aware of the type of activity which is actually happening out there Dead Link Removed.

Many of us are aware of that project and are convinced of that being unfounded technically, to say the least. And so far those people did not bring up anything to counter that assumption. But cashed in the money.

And that there are activities of that kind, benign or scam, does only indicate that the initiators see a market, not that there is one.