future of 4x5 and 8x10 film

[Marko]

Okay... you mean like the 17 megapixel Leaf Valeo 17WI for $6500 that has roughly a quarter the resolution of a Mamiya 7 scanned on a 9000, yet costs more than a brand new Mamiya 7 and Coolscan 9000 combined?

Sigh... this is getting tiresome and pointless. I really have no interest in being forced to keep repeating ad nauseam that I do not compare resolution or quality of existing MF backs to 6x7 film, Mamiya 7, RB67 or whatever, as it is today.

Actually, I meant something more along the lines of this one, with double the resolution of the one you mention, with actual bids being placed.

All I am saying is that it is nonsensical to bandy about the in-store $40,000 price tag as an argument of inferiority and then compare it to a $900 price tag off of eBay as further proof.

If you don't - or won't - see the double fallacy in this, then any further discussion is useless. Which seems to be the goal of such approach. Oh, well. I have more important things in life to get upset over.

[Marko]

Van,

Just in case you missed it, the title of this thread is "future of 4x5 and 8x10 film".

I used the MF digital back as a trend indicator.

Which part of it don't you understand?

[Ben Syverson]

The trend is there... The timeline is just a very long one.

99% of the people who will jump from film to digital already have. People who used to shoot 4x5 are now happy with a Canon 5D, because it may be all they need. Yet, film is going strong... hmm...

[Oren Grad]

Therefore, by "full hog" I meant buying a full system new in the store. If used is the comparison of the day, than we look at eBay for both sides of the story, and by that I mean closed auctions where the item actually sold. Otherwise, a comparison makes little sense.

The Mamiya 7 is an unfortunate example that just confuses this aspect of the discussion, because there's a big difference between the price set by the US distributor for US dealers and the prevailing prices in Asia, especially Hong Kong at the moment. So yes, you really can buy a 7II brand new with lens for $2000, from a Hong Kong dealer via eBay, though Mamiya America won't touch it if you need repairs.

[Marko]

The Mamiya 7 is an unfortunate example that just confuses this aspect of the discussion, because there's a big difference between the price set by the US distributor for US dealers and the prevailing prices in Asia, especially Hong Kong at the moment. So yes, you really can buy a 7II brand new with lens for $2000, from a Hong Kong dealer via eBay, though Mamiya America won't touch it if you need repairs.

Any individual example based on price in a discussion like this is unfortunate and only confuses the main point, IMO.

That being said, the $40,000 price tag for one of those backs - currently it is a P65+, 60 MP - being bandied around virtually all discussions like this is a full US retail price. Therefore, it only makes sense to compare it to another US retail price.

Provided, of course, that any such comparison makes any sense at all, since that price is almost always used simply for its shock value in order to derail the discussion and not much anything else. Hence my comparison to a Ferrari.

[Marko]

The trend is there... The timeline is just a very long one.

99% of the people who will jump from film to digital already have. People who used to shoot 4x5 are now happy with a Canon 5D, because it may be all they need. Yet, film is going strong... hmm...

Yes, I'm sure that's why we have "discussions" like this every so often on this and other boards...

[JBrunner]

I do enjoy discussions of megapixels and line pairs and such, and when such and such reaches this point, etc.

I have a bit of a different take. I could give a rats ass when such and such overtakes whatever. I like to shoot film for the qualities it delivers. The way the photograph looks. Sure I suppose I could get a whatsit and blow it through some algorithm set up to mimic a particular thing, but that really doesn't get me to my end. It gets me a facsimile of the prints I already make. To me digital and film are different things. I have seen stunning work come out of both. I shoot a lot of digital commercially, but I'm mostly a film guy when it come to art. I use it for its qualities. The quality has been more than satisfactory for some time. The folks who are waiting for some magic number to appear that signals the time to jump? I don't think it probably matters what they shoot with.YMMV.

[Marko]

Van, you are still missing it - yes, the future of LF film is not just related to digital, it will be decided by digital.

As for these conversations, it's not like we really need them anyway, they're here mostly as a byproduct of the transition - the more something is happening, the loudest some people question it or deny it. If you have to ask what the future of film will be, you already know it but won't accept it.

[JBrunner]

Van, you are still missing it - yes, the future of LF film is not just related to digital, it will be decided by digital.

As for these conversations, it's not like we really need them anyway, they're here mostly as a byproduct of the transition - the more something is happening, the loudest some people question it or deny it. If you have to ask what the future of film will be, you already know it but won't accept it.

Uh huh, just like how it wasn't going to be here in 2005 as alluded to in in one of the first posts in this thread. FWIW I don't really worry about it. If I ever have to I will. If it comes down to it, I'm perfectly capable of making what I need, although my choices will be a bit limited.

[Marko]

I know what the future of film will be

Great, so since we both know what we need to know, there's no need to carry on with this, so we can let the thread sleep for another few years.

Who knows, some of those corporations you mentioned may even choose to come out of hiding by then?