So, IS black & white photography on its way out?

[Marko]

And you can still buy upright, manual typewriters (albeit used), and ribbons for them, because there are still enough people who want/need to type stuff in places without dependable power for a computer/printer, or in an environment unfriendly to electronics, to keep a few repair shops open.

But the technology that made photographs in the 1850s hasn't gone anywhere. Wet plate is still alive, still a one-by-one handmade operation, and with wet plates and alt-process printing techniques like carbon-pigment, platinum, or even the "lowly" Van Dyke Brownprint, B&W photography can potentially survive for, well, as long as we can get collodion and silver nitrate.

Well, yes, and the horse carriage is not dead yet either. Amish country is full of them, not to mention all the touristy places...

[Scott Knowles]

This was recently posted on the rec.photo.darkroom newsgroup. It met with very enthusiastic response there, so with the author's permission, I would like to rep ost it to the forum here.

I would like to start a discussion about this topic to find out what other people's take on this issue is. Do you think that black & white photography is going to disappear? If so, why, and if not, why not? If it does disappear, what will b e the alternatives for people who still want to shoot in black & white?

I don't see b&w going way, just changing techniques. I like b&w film, especially Scala (sadly it's out of production but I still have 60+ rolls left). Anyway, while I get chatised on forums for working in b&W (and even asked if digital slr's can shoot b&w digitally), I see many of the same photographers desaturate color to get b&w images. It's ironic that they criticize the traditional methods, but they're willing to digitally manipulate color to mimic it. I don't see it disappearing and think (hopefully) b&w films will come back as people discover it's quite compatible with digital b&w, just different.

I guess I have a hard time understanding the corporate decisions about discontinuing some photography products (film, chemicals, paper) which are profitable, just not that profitable or have declining sales, while continuing development in and production of non-profitable aspects (cameras, lenses). But that's normal when corporations buy photographic companies and manage them for overall corporate image and business than for photography. That's was obvious in the loss of Agfa products, Minolta's sellout to Konica and then Sony, and Nikon's decision about camera and lens lines.

[steve simmons]

This is one of those dire warniongs that pops up every once in a while. We did an article several issues ago looking at the available films and clearly showed there is more sheet films available than any of us will ever use in our lifetimes, We do need to update the list and will do so but the article has been posted on the View Camera web site in the Free Articles section. If you are worried check it out and then relax.

steve simmons

[Joseph O'Neil]

39 years ago, as a kid, I shot my first B&W picture - Kodak Brownie, 620 film. At that time the corner drug was at the corner, one block north, and the pharmacist showed me all the new colour films, and told me how soon nobody would be shooting B&W anymore. However, at that time, B&W was still - film and processing - less than half the price of colour, and we didn't have much money, so I stuck with B&W, which turned out to be a life long love affair.

What do people want anymore? A grand summit at the UN of every world leader, who will sign in blood an ironclad guarantee that b&W film will always be produced? Sorry, I don't think real life works like that.

i have a suggestion (tounge in cheek mind you ) . The moderators start a new sub-forum call "People who need to get a life and love to complain about everything", and the next time we see another "demise" thread, it get's moved there.


joe

[Jim Chinn]

All one needs to do is do some research on what has happened between the OP date (2001) and today.

We have lost papers from kodak (and Verichrome) and film and paper from Agfa, but Agfa chemistry continues under different mfg arrangements.

If you look at the number of film mfgs and paper options, the numbers are greater today then in 2001. If you shoot LF or ULF this is the best of times. More camera mfgs now then ever, more film options in all formats from 4x5 to 20x24. Ilford has reorganized into a better company dedicated to B&W and even Kodak has gone the distance and coated TMY for ULF shooters.

Michael Smith and Paula Chamlee have gone out on a limb to produce a new paper to replace AZO for contact printing and J&C Photo has said it will enter the film production business in the next couple of years.

There are even a couple new lenses being made for LF (although a bit on the pricey side).

In 2001 I thought we would be well on are way to one or two film and paper mfgs left with only a couple choices of emulsions and coatings. The marketplace has disproved that prediction.

I also can recount a discussion I had with Jim from Midwest Exchange a year ago when he told me they were selling more LF cameras then ever before. I would imagine most of those folks want to shoot B&W.

As far as the relativity of B&W imagery, pick up Lenswork each month. Lots of very good contemporary, cutting edge work being done. I don't think anything can supplant the beauty and revelation of a well done B&W portrait. This stuff also goes in cycles. Styles, genres, mediums go in and out of favor by collectors and art directors.

[Marko]

I still see this as two separate and very diferent issues. One of them, beaten to death already, is availability of traditional b&w materials - film, chemicals, paper... - and the other is the future of b&w photography.

Most participants still seem to bunch the two together, and even sneer at digital monochrome. I beg to differ - IMHO, one is ulimately the matter of market and profitablity, while the other is the matter of esthetics and style.

While the materials as we know them will eventually go away for the reasons already stated, the esthetics part is simply too unpredictable to guess.

Either way, I see no reason to worry - it's photography we're all after, it will be available in one form or the other for as long as there is an interest in visual arts.

[Ron Marshall]

i have a suggestion (tounge in cheek mind you ) . The moderators start a new sub-forum call "People who need to get a life and love to complain about everything", and the next time we see another "demise" thread, it get's moved there.


joe

I heartily concur!

[Jorge Gasteazoro]

While the materials as we know them will eventually go away for the reasons already stated, the esthetics part is simply too unpredictable to guess.

You keep insisting on this when you are not more able to tell the future than anybody else. While you may think your sarcastic comments are cute, like the amish above. There are still a lot of people making good money manufacturing horse saddles and related items.

As to the aesthetics, nothing to unpredictable there. Some people like ink jets some dont...as long as there are people who dont, traditional B&W materials will be available.

[Don Bryant]

You keep insisting on this when you are not more able to tell the future than anybody else. While you may think your sarcastic comments are cute, like the amish above. There are still a lot of people making good money manufacturing horse saddles and related items.

As to the aesthetics, nothing to unpredictable there. Some people like ink jets some dont...as long as there are people who dont, traditional B&W materials will be available.

The end of B&W film will occur one week from today - hopefully so will this thread.

Don Bryant

[Don Wallace]

The short answer to your question is a simple no. Those who have been use black and white film are not the people who are just getting into photography via digital. At the same time, the number of people using black and white film is declining, as evidenced by diminishing resources. This will stabilize at a certain level at some point, but there will be change. It isn't going to be simply a bunch of old farts hanging on by their fingernails. The new state of the market will lead to unanticipated consequences, new people will see monochrome as an "alternate process," and the world of film will continue but in different ways.

I always get a kick out of the "horse and buggy in Amish country" comment. I am also a musician and would like to point out that digital entered the musical instrument industry (not just records) long before the world of photography. And as we know, EVERYONE is using digital amplifiers and digital instruments, right? Wrong. For example, the demand for acoustic guitars (gasp) has led to much greater choice than even 25 years ago. Discriminating electric guitar players use tube amplifiers. Yes, actual vacuum tubes. And so on. The music industry has greatly benefited from modern technology, including digital, and it has been transformed, but there is a huge market for traditional instruments.

Just to stick with the horse and buggy analogy, no one rides horses anymore as a means of transportation, but the "horse world" is not only thriving, there is a LOT of money involved. If you don't know that, then you are the one either living in the past or in Amish country.