future of 4x5 and 8x10 film

[duff photographer]

After four and-a-bit years since the last post on this thread, it was interesting to read the predictions - mostly all wrong !

In an age of 24 mp '35mm' cameras and 65 mp digital backs, film still has its place and quite a big place at that. Digital has meant that the lenses used have had to be either redesigned or built to tighter tolerances to keep up with the higher resolution of the chip. That's something the lens manufacturers never bothered to do with film, even though black-and-white film, for example, has ratings upwards of 300 lp/mm! Now that we have some decent lenses out there we are now also seeing what film can really do in terms of resolution. Yes, we have a longer and more complex processing of the image before we can get a print if we wish to digitise the negative but the end result is worth the effort if we use the best means and materials available to us. That effort for me produced a 6x9 rollfilm in Rollei Pan 25 that easily beat a Hasselblad 39 mp back in an informal test I recently carried out (a test I'll be repeating again with more rigorous methodology so don't take my word for it until then). The film image cost me just under £1 to produce and the equpment needed to make it was ten times less than that of the Hasselblad. Both do the job they were designed well of course.

There are also some inherent restrictions that digital places on photography. Unless we get 4x5 digital backs it will never get past the depth of field foreshortening, the lack of movements on medium format cameras (the recent increase in tilt&shift lenses is a poor substitute), for which 65 mp digital backs are designed for, and the huge cost. Indeed, now that the world is well and truly into recession it will be interesting to see if these high end, high megapixel, digital backs, designed for a specialised market (commercial photography) will survive.

As of today, we still have new film technologies being introduced and after talking to my local but well-known film seller, rollfilm and sheetfilm sells have been increasing.

My prediction? Little change with medium format digital sells receeding a little, 35mm digital receeding a lot, and sheetfilm, as well as rollfilm, making a small comeback. ...or is that happening now?

[Scott-S]

I think if film were to go it would have already gone. I don't know for sure but digital has already captured over 90% of the market. I called Bostic and Sullivan yesterday and asked how business was. He said it was thriving. Freestyle in LA is doing excellent business and they cater to the film world. It's pure economics, if there is a demand for something.... someone will come along and supply it. The film business has already moved into Eastern Europe with Efke, Fomapan, etc.

[GPS]

I think if film were to go it would have already gone.
...
The film business has already moved into Eastern Europe with Efke, Fomapan, etc.

Already?? Moved there?? Wow! Foma was producing film from 1921 in Czechoslovakia (today the Czech republik), Central Europe...

[Drew Wiley]

A lot of sheer bull on this thread. The NSA does do a lot of aerial recon, and satellite
digital is no substitute for the real deal. I know who services their enlargers, who makes their lenses,etc. There is an entire classified facility where digital is completely prohibited. Satellites are like spotting scopes telling you where to look. 9x9 film is still
a lot better for detail and provides a "true color" reference which cannot be easily
manipulated by a potential smart ass with access to a computer. They're not that dumb (it's the job of politicians to be dumb). DEA also uses a lot of film. Commercially there is no real substitute for large format film. Catalog houses etc might be able to amortize a scanning back etc, but how many typical photographers can afford to invest tens of thousands of dollars in fragile finicky equipment dependent upon rapidly obsolescent software? It just doesn't make sense. Most professionals going digital are going to opt for SLRs or medium format. From time to time we might lose a favorite film or paper, but overall the selection and quality of sheet film is better than it has ever been. If you like digital do it. Otherwise have fun with film. Changes have been
occuring for a long, long time. Film evolves too, and there's enough of us using it to
made it profitiable to someone somewhere for the forseeable future.

[Scott-S]

Already?? Moved there?? Wow! Foma was producing film from 1921 in Czechoslovakia (today the Czech republik), Central Europe...

what I meant was they have a greater share of the market. Obviously they are making the film on old machines so it would make sense that they have made film for a long time..

sorry for the confusion

[GPS]

what I meant was they have a greater share of the market. Obviously they are making the film on old machines so it would make sense that they have made film for a long time..

sorry for the confusion

Obviously on old machines? Where do you have that info from? Do you think they make the film on machines from 1921?

[Bob McCarthy]

Interesting thread, I hadn't read it before. I shoot 4x5 and I for the first time saw a file from a Phase 65 digital back. It was the file size equivalent of me scanning at 1800 dpi. I was very impressed with the per pixel sharpness.

So it is an economic issue now. $40k will buy lots of view camera equipment and film and is the primary reason why large format will have a life. After seeing this file, I can attest there is no longer a quality advantage.

What irk's me, is my local processor recently doubled his E-6 processing price to $3.50/sheet.

I suppose I should be glad I have a local lab.

bob

[Herb Cunningham]

I have a 21mp digital camera that i will use for color, which I only occasionally do. Just yesterday I bout an EOS 650 35mm body at a local shop so I can shoot b/w with it. It uses the same lens and the digital, and I don't have to put up with digital b/w, while quite good, is different, and not to my liking.
I don't see film going anywhere.

[Marko]

So it is an economic issue now. $40k will buy lots of view camera equipment and film and is the primary reason why large format will have a life. After seeing this file, I can attest there is no longer a quality advantage.

What irk's me, is my local processor recently doubled his E-6 processing price to $3.50/sheet.

Consider this: less than 10 years ago, Canon D30 cost $3000 and had 3 MP. Today, Canon's lowest DSLR costs about 6 times less $$ and provides about 4 times more MP.

Even if you dismiss Moore's law and linear extrapolation, it is still a fairly good indicator of the future trends. I think it is a pretty safe bet that the technology will get up there and its price will drop down here, and sooner rather than later.

[Barrie B.]

Greetings all,
Sure Digital has been taken up by the mums and Dads as ' The Modern Box Camera' and it does the job well.
The pro`s have taken up digital to keep up with their market , in the commercial world every-body wants results today / tomorrow .

But as Camera Hobbyists the Large Format equipment , with all of the potential movements is a joy to own and use . Sometimes it it not the final image only but the whole process that gives us the satisifaction .

I still enjoy my Wisner 4 X 5 and a few lenses to take Black and White Images , all processed by hand in my home darkroom . I use a Canon EOS Digital for Color Images of the family.

As long as film is still being made and used in Motion Picture Industry and some areas of Science we will still have Film for our equipment ( although we will have less choices )

Barrie B. Melbourne Australia.