35mm film disappearing?

[kreig]

I was in Costco yesterday, wanted to buy some 200 asa film. They dont stock 200ASA anymore and I was told they will be phasing out all film products in the near future. The guy told me that digital is better and the only way to go.

My impression is we will be forced to go digital, not because we wont be buying film but because we cannot. The people making the decisions are not the ones who should be . . .

Kreig

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

LF film will be around much longer than 35 mm. Cell phones are killing the consumer market for both 35 mm and low end digital cameras. I would say LF for the past 15 years have been seen as the staple of art photographers or those who required outstanding quality like Architectural photographers.

Be prepared to pay a lot more for LF film, specially in color, but it will still be around long after 35 mm is gone. Wait until someone comes up with a 20 MP cell phone, you wont see 35 mm anywhere.... :-(

[Richard Schlesinger]

Jorge, I certainly hope you are mistaken. While I love LF 35mm is my staple. Many more images than on LF, and when printing (I do only B&W) 8X10 35 isn't so bad. And if what you say is really true why aren't used enlarger lenses a lot less expensive?

[George Hart]

I recently bought a 16x20" easel from one of the UK suppliers. I said to him that I must be one of the last of the photographic dinosaurs, to which he replied no! He told me that they had sold more enlargers last year than in the previous 16 years combined. As our American colleagues say, "go figure"!

[Mark Sawyer]

There's still a market for film in all sizes, but it's shrinking as digital grows. One strange phenomenon is that many high schools are stuck teaching film-based photography to the next generation because that's the equipment they have. At my high school, I'm trying to work digital in, but my equipment budget is $200 per year (last year, don't know what it will be this year), which doesn't buy much digital stuff for 150+ students.

Strangely, a lot of the kids really like working with b/w in a darkroom, as opposed to another hour of sitting in front of a computer screen each day. This is prolonging (for a little while) the market for analog b/w.

[Nick_3536]

Any body been to a movie lately?

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

I dont know Richard, there is no harm in hoping, but we have to face facts. I bet you Wal Mart, Costco, Sams, etc, are buying one tenth of the film they were buying 5 or 10 years ago. The cash cow for Kodak, et al used to be the 2 million rolls each of these outlets bought a year.

Why do you think digital sales have slumped? Cell phones are eating their lunch, why would I want to pay $300 for a p&s (digital or film) when my phone has one for free?... :-)

[resummerfield]

I believe that as long as film is manufactured, it will or can be cut into any size that sells. So if film is available for the LF group (and I don't see any signs of that ending), then someone will offer it in 120 and 35mm.

How many 35mm cameras do you think are out there.....

[Matt Powell]

Film won't disappear. You'll always be able to buy it from a source outside 'the west' (be it China, Eastern Europe, Africa down the road) or from a fine-art supplier. More difficult than hitting up Wal-Mart for a five-pack of 200 film but still available.

Traditional silver photo processes now have a greater 'art' cachet (with digital being perceived as owning the commercial/snapshot realms), so I suspect that we've seen the worst of it for niche film camera/accessory makers - the business of selling enlargers/4x5/easels/etc. should have levelled off.

[Oren Grad]

I believe that as long as film is manufactured, it will or can be cut into any size that sells. So if film is available for the LF group (and I don't see any signs of that ending), then someone will offer it in 120 and 35mm.

Switching production among different formats requires more than setting the cutting machine to different dimensions. Roll film and sheet film are generally coated on different bases - relatively thin acetate bases in the case of roll film (and even those different between 35 and 120), relatively thick polyester bases in the case of sheet film. Even if you could feed a master roll on polyester sheet film base into a finishing machine designed to churn out rolls, many cameras would have a hard time handling it - remember that some medium format cameras had problems when T-Max films first came out on a slightly stiffer acetate base, which was still not anywhere near as stiff as sheet-film bases.

[chris_4622]

Richard,
I recently purchased two El Nikkor enlarging lenses, a 135mm and a 150mm, both newer. They were a steal. I might part with the 135 since the 150 is so close. I bought them for my 4x5 and hope to get a head Michael Smith sells for enlarging on azo to go along with it. Now that is expensive!!

[Michael Kadillak]

Just because someone like Costco said that they were not carrying film does not mean that 35mm is dead. They are making the best decisions that they feel to optimize their profit and who can blame them? Just look around and it is everywhere. Walmart and my local Krogers has B&W portable cameras as well as a diverse and well stocked 35mm line up. 120 takes some looking to find, but I found Agfa 120 print film in Germany at a small grocery.

The motion picture industry will continue for many years to be a large consumption sink for small format film as even Kodak is doing very well in this individual department. As someone said earlier, that fact alone will save our bacon in this size.

Continue shooting and buying 35mm film is the best thing you can do to support the business.

Keep the faith. It will always be around - the specific emulsion may change but so what?

Cheers!

[Robert McClure]

As long as we're on the general subject, what about this. Despite the proliferation of digital image-making, I note that the theatrical film industry still originates/distributes its product in color negative.

I am wondering how long before digital technology will allow the "Hollywood" filmakers the capability of distributing their films via telephone lines (or satellite) versus striking/shipping tons of prints.

BTW, can you imagine (this is hypothetical, so don't anyone get bent out of shape with me!) fast-forwarding 20 years (or less) and discovering that "Hollywood Actors" are no longer in demand. Imagine they have all been replaced with electonically generated "actors."

"Why, when I was your age, son, movies were really movies ... none of this electronically generated imaginary crap." Ha, ha!

[Robert A. Zeichner]

Robert McClure, What you suggest is already happening. Arriflex, Dalsa Digital and Panavision have over the last couple of years introduced Electronic Imaging Motion Picture Cameras with a single 35mm sized CMOS or CCD chip, masked with a Bayer filter. These are 8-12 megapixels on a target the size of 1/2 frame 35mm still format. The results are very promising when compared to film originated material and because the editing workflow is all digital now, it begs to be adopted as the new way for making theatrical films. These cameras, btw, accept all of the optics that the motion picture industry currently uses and the ARRI and DALSA feature optical viewing systems as well, very much liked by the film community. That said, a number of motion pictures have already been produced with the Panavision modified Sony Cine Alta and the Panasonic Varicam, both 2/3" prism optic cameras that fall far short of the other cameras I mentioned. Digitally stored films (both conventionally shot on film and originated electronically) with surround sound and all of the rest have been successfully delivered to theaters already and projected on very expensive Christie digital cinema projectors. The number of problems that this solves is enormous when you think about it. The expense of shipping, the security of films being "sidetracked" while in transit, the hassle of assembling and breaking down reels, the fragility of film and its propensity to get scratched, the elimination of mechanical jitter, the cost of the raw materials and their finite life all contribute to the argument for digital delivery. Every year at the National Association of Broadcasters convention (the last 20 of which I have attended) there is a digital cinema symposium where the progress of this transition is discussed in detail. It's only a matter of time.... a time shorter than we all think. Is digital better than film? Not a yes or no answer to that. They look different. George Lucas says he'll never shoot film again and Steven Spielberg says he'll be the last guy using film, so even the great Hollywood directors can't agree.

[Oren Grad]

Robert Zeichner, do you happen to know what is the investment required to equip a theater with digital projection equipment? And approximately how long the useful life of the equipment is likely to be? It seems to me that that those are the numbers that will determine how fast the transition in distribution technology occurs.

As for whether you can buy film at Costco or Walmart, those of use who work in B&W got used to not being able to buy film at the drugstore a long time ago, and we're getting used to not being able to buy darkroom supplies at local camera stores too. You can still get what you need from mail order specialist suppliers, you just have to plan and order ahead. If people don't care about the medium enough to put up with that minor inconvenience, then the materials are most certainly going to go away.

The bottom line remains as Michael said:

Continue shooting and buying 35mm film is the best thing you can do to support the business.

[Robert A. Zeichner]

Oren, You are on the right track if you are thinking that the high cost of this transition is the stumbling block for theaters already suffering from the widespread popularity of DVD's and home theater systems. Costs of the projector are not too bad as I recall, around $80k. The projectors will probably be cheaper to maintain and currently share many of the same components of their sprocketed predecessors and will not entail the mechanical wear associated with a film transport. The audio has already been in place for a while now and is handled off optical disc to which the film projector is synchronized. A number of theaters in major metro areas that are typically cineplex operations of 10-20 theaters have converted one or two of their rooms to digital projection. As far as the security issues are concerned Dan, twisted pair and cable are simply not in the plan. We're talking satellite receivers with very sophisticated encryption and until that is fully tested and adopted, probably private ultra secure couriers. The film distribution business has been under the protective eyes of the FBI for years and you can bet there will be no system for downloading feature films that isn't thoroughly thought out and very secure.

[Brian C. Miller]

Robert, I personally don't like the Christie projectors because its like looking at a huge computer monitor. I keep seeing the jagged edges of everything. I would far rather watch 16mm rather than movies on those machines.

As far as film's demise, I visited two Seattle stores, Optechs and Glazers. Optechs has put all of their film and chemicals on 50% discount to get rid of them, as they are going all digital. Glazers has swapped the film from the large building to the small building, and the digital from the small building to the large building. In the Glazer's film store, there's quite a few things with huge discounts on them.

[Oren Grad]

Robert, thanks as always for sharing your insights - I learn something every time. To this outsider, it looks as though the movie theater business, like the photographic film business, is also facing some pretty deep challenges as a result of technological change - but in this case not so much the film-to-digital change as what you pointed out, the popularity of DVDs and home theater.

If the revenue shift from the theater channel to the home market stays at its current pace for much longer, theaters may not be able to afford to invest much in new digital equipment. But I imagine that if that happens, the demand for film stock will still decline, simply because the overall decline in theater attendance will likely result in a consolidation in the theater business. In any case, it will be interesting to see how this plays out.

[David F. Stein]

"Single-shot" hobbyist and fine art photography have always been the beneficiary of advances in cinematography and commercial photography habits. Why was Tri-X developed in the first place, and so on. We will continue to get tremednous advances in imaging, but not in conventional film-based photography. Actually, I am amazed how many 120 B&W and color emulsions are still being manufactured-I see those going away next. While scrambling, I don't believe Kodak has helped itself with so many names at the drugstore/Target: Gold, High Definition, Royal, etc. I don't know what's in each box. Actually, Ektapress was a great emulsion-where is it? For 35mm, I stick with Fuji Superia 400. As for digital cinema, inevitable, but we will have lost something wonderful. There is a difference when the movies are shot on film and the actors are in real settings.

[Robert A. Zeichner]

"...I personally don't like the Christie projectors because its like looking at a huge computer monitor. I keep seeing the jagged edges of everything. I would far rather watch 16mm rather than movies on those machines."

The problem is that without knowing for certain how the original material was generated or dealt with in post, you can't know whether the projector is imparting the aliasing or if it was in the digital media itself. I'm guessing it's the latter. The projectors themselves can and do make impressive pictures and I've seen this for myself at a local SMPTE presentation with the same material projected conventionally and digitally on two adjacent screens in a local cineplex. Yes, there are differences and being a film guy myself, I would probably pick film as the ideal delivery medium. But, just as there was resistance from the congnacenti to the original 3-chip video cameras over the old tube types, with most folks embracing the advantages from an operational standpoint and using the newer technology, I think it will work the same way with digital imaging taking over the theatrical film business. There will be a period of accepting some of the shortcomings in order to gain the delivery advantages et al and then as more of the newer technology is embraced, there will be a gradual improvement to it and the resulting look. There have thus far been no full length theatrical releases originated on the Arri D-20, Dalsa Origin or Panavision Genesis to my knowledge. These cameras are still in a sort of beta test mode. When these types of productions hit the digital theaters I think many film advocates will be impressed and it will only get better. You can't compare them to the present day 1080i or 720p 3-CCD prism optic "Video" cameras.

[Brian Ellis]

I have no idea what the future of any film will be, anyone's guess is certainly as good as mine. But nobody seems to have mentioned disposable cameras. These things still seem to sell pretty well, at least I see a lot of people using them in tourist places like Disneyworld and I've read that they remain very popular in less affluent countries. Even before digital caught on I remember reading that sales of 35mm color film in disposables constituted something like 50% of all sales of 35mm color film. So my totally uninformed guess is that we'll continue seeing color 35mm film as long as sales of disposable cameras are good enough and when they aren't we won't.

[Nick Morris]

Once upon a time a number of people thought that photography would replace painting and drawing...well, I don't really know this, but I willing to venture that painters of the day foresaw the demise of painting and the disappearance of the tools and materials of their media.

Yet, unbelieveable as it must seem, the painting and drawing supply business seems to be thriving. In most, if not all, large, medium, and small communities around the country - and I'd further venture to say - the world, painting and drawing supply houses exist. Cooperatives exist that countinue to provide instruction in painting and drawing, not to mention public and private educational facilities. This some 150 years after the advent of photography.

So to the "sky is falling" folks I say that it is reasonable to assume that the tools and materials of film based chemically processed photography will be available for at least another 20 or 30 years. That would be enough to satisfy me.

[Anne Williams]

At our Costco, the 1 hour lab people told me that half of their printing comes from film and half from digital. They keep hiring more lab people, so it appears that they are doing a good volume. I buy a lot of 35mm film for snapshots, but not from Costco. I just don't like the type of film they sell, so I either order it or buy it elsewhere.

[John Kasaian]

How do I fit a glass dry plate in my F2??? ;-)