Will film be banned?

[Wallendo]

I saw several online post on Earth Day about the environmental consequences of shooting film. On the other hand, not enough people care about film to actually ban it. Environmental regulations may drive costs up high enough to put smaller manufacturers and labs out of business on the other hand.

 

[radiant]

I saw several online post on Earth Day about the environmental consequences of shooting film. On the other hand, not enough people care about film to actually ban it. Environmental regulations may drive costs up high enough to put smaller manufacturers and labs out of business on the other hand.

Before that happens I think we should see a farewell to consumer electronics. If film photography is considered bad, I only imagine what happens to manufacturing of new mobile phones or digital cameras. Or just McDonalds trash alone. Plastic water bottles.

 

[George Mann]

Without new film cameras being made, films existence will eventually be irrelevant.

 

[CMoore]

I'll put that on my list of things to worry about. There is still a little room left, way down here at the bottom.

That's funny.

I can promise you, no politician has film on their radar. The vast majority of people don't even know you can still buy film.

I am always kind of Shocked/Surprised...and i should not be..... at how often people ask "Can you still buy film."
No reason most people in the world would think it is still made.
I get the Same/Similar reaction about vacuum tubes.

Don't bring to attention that avgas is still leaded.

I did not know that
Why is that.?

Without new film cameras being made, films existence will eventually be irrelevant.

Yeah.
It does seem that, Sooner or Later, those two points are going to cross.
Unavoidable i would imagine.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

What if the government decides that film is too wasteful? All those chemicals and everything polluting the environment. Would you support the cancellation of film like fossil fuels will be stopped in automobiles? What should we do to protect our hobby?

At some point it will happened. By the same time cows will be banned as another big source of pollution.
Do you know they already print fake food by 3D printer. So, it is closer than many of you think.

But, I'm holding to my film cameras. Once ban will happened, easy convertion to digital via global shutter will became widely availible.
I'm going to like it. I'm into film cameras mostly by their look by now, not because of film.

 

[Cholentpot]

That's funny.


I am always kind of Shocked/Surprised...and i should not be..... at how often people ask "Can you still buy film."
No reason most people in the world would think it is still made.
I get the Same/Similar reaction about vacuum tubes.


I did not know that
Why is that.?



Yeah.
It does seem that, Sooner or Later, those two points are going to cross.
Unavoidable i would imagine.

Leaded fuel runs much smoother than unleaded. Unleaded gas can lead to engine knocks or failure to combust. If your driving in a car that's fine, car mumbles a bit and you don't even notice. In an aircraft not so much, engine goes and you go with it.

 

[CMoore]

Leaded fuel runs much smoother than unleaded. Unleaded gas can lead to engine knocks or failure to combust. If your driving in a car that's fine, car mumbles a bit and you don't even notice. In an aircraft not so much, engine goes and you go with it.

Oh Wow.......I thought that had all been figured out a long time ago.
I guess the gas companies never found a good substitute for ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,is it Tetraethyl.?
Germany was dying to get their hands on that stuff in WW2.

 

[Cholentpot]

Oh Wow.......I thought that had all been figured out a long time ago.
I guess the gas companies never found a good substitute for ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,is it Tetraethyl.?
Germany was dying to get their hands on that stuff in WW2.

I'm no expert but they developed a synthetic way back in the 50's already but it's not used.

 

[pentaxuser]

Leaded fuel runs much smoother than unleaded. Unleaded gas can lead to engine knocks or failure to combust. If your driving in a car that's fine, car mumbles a bit and you don't even notice. In an aircraft not so much, engine goes and you go with it.

You may be right but personally I am more concerned about the gremlin on the wing tearing at the engine cowling. That Canadian can't be on everybody's plane. Hell we can't even rely on Dana Andrews whom I thought was exceptional given his experience was confined to single engine fighters in WWII

A bit of lead never did me any harm as I hope is now obvious

pentaxuser

 

[Pieter12]

At some point it will happened. By the same time cows will be banned as another big source of pollution.
Do you know they already print fake food by 3D printer. So, it is closer than many of you think.

But, I'm holding to my film cameras. Once ban will happened, easy convertion to digital via global shutter will became widely availible.
I'm going to like it. I'm into film cameras mostly by their look by now, not because of film.

I'm glad you are so certain of what will happen and be available in the future.

 

[Pieter12]

Leaded fuel runs much smoother than unleaded. Unleaded gas can lead to engine knocks or failure to combust. If your driving in a car that's fine, car mumbles a bit and you don't even notice. In an aircraft not so much, engine goes and you go with it.

Lead in fuel slows combustion under high compression. The solution is lower compression-ratio engines, like modern automobiles. Airplane engines are pretty rudimentary, like an old VW beetle's. In fact, some kit planes use beetle engines.

 

[Cholentpot]

You may be right but personally I am more concerned about the gremlin on the wing tearing at the engine cowling. That Canadian can't be on everybody's plane. Hell we can't even rely on Dana Andrews whom I thought was exceptional given his experience was confined to single engine fighters in WWII

A bit of lead never did me any harm as I hope is now obvious

pentaxuser

We ran out of gas Doc.

Lead in fuel slows combustion under high compression. The solution is lower compression-ratio engines, like modern automobiles. Airplane engines are pretty rudimentary, like an old VW beetle's. In fact, some kit planes use beetle engines.

I knew someone would know more. Take it way Pieter12!

 

[Ko.Fe.]

I'm glad you are so certain of what will happen and be available in the future.

Leica M3 reversible conversion is already available. With all components inside.
And if you’ll keep your eyes and ears open, you’ll realize how veganism is back and growing. I never seen so many people around me been into it. Those who are outnumbering westerners and westerners going into it.

 

[Pieter12]

Leica M3 reversible conversion is already available. With all components inside.

Not too sure why anyone would want to go to the bother to convert an M3 to digital. There are already digital Leicas available and adapters to use Leica lenses on other digital camera bodies. The only advantage of a conversion is keeping the optical viewfinder and rangefinder. You'd be better off with a Fuji Xpro and get to keep the Leica in unmolested condition.

 

[Agulliver]

Before that happens I think we should see a farewell to consumer electronics. If film photography is considered bad, I only imagine what happens to manufacturing of new mobile phones or digital cameras. Or just McDonalds trash alone. Plastic water bottles.

Logically you are correct but people see the word "chemical" and get scared.

If I take time to think about developing B&W film at home, I use a plastic tank and bottles which I've owned for 15 years and which will doubtlessly last another 20 years unless I am very careless. Indeed after I die they'll likely still be good and someone else. If I make up 1 litre of developer and 1 litre of fixer, which is what I typically do, they are about 80% water. The chemicals used are not especially harmful to the environment or to me, though I won't be drinking it. When I restarted developing film after a few years hiatus in 2013, I did check with the water companies here that it's still OK and the official line is that B&W and colour developing chemicals for film and paper intended for home use are of no concern as their treatment plants are more than capable of dealing with them.

But people see the word "chemical" and panic. Without thinking of all the environmental nastiness needed to bring their smart phone, tablet and television into their home.

 

[Kino]

When I restarted developing film after a few years hiatus in 2013, I did check with the water companies here that it's still OK and the official line is that B&W and colour developing chemicals for film and paper intended for home use are of no concern as their treatment plants are more than capable of dealing with them.

In my experience in the USA, all the sanitary sewage treatment facility Managers would rather be roasted alive than give affirmative answer to treating home lab discharge.

 

[Nodda Duma]

I could only see film being banned in an era of heavy dictatorial censorship.

Without new film cameras being made, films existence will eventually be irrelevant.

Fortunately, new film cameras are currently being made.

 

[removed account4]

Fortunately, new film cameras are currently being made.

WOOOOT!

I could only see film being banned in an era of heavy dictatorial censorship.

!!! exactly ! film and seltzer water cause of all that CO2

 

[radiant]

I could only see film being banned in an era of heavy dictatorial censorship.
Fortunately, new film cameras are currently being made.

Yes and this world will never run out of working film cameras anyways.

 

[Pieter12]

Logically you are correct but people see the word "chemical" and get scared.

If I take time to think about developing B&W film at home, I use a plastic tank and bottles which I've owned for 15 years and which will doubtlessly last another 20 years unless I am very careless. Indeed after I die they'll likely still be good and someone else. If I make up 1 litre of developer and 1 litre of fixer, which is what I typically do, they are about 80% water. The chemicals used are not especially harmful to the environment or to me, though I won't be drinking it. When I restarted developing film after a few years hiatus in 2013, I did check with the water companies here that it's still OK and the official line is that B&W and colour developing chemicals for film and paper intended for home use are of no concern as their treatment plants are more than capable of dealing with them.

But people see the word "chemical" and panic. Without thinking of all the environmental nastiness needed to bring their smart phone, tablet and television into their home.

The chemical use in processing film at home is negligible. The chemical use for commercial processing (such as motion picture film by the hundreds of thousands of feet--not to mention the film used for release prints) and the use for producing film might be of more troubling. Of course, the switch to digital in that filed has reduced the demand significantly. I believe the amount of water used to produce and process film that could be more of a concern.

 

[Wayne]

In my experience in the USA, all the sanitary sewage treatment facility Managers would rather be roasted alive than give affirmative answer to treating home lab discharge.

Mine lets me dump it right in the treatment ponds

 

[MattKing]

Mine lets me dump it right in the treatment ponds

It is the only way they get people to visit.

 

[KenS]

What if the government decides that film is too wasteful? All those chemicals and everything polluting the environment. Would you support the cancellation of film like fossil fuels will be stopped in automobiles? What should we do to protect our hobby?

I'm tempted to 'say' FIGHT BACK until such times that digital cameras can make use of 'swings and tilts' that are (usually) available on large format cameras that provide much greater..and probably more 'information' after scanning than you might 'get' from the majority of digital cameras.

Ken

 

[kevs]

What if the government decides that film is too wasteful? All those chemicals and everything polluting the environment. Would you support the cancellation of film like fossil fuels will be stopped in automobiles? What should we do to protect our hobby?

So many questions already...

What if the government decides that film is too wasteful?"

Whose government, yours or mine? There's more than one government.

Would you support the cancellation of film like fossil fuels will be stopped in automobiles?

No. I don't think it's likely. Film is now a very niche market whereas fossil fuels are ubiquitous. It would be more effective to ban the landfilling of electronic waste than to ban film. Mind you, some governments don't use fact and reason as guiding principles... I guess raw emotions are a more common currency these days.

What should we do to protect our hobby?

Man the barricades, grab the pitchforks and occupy Mobberley! One out -- all out! Keep the Red Flag flying! Up The Revolution, Comrades! Oh hang on... wrong century!

 

[DREW WILEY]

All the film processing effluent in the country at his point of time is tiny compared to the groundwater pollution being caused by the digital tech plants. They aren't clean industries by any means, unless only software development is involved. E-waste based on the constant replacement of consumer electronics gadgets is a toxic pollution nightmare. Then there are the really big polluters. When rules are enforced, which is rather rarely even here, the parties who get picked are usually those with the smallest lobbies. Home darkroom types aren't on anyone's radar; just too small. But the DEA does monitor distributors of darkroom chemicals, cause there are people stupid enough to actually smoke some of those chemicals, including chromium and vanadium salts.

I wouldn't be worried about any potential Hollywood uptick in actual film consumption either. Yes, a hypothetical revival of something like the true Technicolor process wouldn't be viable anymore due to restrictions on dichromates. But it wouldn't be viable on an expense basis either. A single Monsanto plant in someplace like Louisiana puts out thousands of times more serious pollution than all the world's annual photographic chemicals combined. The EPA is so overstretched and understaffed now that they can't keep up with even the worst offenders.