PDA

View Full Version : The Upcoming Death Of Camera Film



Hardrock69
06-01-2011, 09:15 AM
http://beta.news.yahoo.com/much-longer-photographic-film-hold-162516670.html


ROCHESTER, N.Y. (AP) — At Image City Photography Gallery, Gary Thompson delights in pointing out qualities of light, contrast and clarity in one of his best-selling prints — a winter-sunset view of Yosemite National Park's El Capitan peak shot with a hefty Pentax film camera he bought in 1999 for $1,700.

His wife, Phyllis, a latecomer to fine-art photography after they retired from teaching in the 1990s, favors a Hasselblad X-Pan for panoramic landscapes, such as a time-lapse shot of a harbor in Nova Scotia.

Of 11 partners and resident artists at the private gallery in Rochester — the western New York city where George Eastman transformed photography from an arcane hobby into a mass commodity with his $1 Brownie in 1900 — the Thompsons are the only ones left who haven't switched to filmless digital cameras.

But that time may be near.

"I like the color we get in film, the natural light," says Phyllis Thompson, 70, who married her high-school sweetheart 50 years ago. "But digital cameras are getting much better all the time, and there will come a time when we probably won't be able to get film anymore. And then we'll have to change."

At the turn of the 21st century, American shutterbugs were buying close to a billion rolls of film per year. This year, they might buy a mere 20 million, plus 31 million single-use cameras — the beach-resort staple vacationers turn to in a pinch, according to the Photo Marketing Association.

Eastman Kodak Co. marketed the world's first flexible roll film in 1888. By 1999, more than 800 million rolls were sold in the United States alone. The next year marked the apex for combined U.S. sales of rolls of film (upward of 786 million) and single-use cameras (162 million).

Equally startling has been the plunge in film camera sales over the last decade. Domestic purchases have tumbled from 19.7 million cameras in 2000 to 280,000 in 2009 and might dip below 100,000 this year, says Yukihiko Matsumoto, the Jackson, Mich.-based association's chief researcher.

For InfoTrends imaging analyst Ed Lee, film's fade-out is moving sharply into focus: "If I extrapolate the trend for film sales and retirements of film cameras, it looks like film will be mostly gone in the U.S. by the end of the decade."

Just who are the die-hards, holdouts and hangers-on?

Among those who still rely on film — at least part of the time — are advanced amateurs and a smattering of professionals who specialize in nature, travel, scientific, documentary, museum, fine art and forensic photography, market surveys show.

Regular point-and-shoot adherents who haven't made the switch tend be poorer or older — 55 and up.

But there's also a swelling band of new devotees who grew up in the digital age and may have gotten hooked from spending a magical hour in the darkroom during a high school or college class.

Others are simply drawn to its strengths over digital and are even venturing into retro-photo careers.

"In everything from wedding to portrait to commercial photography, young professionals are finding digital so prevalent that they're looking for a sense of differentiation," says Kayce Baker, a marketing director at Fujifilm North America. "That artistic look is something their high-end clients want to see."

Kodak remains the world's biggest film manufacturer, with Japan's Fuji right on its tail. But the consumer and professional films they make have dwindled to a precious few dozen film stocks in a handful of formats, becoming one more factor in the mammoth drop-off in film processing.

Scott's Photo in Rochester finally switched this year stopped daily processing of color print film because fewer than one in 20 customers are dropping off film. A decade ago, "we could process 300 rolls on a good day, and now we see maybe 8 or 10 rolls on the few days we actually process," owner Scott Sims says.

For the hustling masses, there's no turning back the clock.

"There's so many digital images taken every day, especially with mobile media, that never will hit a piece of paper," says Therese Mulligan, administrative chair of the School of Photographic Arts and Sciences at Rochester Institute of Technology.

Even at major photography schools, film is an elective specialty.

"Our entire first two years' curriculum is digital in orientation," Mulligan says. "Those that follow a fine-art option are the first to gravitate toward film. Other genres we teach — photojournalism or advertising or biomedical — have a stronger digital emphasis because of the industry itself."

In a rich irony, film's newest fans — not unlike music aficionados who swear by vinyl records — are being drawn together via the rise of the Internet.

"The technology that enabled the demise of film is actually helping to keep it relevant with specific types of users," says IDC analyst Chris Chute.

But with the film market shrinking by more than 20 percent annually, most other signs point downhill. Analysts foresee Kodak offloading its still-profitable film division sometime in the next half-dozen years as it battles to complete a long and painful digital transformation.

Kodak will churn out a variety of films as long as there's sufficient demand for each of them, says Scott DiSabato, its marketing manager for professional film. It has even launched four new types since 2007.

While digital has largely closed the image-quality gap, DiSabato says a top-line film camera using large-format film "is still unsurpassed" in recording high-resolution images.

"The beauty with film is a lot of wonderful properties are inherent and don't require work afterward" whereas digital can involve heavy computer manipulation to get the same effect, DiSabato says.

"In the extreme, they call it 'stomped on,'" he said. "But a lot of photographers want to be photographers, not computer technicians. And some prized film capabilities — grain, color hues, skin-tone reproduction — can't quite be duplicated no matter how much stomping goes on."

Gary Thompson, who's been exhibiting his best photos for 32 years, captured his Yosemite picture on medium-format slide film — which is 4 1/2 times bigger than 35 mm film — during one of many weeks-long photo jaunts with his wife.

In the digitally scanned, 24-by-30-inch print, the shadow from a dipping sun has climbed halfway up El Capitan. The wooded, black-and-white foreground with its lacy snow patterns stands in stark contrast to the golden glow on the granite cliff face under a blue sky.

"I don't know if I could have gotten this print that large with that kind of detail" using a digital camera without "shooting several images and blending them together in Photoshop," he says. "What attracts me to shoot in almost all instances is the quality of light and there's something about film and working with it and the way it records that I just like."

Thompson feels acutely that he's reaching the end of an era.

"As people's film cameras break down, rather than purchasing another one, they move to digital," he says. "Eventually, we'll probably be doing that. There's a certain nostalgia involved, particularly when I'm working with one of my big husky cameras. That will be sad. But hey, when it happens, I'll adjust."

clarathecarrot
06-01-2011, 10:05 AM
Is this 1996 ?

That is the last time I was able to want to be involved in photography. I was good just not good enough to pay 15,000$ for a digital Nikon set up.

As stated in the article Photoshop and digital is all there will be in a cost effective studio atmosphere and in image bank storage.
Nobody wants prints except if they need something over 8X10 size they just want you to shoot something pro and give them a disk,.. they print at home, that on the end money is gone for pro shooters. That on the end monies, was at sometimes three times more money than the initial time shooting fees, due in large part the costs of labs, that are the ones who suffered the quickest and dissapeared first. IMOP.

Digital has opened many new avenues that create future monies that perhaps film made cost innefective.

There will always be film, for digital lacks the depth even with Photoshop enhancement, and will I believe always create a somewhat hollow in character image. The costs will make it's usage rare.

The last studio I was involved with I was asked to help the owner dissassemble and not even sell but give away the black and white print room equipment, I worked in for so many years, that was back in 2001 I believe.

Nitro Express
06-01-2011, 12:19 PM
Our house had a full on darkroom when I bought it. It had three very nice enlargers and some other equipment. I literally couldn't give the stuff away. Nobody wanted it. There is only one place left that processes Kodachrome film. Pawn shops will not take even the most expensive film cameras. The only beef I really have with digital is the cameras are made cheap and break. I have an old Nikon F3 and it can take a beating. It's what all the freelance photographers used to use due to it's rugged construction and reliability. The new digital cameras just don't hold up as well.

I took film production classes in college. It was all film in those days and us students had to buy it. Film cost was always a huge part of the deal. Digital takes that away. It was always fun to mess around with black and white photography and develop the film and prints yourself. I got quite good at it.

clarathecarrot
06-01-2011, 02:26 PM
The F4 was great but every photo dude I knew said he wished there wasn't a " Toy Race " involved in everything..lol Because they all said, I just wish I could have my F3 back .

Like you said a workhorse of a camera.

You know what's funny ? I was out shooting on location with a friend of mine who is still in the business (the finest photographer and graphic artist in the country as far as I am concerned) I still assist if he needs a dingdong who can push a button and say smile or carry a light stand and not drop it.. whatever..lol.

A couple weeks after the shoot I realized the digital Nikon makes a winding sound at the end of each click of the shutter button ..lol what's it winding...lol, maybe the little pixels on the picture card..?..lol.

Funny stuff..lol

Nitro Express
06-01-2011, 02:35 PM
They just need to make a digital F3 and make it like a tank then they would have something. Right now a Pert shampoo bottle is better quality than the current digital cameras. I'm tired of mold injected plastic parts. Get the machinists back and start making some real cases for once! The good old days of manual shutter speed and F stops and even knowing how to fudge the film speed dial for the right effect. In those days you knew your camera like it was a part of you and you controlled it. It was like you were god. Now it's select mode and push the button hoping the computer won't fuck up.

clarathecarrot
06-01-2011, 02:49 PM
I like the auto focus at the shutter release for action stuff non studio work, but it is so sensitive that I seem to pass is by when depressing the shutter release button cause I am still a snap photographer focus and snap like a gunslinger and include the jerk reaction in my style, The new digitals are so sensitive I am like a cave dude with a club on the button.
They are to light and kinda plastick'y like you say.
I am usually back in the swing by the end of the day but then I won't assist for months maybe and it is deffinetly a art form that demands constant use (practice)...I am out of the loop .

My photographer friend, still has his 5X7 and 8X10 film backs for his rail camera ( huge digital camera set up on a 30 ft long chain driven rail system).. there are a few artists, canvas painters he contracts with, who want actual representation copies for archival purposes.

I don't think he shoots much else with film.

I also miss the darkroom it was always cool and commfotable in there..lol , aint reslpel'n that is makes sense, comm-fotable ..lol

clarathecarrot
06-01-2011, 02:58 PM
They just need to make a digital F3 and make it like a tank then they would have something. Right now a Pert shampoo bottle is better quality than the current digital cameras. I'm tired of mold injected plastic parts. Get the machinists back and start making some real cases for once! The good old days of manual shutter speed and F stops and even knowing how to fudge the film speed dial for the right effect. In those days you knew your camera like it was a part of you and you controlled it. It was like you were god. Now it's select mode and push the button hoping the computer won't fuck up.

Push the film durring processing was a skill also.

Point and click hire a monkey and then you are a god in post production photoshop. < not even tru statement but most of the understanding is not on the camera end anymore< another not true statement but you catch my drift I am sure.

Nitro Express
06-01-2011, 03:35 PM
Push the film durring processing was a skill also.

Point and click hire a monkey and then you are a god in post production photoshop. < not even tru statement but most of the understanding is not on the camera end anymore< another not true statement but you catch my drift I am sure.

Yup. We now live in a virtual world. The ones in power create the illusion everyone else believes is real. Hey, I just described the banking system.:biggrin:

Hardrock69
06-02-2011, 02:05 AM
I am selling my F3. They still go for 1 to 200 dollars on eBay. Just more cost effective for me to use digital, though my Nikon is the lower end of the DSL spectrum (D40X). My Dad gave me a Nikon D1. Those things sold for 5500 bucks originally in 1999. I sold mine on eBay with a lense, a flash unit, strap, 6 batteries and a charger, and the original manual, and managed to get $275 for the lot.

Life is a never-ending upgrade. Though sometimes what they try to pass off as an upgrade, is actually a "degrade".

Nitro Express
06-03-2011, 01:53 AM
Life is a never-ending upgrade. Though sometimes what they try to pass off as an upgrade, is actually a "degrade".

It is with Microsoft products.

clarathecarrot
06-03-2011, 02:56 AM
Yup. We now live in a virtual world. The ones in power create the illusion everyone else believes is real. Hey, I just described the banking system.:biggrin:

Not a true statement but just the same.

We are thru the beautifulness of the constitution and the 2 other papers afforded the right to be the ones in power, but some are slaves to the local constabulary and that there is what is wrong with plastic image parts.

ashstralia
06-04-2011, 06:54 AM
i'll admit to being a tragic classic photography romantic. that said, the real advances in digital have been particularly strong in the sciences. those hubble deep field pics are amazing.... and now anyone with a few grand, an interest, and a semi functioning brain can produce beautiful images. roll on technology, i say.

PETE'S BROTHER
06-23-2011, 03:15 PM
Lytro: The camera that could change photography forever

http://news.yahoo.com/s/digitaltrends/20110622/tc_digitaltrends/lytrothecamerathatcouldchangephotographyforever;_y lt=AsFaC.K5bGzqKv34Wmg0K_Ss0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTNudnUyN jVwBGFzc2V0A2RpZ2l0YWx0cmVuZHMvMjAxMTA2MjIvbHl0cm9 0aGVjYW1lcmF0aGF0Y291bGRjaGFuZ2VwaG90b2dyYXBoeWZvc mV2ZXIEcG9zAzQEc2VjA3luX21vc3RfcG9wdWxhcgRzbGsDbHl 0cm90aGVjYW1l

And, according to AllThingsD, this next-generation camera will be available before the end of the year.
The secret behind the Lytro camera is a new type of sensor that gathers much more information about the light coming into the camera than the sensors found on all other types of digital cameras. Rather than record a finite amount of information about the light in a photograph, as is the case with other camera sensors, the Lytro sensor records the entire “light field,” which is made up of “all the light rays in a scene,” according to the Lytro website. This includes the color, intensity and direction of the rays of light. Other cameras simply record all the light as a single amount of light.

PETE'S BROTHER
06-23-2011, 03:17 PM
http://us.rd.yahoo.com/dailynews/digitaltrends/tc_digitaltrends/storytext/lytrothecamerathatcouldchangephotographyforever/41957133/SIG=116l9p19b/*http://www.lytro.com/picture_gallery

Anonymous
06-23-2011, 03:34 PM
Death of camera film?

Is this like the paperless office?

Don't you just love it how these opinionated morons with high opinions of themselves - yeah, yeah, I know what you're thinking, fuck you, arsehole - are always trying to predict how the future will be & end up failing spectacularly?

Problem with you humans is, you never do learn from your mistakes. At least Dave "T. J." recognizes it every time he makes it.

Cheers! :bottle:

Hardrock69
06-23-2011, 04:08 PM
Hey, unlike paper, the production and processing of camera film has almost come to a complete standstill...

sadaist
06-23-2011, 04:29 PM
Just last month I scanned all of my 35mm negatives into the PC and then tossed them. I had a whole shoebox of them. Insane. But now I don't have to worry about them degrading over time any more or losing them in a flood or fire.

But I miss film cameras. Opening that fresh roll, lining it up & getting it loaded. Taking it to the drugstore & filling out those envelopes. Then going back in 2 days to pick them up and then sitting in the car going through all the pics. Was like opening a great Christmas present every time. The thrill is gone.

Plus, film canisters made great places to keep a bud or two.

I remember the guys who took photography in high school. The actual developing was an art form. Plus they would always spark up in the dark room cause no one could turn on the light to see who did it. Pot smoke always wafted out of that area. What a great time. One friend I know actually fucked a girl during school in the dark room.

Anonymous
06-23-2011, 04:39 PM
Hey, unlike paper, the production and processing of camera film has almost come to a complete standstill...

Like vinyl LPs? :umm:

Cheers! :bottle:

Dan
06-23-2011, 08:14 PM
How Dare They.:D

Seshmeister
06-23-2011, 08:21 PM
This is a bit clever.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/80beats/2011/06/22/new-camera-lets-you-focus-photos-after-the-fact/