What is the current state and future of film availability especially 35mm?

GaryFlorida said:

Digital images and video are no longer trustworthy as reality.

Click to expand...

GaryFlorida said:

AI is coming true.

Click to expand...

Well, if you're going to go in that direction, and like peeping gloomily into the future, I'd venture that AI is much more a menace to digital photography than it is to film. Two of the biggest strength of digital photography are speed and the ability to manipulate the image at will. AI already does that better than many expert digital photographer do.

Bread and butter of pro photographers, other than photojournalists, has long been advertising, fashion and weddings. First two have never been interested in being trustworthy as reality—and the divorce rate says that the love and joy manifested in the third was a reality that wasn't made to be real for very long. For advertising, fashion and wedding, digital was a true revolution. But we're at the point where, because of AI, photographers will no longer be needed for advertising or fashion, and a couple who had to wed with, as background, the lovely scenery of Trenton, NJ, will soon be able to replace it with that of a beach in Bora Bora just by asking their computer.

Alex - you forgot to mention the Ai generated virtual Bride or Groom, or both. It's just one more ludicrous step forward from computerized dating.

DREW WILEY said:

Steven - what is your problem with the Kodak color negative film selection? Their current products are top notch. Is it just a price issue?

Click to expand...

Drew, you mentioned earlier in another thread that you despise scanning, so I am prepared for my answer to be dismissed. I have to spend more time balancing Kodak color. Fuji films are more neutral without the pronounced warmth. As a result, I find the 400h negative to be easier to work with than Portra 400. The difference is especially pronounced in 35mm when you compare C200 and Gold: bluer (and more natural) blues and deeper reds. Don't care much about Superia, where I have to fight magenta. The only Kodak film I like is Ektar and to a much lesser extent ProImage, but both are just ISO 100.

Alex Benjamin said:

Well, if you're going to go in that direction, and like peeping gloomily into the future, I'd venture that AI is much more a menace to digital photography than it is to film. Two of the biggest strength of digital photography are speed and the ability to manipulate the image at will. AI already does that better than many expert digital photographer do.

Bread and butter of pro photographers, other than photojournalists, has long been advertising, fashion and weddings. First two have never been interested in being trustworthy as reality—and the divorce rate says that the love and joy manifested in the third was a reality that wasn't made to be real for very long. For advertising, fashion and wedding, digital was a true revolution. But we're at the point where, because of AI, photographers will no longer be needed for advertising or fashion, and a couple who had to wed with, as background, the lovely scenery of Trenton, NJ, will soon be able to replace it with that of a beach in Bora Bora just by asking their computer.

Click to expand...

photojournalism & photographic evidence as an old popular internet meme says "Pics or it didnt happen". I say the new meme is "film or it didnt happen"

cmacd123 said:

whele he opened his last movie in 100 IMAX theaters.so he needs 100Prints. 24 frames a second, time 120Minutes so

172800 frames each 15 perfs long and 70mm wide. each foot of film has 64 perfs.

so his order proably chews up 3 master rolls of 5383

does Alaris order that many master rolls of TRI_X?

Click to expand...

Yes, a feature length motion picture requires lots and lots of film. That doesn't mean very much when it comes to the demand/profitability of still films.

DREW WILEY said:

The invention of photography was proclaimed to be the doom of painting, especially if color photography ever became a reality. Well, it did; and here we are more than a century later, and there are art stores in every city still celling pigments, brushes, and canvas. Lots of people still ride horses too, simply because they enjoy doing that. What's in oversupply at the moment is unwarranted pessimism; I wouldn't mind if some of that runs out.

Click to expand...

Sorry but I don't think comparing photography and painting with film photography and digital photography makes sense.

Milpool said:

That doesn't mean very much when it comes to the demand/profitability of still films.

Click to expand...

It does in the sense that they're produced within the same production system, which means that many costs can be discounted over the total volume of both product categories. This in turn improves profitability and helps in keeping the system alive for longer. Motion picture film is very useful to the continued existence of still image film, and vice versa. They go hand in hand.

It's the same overall system, and high enough motion picture film volume is indeed a key to keeping the line going, but I doubt there is nearly as much going the other way. I can envision say Tri-X going away with motion picture film remaining viable, but not the reverse.

A fair bit of all this crystal ball gazing with respect to the forward-looking part of OP's question has to do with whether or not one thinks the so-called film resurgence, renaissance etc. is sustainable. If it is, it is also perhaps (or perhaps not) worth asking what kinds of films there will be demand for (quality, price). A lot of things have annoyed me about this, but that's just me. Nobody has to agree.

Steven Lee said:

@Henning Serger I always enjoy your posts because they tend to be full of optimism. But this thread is not one of them.

Click to expand...

Steven, than you must have misunderstood my two posts in this thread.

Steven Lee said:

Personally, I will lose access to color film as soon my stock of 400H depletes. I don't enjoy working with Kodak color films.

Click to expand...

Then you have the following options:
- support the other companies like Harman technology, ADOX, InovisCoat (Original Wolfen brand) who are active in colour negative film R&D / production
- use Fujifilm colour reversal film (outstanding material)
- try Portra 160: It has the most natural / neutral colour rendition of all Kodak CN films, and it is very similar in colour rendition to Fujifilm PRO 160Ns and PRO 400H.

Steven Lee said:

And I no longer believe that Fuji will return to print film production.

Click to expand...

We just have to wait and see what will happen when Fujifilm has finished its 30 million $ investment in their film factory in Japan. That is a huge project that takes time.

Steven Lee said:

And now it looks that even the remaining films are at the mercy of Instax popularity.

Click to expand...

No, that is not the case.

Steven Lee said:

It’s like if the Louvre stayed open only as long as Justin Bieber remained popular — honestly, it’s pretty disheartening. :-(

Click to expand...

Sorry, with all respect, but that belongs to the worst and most wrong comparisons I've ever seen here on photrio.
You have the completely wrong assessment that instax instant film (or instant film in general) is a short term trend. It is absolutely not. Instant film will be here to stay even when Justin Bibers kids have long passed away. Instant film as a photographic medium has been established and been very popular for more than 70 years now. It will survive us all here. It is an art form, and art forms don't die. Same is true for conventional film.

Instax instant film demand is meanwhile growing without interruption for 20 years (!!). It belongs to the most long-term growth stories in photographic history.
Even if it would crash by 90% (which is extremely unlikely) it would still be big enough to be sustainable in the long run. Instax film is used by snapshooters, artists, and commercial professional photographers (it is a blessing for wedding photographers; one of the most successful tools in wedding photography; I've loved it in that application).

And what I've written about several 135, 120 and sheet films that have been / are available thanks to instant film production: That was mainly related to the Polaroid factory in Monheim. That infrastructure has made it possible that additional, new film types could have been offered to the market. Films which were not existent in the film-boom, pre-digital era.
Again a very positive effect of instant film, from which users of standard film benefit.

Therefore: Even it you don't use instant film by yourself, you can or you already are benefitting from its existance, and should be thankful for what it is contributing to the market and the whole film community.

And to the initial question of the OP, some essential market facts:
- all film manufacturers are investing in either new products, and / or in new production equipment; they are all doing that because they have a positive outlook
- the number of labs has increased globally in the last years
- there are new, small and innovative companies offering new products or services for the film photography market
- new film cameras are introduced to the market.

Therefore: Don't worry, be happy, use film and enjoy it.

Best regards,
Henning

Henning Serger said:

completely wrong assessment that instax instant film (or instant film in general) is a short term trend

Click to expand...

Well, so far, Justin Bieber has proven to be a remarkably long-standing trend.
If you include his forefather Franz Ignace von Bieber, it even goes back several centuries.

koraks said:

Well, so far, Justin Bieber has proven to be a remarkably long-standing trend.
If you include his forefather Franz Ignace von Bieber, it even goes back several centuries.

Click to expand...

Made my day.

koraks said:

Well, so far, Justin Bieber has proven to be a remarkably long-standing trend.

Click to expand...

So what. Photographers will use instant film and standard film when you, me and JB are all long gone.
That is for sure.

And when we are all long gone, and when meanwhile Harman, ADOX, InovisCoat, Film Ferrania, Fujifilm, Lucky etc. have all introduced new films to the market, Pentax, Leica, Mint, Nikon etc. have introduced new film cameras to market.....
Then at least once per half-year here on photrio there will be a long "film is dead" thread, saying that film has no future and will die soon........
That is for sure as well . You can bet your whole fortune on that.

Best regards,
Henning

For the record @Henning Serger , I was just joking.
In case you're not familiar with Bieber's music, I can heartily recommend it. The long-dead Bieber, I mean. He lives on as long as there's a violinist alive who manages to cross the strings on their violin.

Henning Serger said:

....

And to the initial question of the OP, some essential market facts:
- all film manufacturers are investing in either new products, and / or in new production equipment; they are all doing that because they have a positive outlook
- the number of labs has increased globally in the last years
- there are new, small and innovative companies offering new products or services for the film photography market
- new film cameras are introduced to the market.

Therefore: Don't worry, be happy, use film and enjoy it.

Best regards,
Henning

Click to expand...

most reassuring post so far.

Steven - I can sympathize with your personal workflow issues, but your objective comments are incorrect. The best balanced color film Fuji ever made was unquestionably the Astia series, a chrome film you might not have ever used, along with its tungsten balanced counterpart, CDU. Some of the later Ektachromes are second best, starting with E100G and leading to the current E100. Other Fuji chromes were lovely, but never as well neutral balanced. I shot and printed pretty much all of them.

Now when it comes to color neg films, it all depends on the specific hue category you are trying to reproduce. I think a strong argument could be made that current Ektar 100 has the best neutral balance ever in the CN category when it comes to grays, warm earthtones, and green, but can be somewhat disappointing when it comes to the rendition of blue and violet. I've done an enormous amount of testing this. DIY scanning and its post-interpolation can be misleading and introduce its own variables. One also has to understand the need to correctly color temp balance CN films under certain circumstances. That fact has been lost upon a generation who thinks it can correct just anything in PS; they can't.

Now if you want a more traditional low-contrast color neg film geared toward portraiture, I'd agree with Henning that Porta 160 is as good as it gets. It's so good that I use it as a precise internegative film in relation to both Fuji and Kodak chromes for sake of RA4 printing. That's a fussy application! But again, I get the most out of it by very careful color temp balancing and taking advantage of an exposure sweet spot beyond the needs of general shooting. Only the main part of the characteristic curve comes into play because I also employ selective contrast masking. But that's done in the lab.

For the record, I have nothing against scanning or digital printing. It's not for me personally, but I've certainly had enough professional scans done for commercial projects to understand the quality and repro implications. I even had my own scanner set up at one point. But none of that was for sake of my personal printmaking, which is strictly a darkroom affair. I've spent many hours chatting in person with some of the best digital printmakers alive. But when it comes to the level of discussion often encountered on this forum, it's often difficult to distinguish what certain films are really capable of doing or not, versus the foibles of an intermediate hurdle like less than ideal scanning.

One might have a good reason to prefer the "look" of one specific brand or product over another. For example the rendering of the late 160 Fuji negs was somewhat different than the various 160 speed Kodak products, which differed quite a bit from one another as they progressively evolved. I've RA4 printed a number of them, and miss both the Fuji version and things like Kodak 160VC, which had a niche somewhat in between that of current Porta 160 and Ektar 100.

But throwing in the towel because Fuji has greatly diminished their own color options doesn't make a lot of sense. The differences aren't really all that great from what Kodak is doing especially well right now. And if someone wants a more funky look using Kodak Gold or Portra 400 or whatever, there are a range of tricks
being used by those who choose to do so, not to mention various "new" CN films aimed at off-hued performance to begin with. The scenario is not gloomy at all.
There is still plenty of color neg film choice.

koraks said:

For the record @Henning Serger , I was just joking.
In case you're not familiar with Bieber's music, I can heartily recommend it. The long-dead Bieber, I mean. He lives on as long as there's a violinist alive who manages to cross the strings on their violin.

Click to expand...

For the record (bis) it's Biber, and the music is sublime


End of digression.

Henning Serger said:

So what. Photographers will use instant film and standard film when you, me and JB are all long gone.
That is for sure.

And when we are all long gone, and when meanwhile Harman, ADOX, InovisCoat, Film Ferrania, Fujifilm, Lucky etc. have all introduced new films to the market, Pentax, Leica, Mint, Nikon etc. have introduced new film cameras to market.....
Then at least once per half-year here on photrio there will be a long "film is dead" thread, saying that film has no future and will die soon........
That is for sure as well . You can bet your whole fortune on that.

Best regards,
Henning

Click to expand...

I doubt Photo will still be around that long.

I think there are a lot more real doom n' gloom scenarios around the world to worry about rather than the destiny of photo film. I'll be gone long before it is. Probably nearly every form of what is currently considered state of the art digital imaging will be gone first too, and replaced with something else. I'd rather leave behind actual handmade prints people can handle and see with their own eyes rather than something doomed to cyberspace. If there is another world war, it might very well begin with massive attacks upon cyber infrastructure, including the "Cloud".

Pieter12 said:

I doubt Photo will still be around that long.

Click to expand...

Oh, Photrio will be around, but all its members will be self-conscious AI bots running endless threads about whether or not they are art.

Should also be noted that thinking about the final death of film is not all doom and gloom since it will mean that questions regarding pre-wash and whether or not stand development is a viable method will be settled once and for all. So, glass half full on that point .

Well I went through my stash of film I found in the freezer. I had more than I thought so I should be ok for a little while although most of it is expired. I started a new thread on it.

Pieter12 said:

I doubt Photo will still be around that long.

Click to expand...

I was at the Los Angeles Union Station* in the early 1970's and an old man was there with his grandson at the ticket counter. The old man asked the ticket clerk, "When is the last train to Chicago?"
The clerk answered, "You should live so long!"

That answer fits for how long Photrio and film will last.





* https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=Ph...0/union-station-in-los-angeles-california.jpg

Sirius Glass said:

I was at the Los Angeles Union Station* in the early 1970's and an old man was there with his grandson at the ticket counter. The old man asked the ticket clerk, "When is the last train to Chicago?"
The clerk answered, "You should live so long!"

That answer fits for how long Photrio and film will last.





* https://duckduckgo.com/?t=ffab&q=Photo+los+angeles+train+station&iax=images&ia=images&iai=http://static6.businessinsider.com/image/569ea179dd089572228b46d6-1200/union-station-in-los-angeles-california.jpg

Click to expand...

well if you put it that way, Im not sure what to hope for

GaryFlorida said:

Well I went through my stash of film I found in the freezer. I had more than I thought so I should be ok for a little while although most of it is expired. I started a new thread on it.

My current inventory of film that has been in the freezer.

Lately theres been scuttlebut about the future of film and its availability. I havent shot film for probably 5 or 10 years. I bought a bunch of it a while back and kept it in the freezer. Due to more important family matters I took a break from photography but now I would like to get back...

www.photrio.com

Click to expand...

How long will that film last you? A year? Twenty years? More? Maybe you already touched on that earlier in the thread but I haven’t read it all.

warden said:

How long will that film last you? A year? Twenty years? More? Maybe you already touched on that earlier in the thread but I haven’t read it all.

Click to expand...

My goal is to shoot 1 roll of film per month using a different camera for each month of the year (i have 12 cameras).

So for the amount of film I have in my cache, provided its not deteriorated from being expired (its been in the fridge since new and is 3 to 8 years expired now) , 34 rolls, 34 months so almost 3 years worth, if I can keep up with shooting, developing and printing or scanning and ideally uploading on here, a roll per month.

Sounds like a terrific idea. Great project.