APS did not fail due to lack of quality. It failed because the film was more expensive than 35mm, the processing using the special lab machines dramatically more expensive, and by the time it was on the market 35mm cameras were available with many of the same features for much lower film and processing costs.
The failure of APS was multiple in cause.
Yes, it was significantly more expensive than processing 135 format, but it also had going against it that the prints were generally not as good as what you could get with a conventional 135 format camera. The smaller film format (the APS film surface area was only 56% of 135 film) helped in the demise as well. Unlike APS digital which does not have inherent grain, that meant that the inherent film grain was magnified by about 1.8x greater! So the upper limit on print size, before grain became objectionable, was smaller than for 135 format. That factor, which is frequently mentioned in retrospectives on the format, limited the commercial success.
Additionally the expense of APS processing equipment made the number of locations that could process and print the film more restrictive, again an impediment to commercial success. And, with fewer and fewer places that can process the format now, that really limited the desirability of used cameras, even though you might be able to buy film.
There are those who like grain. And those who don't care.
moki said:just added a mask from thin black cardboard that leaves 18mm in the middle of the full frame.
Yes they were cute little cameras, but not all ideas are good ones. I can't say I ever saw a 1/2 frame print that wasn't a lot grainier than I like. For me it's like running 35mm film through a 120 camera, why bother?
Mike
Looking up what BrianL was talking about, I discovered a 24x24 35mm format. Are these still around? That sounds really interesting.
I'm down to my last roll of film (Ektachrome 400/5074) and I'm only on frame 2!
It takes me several weeks to go through 36 exposures, when I'm not at some major event!!!
I normally have a 2 week turnaround after a major event.
Half-frame would mean having over 6+ mos of pictures on one roll!! I would rather have the pictures from one event on its own film.
-R
I'm down to my last roll of film (Ektachrome 400/5074) and I'm only on frame 2!
It takes me several weeks to go through 36 exposures, when I'm not at some major event!!!
I normally have a 2 week turnaround after a major event.
Half-frame would mean having over 6+ mos of pictures on one roll!! I would rather have the pictures from one event on its own film.
-R
Get out there and make more pix, keep film manufacturing alive!! - That goes for all of you!!
Then go to the darkroom and keep paper manufacturing alive!! - That goes for all of you!!
Certainly its good to put a camera in your bag and then just walk with a load of film and photograph everything that pricks your eye. Until the builders came 2 wks ago I was averaging 10+ rolls a wk, I would walk from a train station to my university and as I can basically get off at 5 different stations......
The idea that 1/2 frame cameras were made in post war Japan to save on film cost is incorrect. The Oly single frames were made beginning in 1959 and ran into the '80's.
The comments about the poorer print quality are flat out wrong. Olympus proved this time and again in the '60's by making prints up to 16x20 from their "half" frames. They would challenge professionals to tell them apart from full frame prints, and they invariably failed to do so. .
Hello, I have just had a look at your blog sites, which I like, and realise these documents will be valued later for more than their instant and eclectic qualities - They have also reinforced my desire to get a single frame camera, or just use my Retina, to get lots of pics and print whole rolls together by putting an entire film in my 10x8" DeVere and making 32x40" prints of the whole film in one go, as I have already suggested - Put them in with the Oh-So-Phuqing-Serious 10x8" work I do to lighten up my next exhibition, as I have already suggested
The Retina that Rae found for me in Bristol for 20 quid
View attachment 49009
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?