Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

• 

  Mark, 19 Jan 2006 @ 3:10am

  
  

  another abandons film business

  I think about all this does is illustrate who is in the "snapshot" or amateur photography market. Those who catered to this market by concentrating on programmable and automatic cameras are finding out how little customer loyalty they bought as these customers switch to smaller, lighter, lab-independant print-on-the-home-PC image makers. There will be film cameras for many decades to come, and the fringe manufacturers of films will go by the wayside. There are still things film can do that digital cannot. Like record images without batteries.

  [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • 

    Anonymous Coward, 19 Jan 2006 @ 3:19am

    
    

    Re: another abandons film business

    I guess you can either carry tons of film, or tons of batteries. Personally, I can get more pictures out of four AA batteries than I can 13 rolls of film.
    
    A good friend of mine is a professional photographer, he used to tow the same company line as you do, however his "film is better for x" senerios are getting fewer and far between.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • 

      Mark, 19 Jan 2006 @ 3:41am

      
      

      Re: another abandons film business

      Oh, no doubt there. Film will come to be the mark of unique individuals. Like sextants, Altair computers, and the original wireless, ham radio. I think there's a difference between dead and "glory days" though...Film will definitely become part of the fringe as us old farts die off.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • 

        ?, 19 Jan 2006 @ 6:29am

        
        

        Re: another abandons film business

        I would argue that sextants are still produced, and realitively easy to produced when compared to what is involved in the production of film. Altair computers are collector items, and don't get used up like film, and ham radio, while unique, still has a niche market that is based off of common technology and won't be going away any time soon as the common man can pick up a book, and build a ham radio setup.
        
        I just don't see that with film. I could be wrong, but I don't think the film industry has "home brews" and the production of film will become more and more difficult, and costly as the demand for it dies off (and thus, companies with the ability to produce such products), and that is what will end that era.
        
        The only saving grace might be some executive at a major imaging corporation like Kodak who is willing and able to sell the company, and its stock holders on

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • 

    Pianomahnn, 19 Jan 2006 @ 6:34am

    
    

    Re: another abandons film business

    The obviousness of your last comment just made me laugh. =)

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • 

    Steve, 19 Jan 2006 @ 3:43pm

    
    

    Re: another abandons film business

    I haven't seen a serious film camera without batteries in 20+ years.
    Even the high end digital cameras can not come close to film quality 8x10's. But I can't get an 8x10 within minutes form a film camera
    Cameras:Fuji Pro S2 Digital, Nikon N70 Analog, Nikon coolpix 930 Digital, Yashica T4 Analog.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

• 

  Mark, 19 Jan 2006 @ 5:52am

  
  

  Diehards

  There are still diehards to listen to vinyl records on turntables. Some audiophiles are even building new tube ampliphiers because they sound more "pure" than solid state. There will be film users for a long time too. There are always fringe groups, catered to by small boutique companies. But when all the big companies get out of a technology and only the boutiques are left, it is reasonable to say that the technology is question is dead (for the mainstream).

  [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • 

    Michael, 19 Jan 2006 @ 6:05am

    
    

    Re: Film Diehards

    As with the slide rule, the 8-track, and the vinyl album and cassette tape, the film camera demise is written on the wall. We don't need people to abandon them- only the manufacturers to stop upgrading and producing them. Like the Commodore 64, no matter how fond you are of it, there just isn't anything new available for it anymore. Digital cameras, on the other hand, will continue to evolve, getting better while getting cheaper.
    
    I have a Minolta and a Nikon 35mm at home... interested, anyone???? :)

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

    • 

      Vasco DaGameboy, 19 Jan 2006 @ 8:03am

      
      

      Re: Film Diehards

      Right now, digital technology (at least consumer digital technology) cannot produce a picture as rich as film. There's a reason that movie makers don't shoot with videotape, which has been around for quite a while. Tape is great for newscasts and home movies (I doubt anyone still uses a super-8 film camera to shoot little Bobby's soccer games anymore), but when making a movie, film is still the overwhelming choice. Yeah, George Lucas uses digital, but he's not making Gone With the Wind either. I imagine CGI effects work better on digital than sprawling landscapes and close, interpersonal exchanges.
      
      My point is that consumers who mostly use cameras for pictures of the kids and Uncle Leo's 80th birthday party will eventually find film to be too cumbersome and go completely digital, just as they abandoned home movies for video cameras. Professionals, however, will be some time before chucking film. Just like 8-track lived on for years in the radio and recording industry, long after consumers dumped it, film will be around for all of our lifetimes, just in more of a niche environment.

      [ link to this | view in chronology ]

      • 

        David, 19 Jan 2006 @ 8:54am

        
        

        Re: Film Diehards

        Developments in the world of digital photography have been so rapid that these remarks are already obsolete, with most professional photographers already transitioning over to digital shooting. While small-sensor digital point and shoot cameras may not be able to match 35mm film standards yet, you need only move up to an entry-level DSLR to get quite close and to a mid-level DSLR to get all the way there. The resolution of film may exceed that of the digital sensors used in sub-$2K cameras, but ultimate resolution is actually not that relevent. What is relevent is the resolution required to produce prints of common sizes which are limited by the ability of the human eye to distinguish. Even for 13" x 19" prints, affordable DSLRs meet this standard. And, since these sensors exhibit very low noise compared with the grain of film, and combine this with accurate color, overall quality can be said to already exceed film (especially since you don't lose additional resolution in making a print as you do when transferring a film negative to a print positive in an enlarger).
        
        Movie production is a different story. It's one thing to make a 6-12Mpixel still sensor. It's quite another to make a sensor that can achieve high-resolution per frame and output at least 24 frames per second. You also require the ability to store and transmit the data, which is voluminous even when good compression algorithms are applied. Finally, for maximum end-to-end quality, you also need to retrofit theaters with projects that are equally capable. This all adds up to quite an expense, which is the key factor keeping the film industry from moving digital in a bigger way. However, as costs come down and as theaters increasingly compete with higher and higher quality home theater setups, these upgrades will take place.
        
        Equating modern digital film technology with home video is a bit ridiculous. VHS home video is approximately the equivalent of less than 0.1Mpixel per frame. DVD quality is still only about 0.25Mpixel/frame. By the time you're up to full-resolution HDTV at 1920 x 1080, you're at about 2Mpixels/frame ... an order of magnitude more data compared with VHS. For digital movie projection, we're talking 4Mpixels/frame. Home movies have nothing on this and are not really an appropriate point of comparison.
        
        David

        [ link to this | view in chronology ]

        • 

          Andrew Strasser, 19 Jan 2006 @ 9:39am

          
          

          Re: Film Diehards

          Video stores are still doing wonderfully now that they've gotten DVD's to replace the film they used in videos. The is going to cause an instability of every job related cameras though as with digital media. I don't need your sales associate for help. Just another way technology is costing our country jobs that will never be replaced. Not the greatest news, but it's newsworthy for sure to see that the job market that is at an all time high on un-employment after the Hurricanes of this last summer/fall season. I'm sure this helps our job market wonders.

          [ link to this | view in chronology ]

• 

  Jim Pearson, 19 Jan 2006 @ 6:23am

  
  

  Fun factor...

  I absolutely love our digital Nikon... no doubt!
  
  However, it is still fun to use our Nikkormat (ca. 1969) to take film pictures. The experience of actually taking the picture with a great camera is fun, and waiting for the pictures to come back is a lot like Christmas, waiting for the surprises.

  [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • 

    Felipe Castellon, 24 Dec 2006 @ 9:08am

    
    

    Re: Fun factor...

    I completely agree. I love using my fe2 even more than my 8008s. I use my digital much more, but I don't get those things that you just described. The challenge, the surprise and just knowing that I was an important part of the process.

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

• 

  Chris H, 19 Jan 2006 @ 8:18am

  
  

  No Subject Given

  I like Digital over Standard for a few simple reasons.
  
  1) they can last forever if you keep safe backups
  2) you can edit out red eye, or more if you're good
  3) you can email them

  [ link to this | view in chronology ]

  • 

    admin, 19 Jan 2006 @ 4:05pm

    
    

    Re: No Subject Given

    can they really last forever? There are already
    concerns about the longevity of CD-Rs and similar
    media and of course there is the concern about
    playback. Will there be a CD drive to extract your
    pictures of Johnny's 2nd bday in 20 years? Or will you
    be caught in a never ending cycle of having to
    backup to new media and new devices ever 5 years?
    Digitial only has one advantage and that is convenience -
    something that would only get top billing in our current day
    where even 30 seconds is too long to wait.
    

    [ link to this | view in chronology ]

• 

  Howard, 19 Jan 2006 @ 8:42am

  
  

  Texas DPS finally allows me to use digital camera

  I am a Texas Certified Concealed Handgun License instructor, and one of the things I have to do with each student is supply two photographs of each student. The only thing they would accept is "passport" style photos, using Polaroid film, which is getting ridiculously expensive, and harder and harder to find. The DPS finally announced that they would accept digital photos this year -- a major savings of both time and money for me.
  --
  Texas Concealed Handgun License Classes

  [ link to this | view in chronology ]

• 

  Wes Baker, 19 Jan 2006 @ 12:22pm

  
  

  Correction: 35mm is Dying

  While I shoot digital, the truth is that 35mm film is dying...and only to a certain extent. The demand for film products has lessened and more film people are going to digital. What this means is that the amount of film products out there are enough to satisfy the current 35mm users. Used glass can last a good time if kept properly. Plus, professionals can still use their medium and large format films and cameras, and those lenses can date from 1960s.

  [ link to this | view in chronology ]

• 

  Lordarutha, 12 Mar 2007 @ 1:43am

  
  

  Indoor Photography

  Film is a niche market and as said above it will carry on until us old farts die out, one thing I have noticed with digital photography that I don't like is the quality of indoor shots. Show me a digital camera than can even come close to film taking pictures inside a dimly lit room, or for that matter night shots outside, leave that digital shutter open too long and the 'noise' becomes unacceptable. Digital and Film both still have their uses.
  
  Apart from the proffesional photographers how many digital prints do you see? real prints that you can hold in your hand and show people without having to turn on the tv and dvd player for a slide show or turning your computer on.
  
  Most people seem to be happy looking at the pictures on their lcd and I can gaurantee 95% will never be printed.
  
  Now that is a shame!

  [ link to this | view in chronology ]

• 

  Anonymous Coward, 19 Jul 2007 @ 6:52am

  
  

  pangit mani uy!!!

  [ link to this | view in chronology ]