Advice on further investment in LF equipment

[Mike Delaney]

Advice on more investment in LF equipment

May I consult the oracle once more? I started to get very interested in LF somewhat more than a year ago and have since invested a fair amount of my modest resources in a basic system with one lens, thanks to advice gained here. Now I’ve saved up enough for a second one (there isn’t much cheap used equipment over here; LF photographers are rare) and a scanner. However, I’ve been reading the threads on the future of film recently and have got worried about whether I’m investing in a sinking ship. I hadn’t thought that this might happen so quickly as some people are forecasting. While this is perturbing to all of us, as I’ve only just started and just a few months ago had the pleasure of seeing my first colour slides, the thought that the rug might be pulled from underneath me in a couple of years time is particularly galling.
I don’t want to begin another major future of film discussion, I’d just like to know what you would do if you were starting out now - jack it in and go digital or build up your LF gear in the hope that film (colour in my case) will survive another ten years maybe? Buying a big freezer and filling it with colour film doesn’t seem an option if I can’t develop it myself and the labs close too.

And a second - technically perhaps naive - question about the digital backs from Phase One etc: if such items ever became more affordable in 10-15 years time (?), could they be used with a 4x5 camera and LF lenses just like a roll-film holder, or would that not be possible? (Just hoping that there might be a way to stop my lenses going mouldy in the cupboard if film does dry up). Any comments or advice would be very appreciated!

Cheers,
Mike

[Leonard Evens]

Given the size of the amateur and art photography market, I think film will be with us indefinitely into the future. But if major film manufacturers stop producing the film, it is likely to get somewhat more expensive, and we will have fewer choices. Black and white film should be available at not unreasonable prices, but color film may get very expensive. Developing b/w film should remain possible at home. If worse comes to worst, you can compose your chemicals from scratch. Processing color may be a bit more difficult at home, but there will probably still be some labs which will do it. But you may have to ship your film to a remote site and pay premium prices to have it developed.

Similar remarks should apply to printing paper, but ink jet printing has advanced to a stage where it is practical to scan and print digitally. Also, there should be no shortage of labs which will produce large prints, either b/w or color, from digital images. The price of printing your own large prints at home should also come down.

At the same time, digital backs for large format should come down in price and improve in quality. As a worst case scenario, you may find you have to switch to a medium format view camera to take advantage of the highest quality digital backs. That may mean investing in new view camera equipment, but it won't mean learning a whole new way of doing things.

These, I think, are all worst case analysies. As things now stand, Ilford seems committed to b/w film, and as long as people like us keep buying it, there should be an incentive for them to keep making it. I'm 73, so I don't worry that much about the indefinite future, and I'm assuming that large format view camera photography will be around as a going concern for the rest of my lifetime, which could be15 years or more, if I'm lucky.

[Nick_3536]

At the same time, digital backs for large format should come down in price and improve in quality.

Why? How big is the market for LF digital backs? Rumour was when MF was selling well the whole US market was less then 100,000 units a year. The LF market must be a small fraction of that. How do you get any sort of savings from scale with such a small market?

The only reason LF film hardware prices are what they are is much of the R&D is older then both of us put together -)

[Brian Ellis]

"However, I’ve been reading the threads on the future of film recently . . . "

Then you know all there is to know about what the future holds, which is to say nobody knows, and there should be no need to start yet another thread on this tiresome subject.

[Ed Richards]

With the advent of Canon 5D, an affordable and high quality full frame DSLR, I think you need to really consider what you want to shoot and how big you want to print. Unless you need more movement than you can get with a TS lens, and you want to make prints bigger than 11x14 or 16 x 20 (depending on the subject matter), there are strong reasons to consider digital if you shoot color. This is doubly true if you have to worry about what things cost. You have to be burning at least $4 a shot, plus all the hassle of going to a lab to be doing color. This is going to severely constrain the number of shots you do. Then you have to scan and color correct - a tedious process that is not necessary with digital. For subjects with continuous tone, rather than really fine detail, it is hard to be beat a digital image.

In my view, you will be able get 4x5 color film and processing for a very long time, but it will get ever more expensive and problematic. I live in a regional city in the US of 500,000 and any color I do has to be processed mail order. Once you make that break, then it really does not matter where you live, all the changes is the postage and delay. If you have local processing, you are lucky, it will not last unless you are in a major city like Berlin or Paris.

As for the P45 backs becoming affordable for your 4x5 system - it would not make much sense because you would want the digital lenses to take advantage of the resolution.

The game is different in black and white - you can buy film more cheaply and it is easy to process. If you want to do LF and money matters, consider ditching color.

[Ron Marshall]

I think color film will continue to be available for at least ten years, b/w indefinately, but the price will go up.

If you never intend to print larger than 16x20, a Canon D5, or its successor, may suffice.

[j.e.simmons]

Also consider how you will want to work. If you plan to be a pro and do commercial work, the Canon, or something else digital, would probably be the efficient way to go. If you like sitting in the dark, nursing along the development of a negative or a print, as I do, get what you think you'll need to do that. Do what you enjoy.
juan

[Mike Delaney]

Thank you to Leonard, Ed, Ron and Juan for taking the time to give me your advice - it’s helped clarify the situation and cheer me up!

Brian - this topic may be tiresome for some, but it’s important for me right now and I wanted to ask for some advice on my personal situation. And it’s nice to be able to do that here, to get friendly advice from people much more experienced than oneself. That’s what makes these forums in themselves a reason to continue with LF.
Cheers,
Mike

[John Kasaian]

Mike,

If LF is important to you, don't let anything stand in your way. There is no reason to. The worse case scenario is we'll be coating glass plates and printing on papers we've coated ourselves, just like the early photographers did and not a few still do.

With great sheet film and printing paper coming from eastern europe you're probably in a good position to take advantage these excellent materials.

Don't worry---if you really need that 2nd lens, I say go for it! Your best investment is not your gear, but what you can learn to do with it.

[Rory_5244]

I, at least, appreciate your post, Mike. I had the same conundrum. In my case, I have largely abandoned 4x5 slide film for the allure of 8x10 transparencies. My love for colour in 8x10 is completely illogical, of course, but, I found taking pictures with a Canon Digital Rebel so unsatisfying that I sold it. Investment-wise, I have found that I am quite comfortable using just one lens. I have 100 sheets of 100VS/Velvia 50 in the freezer (which is a lot for my 8x10 shooting), and A&I is still around to process my film. Right now, I am looking at a 5ft x 6ft Lightjet print from one of my 8x10 transparencies and well, seeing is believing. I have only taken 9 colour pictures with my 8x10 so far and, weirdly enough, 5 of those 9 are the best pictures I have ever taken, period. I can't explain it! Don't give in to the paranoia that you may have wandered down the wrong road: you haven't.