Why We Still Love Film: Analog Photography in the Digital Age | NBC Left Field

[adelorenzo]

Nice little 10-minute documentary. If you're not involved in the Instagram and Youtube film communities you may find this especially interesting. Gives a nice glimpse into the people who are driving the recent growth in film use.

 

[warden]

Wonderful! Thank you.

 

[Henning Serger]

Ed Hurley, general manager of film, Eastman Kodak: "We are making twice the amount of film in 2019 compared to 2016, and it is a steady increase.......It is not a fad, it is sustainable. The future looks bright."

And have a look here:
https://www.photrio.com/forum/threa...rong-increasing-demand-new-investment.171280/

Best regards,
Henning

 

[Chan Tran]

Still using film? The guy looks too young to start out with film and if he started out with digital then he is not still using film.

 

[Kino]

I would like JUST ONE TIME for those who object to the "environmental impacts" of film to reach into their pocket and pull out their phone and acknowledge THE ENTIRE impact on the environment that device has and will have over time.

Somehow, that always gets a pass...

 

[btaylor]

Thanks Kino. That’s one of the questions I have about electric cars- what is the TOTAL environmental impact, cradle to grave, of these products? They are not as clean as they first appear.

 

[Lee Rust]

In my opinion, this piece gets it right. Film photography isn't coming back, it's just finding a new niche as an antidote to digital input overload and visual exhaustion. Like Slow Food, it's Slow Pictures. Is it not ironic that the young film enthusiasts seem to be primarily motivated through social media videos? Likewise, the snappy production values of this particular video would have been either impractical or prohibitively expensive using film cinema technology.

I'm aghast at the prices that the camera store guy was quoting. $200 for a plastic point & shoot? I have a half-dozen of those that I picked up for under $10 apiece at Goodwill a few years ago. $3000 for a Contax T3? I've had one of those since 2003 and I know it's around here somewhere!

So it turns out that maybe the kids are alright after all. Let's us old photogs count our blessings and rejoice in this reassurance that film is not dead.

 

[foc]

Like Slow Food, it's Slow Pictures.

A great way to sum it all up.
And just like the slow food movement hasn't gone away, it is great to see the "Slow picture movement" expanding.

A very enjoyable video and great to hear all the positives about film, except the one negative environmental comment but then there is always one isn't there?

 

[AndyH]

Matt Day, Willem Verbeeck, and Nick Carver are three of my favorites. There is so much to love about this video.
Andy

 

[markjwyatt]

I would like JUST ONE TIME for those who object to the "environmental impacts" of film to reach into their pocket and pull out their phone and acknowledge THE ENTIRE impact on the environment that device has and will have over time.

Somehow, that always gets a pass...

It is an opinion. Nothing more.

Nice video, very encouraging (probably intentionally, but still).

 

[pentaxuser]

I would like JUST ONE TIME for those who object to the "environmental impacts" of film to reach into their pocket and pull out their phone and acknowledge THE ENTIRE impact on the environment that device has and will have over time.

Somehow, that always gets a pass...

The only time I can reach into my pocket and pull out a phone that works is when I am within about 50ft of the phone line in the house. I only have a landline phone that operates wirelessly within this distance but I take your point.

pentaxuser

 

[awty]

I would like JUST ONE TIME for those who object to the "environmental impacts" of film to reach into their pocket and pull out their phone and acknowledge THE ENTIRE impact on the environment that device has and will have over time.

Somehow, that always gets a pass...

Yes, smart phones are or will be, by far the most environmentally damaging commodity there is. Film pales in insignificance in comparison.

 

[awty]

I'm always blown away when I see another film shooter out and about, they are always under 30 and full of enthusiasm and have no stupid narrow minded views about brands and dead photographers, everything is good. Often have long chats, pity more aren't doing darkroom, but maybe that will change.
My 20 year old daughter made her first darkroom print the other day with my help and is trying to schedule some time to make more.

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

I live in Maine and I see a lot of tourists in the Summer. Almost every time I go to a popular spot at LEAST one person has a 35mm camera. They do skew younger I suppose though I don't think I'm that old (35). Rarely do I see anyone but pros shooting portrait sessions using a DSLR. Everyone else, smart phones.

It was a mistake to think photography is a zero sum game in which the easiest route to the sharpest image wins. The craft now belongs to a class of activities in which the 'journey' so to speak is a big part of it. Horseback riding, sailing, listening to vinyl records, making bread from scratch, it's all the same feeling. Sitting with your laptop or desktop computer editing photos is not a fun or engaging experience, IMO. I'm glad more people are coming into the fold!

Some of these camera companies might want to do some production runs of film backs or film bodies.

 

[pentaxuser]

No mention of analogue darkroom printing or even much about home developing. There was even one contributor stating that film is a hipster "blip" that has only a few years left. I take it that the middle-aged person was a senior Kodak exec who is bound to say what he did, I'd have thought, irrespective of what he believes or what doubts he may harbour about film's long term future.

Quite a "feel good" video whose overall aim is to give a " green shoots of recovery " view and encourage a warm feeling to its viewers. That's OK but don't we need videos that take a more analytical look at the market today with predictions based on facts

Perhaps I had better explain "green shoots" In the U.K. political scene we have politicians who are seen in the midst of a crisis in front of the TV cameras talking about the green shoots of recovery as soon as there is even a particle of growth in the economy - no matter if the current evidence about the crisis suggests such particles do not amount to more than the so-called "dead cat bounce" that tends to be referred to in a stock market crash.

I'd like more evidence than is presented in such videos as this one. I often feel like the passenger on the Titanic who five minutes after it had stopped and first class passengers were hacking off ice from the berg's sides to add to their gin and tonic, was saying that he feared the situation was more serious than senior members of the crew had either realised or were wiling to admit to.


pentaxuser

 

[Louis Nargi]

Wonderful thread Thank You

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

No mention of analogue darkroom printing or even much about home developing. There was even one contributor stating that film is a hipster "blip" that has only a few years left. I take it that the middle-aged person was a senior Kodak exec who is bound to say what he did, I'd have thought, irrespective of what he believes or what doubts he may harbour about film's long term future.

Quite a "feel good" video whose overall aim is to give a " green shoots of recovery " view and encourage a warm feeling to its viewers. That's OK but don't we need videos that take a more analytical look at the market today with predictions based on facts

Perhaps I had better explain "green shoots" In the U.K. political scene we have politicians who are seen in the midst of a crisis in front of the TV cameras talking about the green shoots of recovery as soon as there is even a particle of growth in the economy - no matter if the current evidence about the crisis suggests such particles do not amount to more than the so-called "dead cat bounce" that tends to be referred to in a stock market crash.

I'd like more evidence than is presented in such videos as this one. I often feel like the passenger on the Titanic who five minutes after it had stopped and first class passengers were hacking off ice from the berg's sides to add to their gin and tonic, was saying that he feared the situation was more serious than senior members of the crew had either realised or were wiling to admit to.


pentaxuser

Look at the gradually rising prices of cameras, the new films entering the market, the number of analog based kickstarters, and take it at face value that Kodak really is seeing higher sales year after year. We are definitely not getting back to a time when your average boomer is carrying an Advantex P&S, but those who are interested in photography enough to bother carrying a camera at all, are at least exploring film.

I'm no longer worried about the future of film in my working lifetime. I've also generally stopped worrying about it as I've realised it's pointless to do so. I just shoot film. I'm about to order some 5x7 Ektachrome from Keith Canham. Times are good.

 

[removed account4]

Yes, smart phones are or will be, by far the most environmentally damaging commodity there is. Film pales in insignificance in comparison.

not so sure about that but its an interesting thing to think about. the photographic industry since the 1830s has not been as un-problematic as one might want to think...

 

[awty]

not so sure about that but its an interesting thing to think about. the photographic industry since the 1830s has not been as un-problematic as one might want to think...

Estimated to be 7 billion smart phones in use https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_mobile_phones_in_use
Not to mention how many billion old cell phones are on land fill. Parts are sourced from countries that dont have a great record for being environmentally friendly.
Even if you went back and added up all toxic chemicals that were used last 2 centuries in film, still wouldn't compare with the smart phone industry in the last 10 years, not even close.

 

[BradS]

Thank you for posting this. I enjoy Matt Day and will now watch some of William Veerbeck’s videos too.

Kino’s right, the public needs to be educated about total environmental impacts and maybe the various industries need to (further?) develop environmental processes and procedures.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I live in Maine and I see a lot of tourists in the Summer. Almost every time I go to a popular spot at LEAST one person has a 35mm camera. They do skew younger I suppose though I don't think I'm that old (35). Rarely do I see anyone but pros shooting portrait sessions using a DSLR. Everyone else, smart phones.

It was a mistake to think photography is a zero sum game in which the easiest route to the sharpest image wins. The craft now belongs to a class of activities in which the 'journey' so to speak is a big part of it. Horseback riding, sailing, listening to vinyl records, making bread from scratch, it's all the same feeling. Sitting with your laptop or desktop computer editing photos is not a fun or engaging experience, IMO. I'm glad more people are coming into the fold!

Some of these camera companies might want to do some production runs of film backs or film bodies.

I agree that film slows me down, allows me to think and compose better. But there's a lot of post shooting work as with digital. You can spend enormous amounts of time in the darkroom or scanning and editing at the computer if that's your thing. I don;t have a darkroom, but i'm sure many people find that just a laborious as sitting by a computer. Also, computer editing can be just as creative as darkroom work. Scanning, editing, and presenting photos on the web or part of a slide show presented on a 75" UHDTV are just as creative.

Also, using film can be an ego thing. Being different than what everyone else is doing has a certain attraction. It sets us apart.

 

[removed account4]

Estimated to be 7 billion smart phones in use https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_number_of_mobile_phones_in_use
Not to mention how many billion old cell phones are on land fill. Parts are sourced from countries that dont have a great record for being environmentally friendly.
Even if you went back and added up all toxic chemicals that were used last 2 centuries in film, still wouldn't compare with the smart phone industry in the last 10 years, not even close.

maybe? IDK im not a scientist and don't claim to have all the information. i would imagine seeing Eastman Kodak was the largest polluter on the planet for decades using all sorts of nasty chemicals to produce film and papers, and the arsenic and cyanide ( or whatever it is ) used to extract and refine silver to be used for film and paper and that's just EK.
maybe cellphones have surpassed that. or like you said it might not be close. they're both pretty bad.

 

[Kino]

I didn't bring up the point to make it contest; just to wish that those who live in the fantasy world of Film = bad polluter and digital = clean non-polluting would wake-up and acknowledge that they are part of the problem too.

 

[NortheastPhotographic]

I didn't bring up the point to make it contest; just to wish that those who live in the fantasy world of Film = bad polluter and digital = clean non-polluting would wake-up and acknowledge that they are part of the problem too.

People just hear 'chemicals' and think 'bad!'. The 'all natural' movement has made enough crazies out there to fill a mega church or two dozen. Analog photography, popular though it may be, is still so niche that the negative impacts are quite small in my estimation. I would say the medium sized city's collective dry cleaning industry is more harmful than what Eastman Kodak is doing.

As far as I know Kodak did do a bunch of work lowering the toxicity of their chemistry. The current Flexicolor LORR, XTol, and I think bleach are low toxicity. And I'm presupposing people are properly handling their fixer and filtering the silver out, which I do.

 

[mshchem]

Very nice!