Film Forever!

Will all dedicated film users please come out of hiding? I mean you classicists who believe the world's greatest black-and-white prints are created with heart and love in a chemical darkroom; you slide-shooters who adore examining images with high-powered loupes; you photographers tired of sitting in front of a computer screen when you long to be out shooting; and those of you who sense that the images created on film are, well, just better than digital images. Finally, let's also call out photographers who boldly use both film and digital. Like me.

Has most of the U.S. gone digital? Sure, but the vast preponderance of the U.S. camera owners are snapshooters, so if film sales are plummeting (and they are), snapshooters are the cause more than are serious photographers. Just how plentiful are you and I? Plentiful enough that Kodak's film R&D recently produced a from-the-ground-up new reworking of its Portra line of films. (See The Goods in this issue.)

When I want to get a handle on how high the interest is in any serious photo field, I look at how well classes in that area are attended. The school of the International Center of Photography in New York has extensive classes, lectures, and workshops in most popular imaging fields.

Does the school have much left in film-based courses? You bet. In a recent semester, 750 students attended 69 such classes. They begin with primers on black-and-white and color photography, and then go on to Photography I for Beginners, followed by Course Level II and III before tackling The Fine Print in Black-and-White and Non-silver Alternative Processes. Courses in the fundamentals of studio lighting, narrative portraits, natural portraits, large-format, and location photography all demand one of the three levels of photography (or portfolio review) as a prerequisite.

Many of the other picture taking courses, such as Developing a Personal Vision, Fashion, and Night Photography, have the same prerequisites. Color darkroom printing receives equal layers of instruction with the same prerequisites. Having only a megapixeled brain obviously doesn't cut it everywhere at ICP.

Feeling better? Does the world of film photography seem slightly rosier and more vital? In Japan, where the percentage of serious photographers is far greater than here and there are fewer lemmings jumping off into an exclusively digital sea, film photography has never lost its healthy glow. While giving ample coverage to things digital, film-oriented subjects get respectable play, as well.

Additionally, we now have the new 35mm rangefinder Zeiss Ikon camera and full line of Zeiss lenses. A digital back as well? Nope. Film first and maybe, after a while, digital. Also, Cosina, under the VoigtlŠnder brand, continues to produce its own array of 35mm rangefinder cameras and lenses plus optics for other brand film SLRs.

More good news for film shooters: While sniffing out dedicated silver halide fans, many of whom are are still in shock over the death of Kodak b&w enlarging paper (and everything Agfa), I came across an utterly fascinating silvermine of film, paper, darkroom equipment, chemicals, and photographic oddments.

Cry no more over the departure of Kodak and Agfa paper! Freestyle Photographic Supplies carries Bergger (German), Foma (Czech), Forte (Hungarian), Fotokemika (Croatian), Ilford and Kentmere (British), Oriental (Japanese), and many others under its own Arista house brand, including relabeled supplies of Agfa's final production runs.

Yes, there are resin-coated and fiber-based papers, graded and variable contrast, in a blizzard of sizes, from 4x6 inches to 40-inch wide, 30-foot rolls and beyond. Want to make sunprints, salt prints, cyanotypes, or platinum and palladium prints, or use liquid emulsions? Freestyle will get you into them.

Is shooting black-and-white film your true love? Besides carrying the usual Fujifilm, Ilford, and Kodak emulsions, Freestyle stocks 60 others! Some are fantastic bargains; others high-tech. Looking for the utmost in high definition and fine grain? One of the numerous high-silver content European ISO 25 films Freestyle has may give you better image quality than any of the standard ISO 100 brands can.

Ever heard of Maco Rollei R3? It's a high acutance 35mm, 120, and 4x5 emulsion that can be used from ISO 25 to 6400 by varying development. In multiple rolls, the 35mm and 120 come in nifty wooden chests.

I did mention oddments, didn't I? How about classic, primitive Holga cameras with built-in flash units and color filter flashwheels? Or maybe you'd like your Holga with a fisheye lens or Polaroid back? Better yet, why not step up to a Woca camera, which is exactly the same as a Holga but has a real glass lens? I'll let you discover all the variations of Russian Lomo cameras, as well as pinhole cameras of all shapes, sizes, and prices -- one comes in teak.

Freestyle goes one better than any other store that I know with its No-Risk guarantee: "We will accept return on any purchase you have made from Freeestyle within 30 days for any reason, including sensitized goods. No restocking fees, no questions askedÉno problem."

Gosh. So if you shoot a roll of some fascinating Croat, Czech, or Hungarian film and it doesn't pass muster, you know what to do with it, right?

You can check out Freestyle's goods at www.freestylephoto.biz or at the store location in Hollywood, CA. But you'll never enjoy the true flavor if you don't request a catalog from the website or by calling 800-292-6137. Even if you never order a thing and you're pixilated up to the ears, you'll have fun with it.

Comments

[KG Kumar]

Great going, Herb! Nice to see that even in the US of A, film isn't dead, nor even moribund, going by your observations. Here in India, 35mm print film is still widely used, slides, transparencies less so (mostly by professionals in the major cities), but digital is becoming all the rage, even among wedding photogs! As for me, I'm more like you -- straddling both worlds, but infinitely more comfortable with old classic mechanical 35mm SLRs and print colour film!

Thanks for all your insights in your very readable column!

Regards,

kg

[Rainer Lehmann]

I understand that some people stick to what they have always done in life - like shooting film - but if someone has only once developed one single chemical colorprint during hours, paying attention to the exact right temperatures, concentrations and developing time in over a dozens of different developing solutions, (which he had to prepare first), without knowing really, what he will get at the end -and repeat the whole procedure a few times (?), then this person would really appreciate immensely how easy and fast all this time and money consuming work has become in the computer and by scanners and digital pictures. Let's be honest -the advantage is mind blowing !
Of course most people dont know this.
Personnally I have always been angry with many Lab-results (prints) and I am overjoyed, that I can now do this myself, not only very much better, but on top treat any image part separately, if I want to - which is impossible with chemical prints. Now you can also print just the three best shots of a few hundreds - which was not possible either before. So really, film has no real defense (only medium or large format - for now).
Let's face it, in ten years or whatever time it will be mostly only remembered, in a few decades forgotten.
Things and life is ever changing - and in this case undoubtedly for the better. By the way, I still shoot sometimes film. Rainer Lehmann

[Peggy Coleman]

I too like both film and digital, right now its black and white photography. I'm able to do my own printing on Sundays at the local university. I have found Freestyle to be a great source and one of the local photographers "Thigpen Photography" develops my film with great care. I think I'll always "ride the fence" when it comes to traditional and digital photography. Lets keep film forever!

[Wolfeye]

'And those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music' - Friedrich Welhelm Nietzche

The question is, are film users the ones dancing or the ones watching the dancing? Herb's report, for all its optimism, shows how low film has sunk. Third-world countries, former Soviet block nations, and eccentric Japan will not sway the tide forever.

I shoot film. Lots of it, with slide film being my true love. I'll keep shooting it as long as I can but when that day comes when I can't get it from B&H any more, I won't cry. Well, maybe one tear. :) I have so many wonderful images on both film and digital that I won't miss having only one choice.

After all, before digital there was only one choice, right?

[Jeffpud]

I shoot primarily [99.9%] Fujichrome Velvia. I have an Olympus 4 meg that I use for non-pro work. I can't afford to keep up with the changing digital technology like the multi-millionaire pros who buy whatever they want, whenever they want or have it given to them. I wish I had a Nikon D200 and a D2X for travel to certain European countries who like to see how many times film cameras can go through their X-ray machines, but I would still shoot 50% slides.

[Walter Reichert]

Yes for me I'm going with film for as long as it's made. I use film for "primary capture", and then scan and print. There are many reasons, I'll try and name a few here:
-I love the "look" of film - yes, I really do think that I can tell a difference,
-I like the "hard copy" that I get with film. Now I know that nothing lasts forever, but I really do believe based on years of experience that film will be around when those discs or files deteriorate or become impossible to open ... because of changing formats, etc. There will always be scanners to scan my slides, and they'll be even better than now!
-I don't spend hours at a computer, wouldn't want to if I could.
-Perhaps digital really works if one travels through a lot of x-ray machines, or shoots journalism or advertising. Even so, be glad that those old photos from all those great photoraphers were shot on film so we can still enjoy them today.

[Gilbert James]

Slides, slides, and more slides and I hope slides for the rest of my life.

[Tiago]

I'm an amateur photographer for about 40 years, and I have Canon EOS film cameras.
There's no way of comparing film and digital, they are different worlds. You have to use one or another depending on what you want or what is your goal.
As soon as I can, I'll buy a digital EOS. I hope so.

[Jean Trester]

I'm sticking to film and hope they make it forever. I use my digital camera to post pictures on ebay or an occasional picture to email to friends and relatives. My husband offered by buy me the new D80 Nikon or D200 but I prefer to stick to my F100 Nikon.

[S.Basu]

Silver Gelatine is far superior.And when you consider that a Digital camera would be outdated in 2 years time its better to stick to good old film. Even a Pentax K1000 will always give a beter results. For snapshooters and B'day party pixes Digital is fine!

[A.Koshy]

I think "film" is dying (if not dead for all practical purposes already), and it is only a matter of time before the last rites are completed. For people worried about "Digital cameras being outdated in 2 years" etc., the question I would pose is, what prevents you from taking high quality images from your Digital SLR, simply because a newer model has hit the streets ? Professional digital SLRs have a shutter life of well over 200,000 actuations. Why would you stop using it after a couple of 10,000 shots, simply because a newer model is now available ? Why insist on "keeping up with the Joneses" and not make full use of your existing investment ?

"Snapshooters and B'day part pixes" are for digital p&s toys not for serious digital equipment. High-end digital SLRs, Rangefinders (and even high-end Fixed-lens cameras like the Sony R1) have been outresolving film, many times over for several years now. High-end professional photographers have moved on from film, eons ago. Wake up, throw away those film cobwebs and welcome to the modern age.

[J Fox]

I use both film and digital and there's nothing wrong with 1100011010, but can't I just like film more?

[Phil Sanfilippo]

Just because something is better does not mean it will be around forever. Do you remember Betamax? As for the number of people taking courses in film photography, the reason is stated immediately after that, those courses are prerequisites! Take away the requirement and you also take away most of the demand for such a course. In my experience as a photography instructor, the benefit afforded to the student by immediate feedback in digital photography cannot be surpassed by any film.

[Ronald Breeze]

The other day I imported a clean digital raw file into my Mac and while the windows were open, letting in fresh air and sunlight and my favorite team was playing on my HD tv, I ran off a pro lab quality 13"x19" print. Do I miss spending hours in a dark room breathing in foul chemical smells to produce an 8"x10" print that took more time spot toning, even though I had cleaned the neg well? Yeah, right, Herb. You like to attach snide names to people like "clerk" and "lemming" I guess in an attempt to make yourself feel superior in the position you are taking. We "clerks" used to laugh at your blind insistance that Minolta cameras were superior to any other brand while we were sending in box fulls of them for repair after the shutters collapsed in a month of use. We especially had a good laugh when the reps came out to try and explain "The Mind of Minolta" to us and they couldn't even figure out how to operate the controls. Call me a "lemming clerk" if you will but when I read your columns one word comes to mind-dinosaur.

[Michael Dorman]

I am a professional photog and use both film and digital. And for the most part I firmly believe that to compare the 2 is like comparing Apples and Oranges or Oils vs. Acrylic. You just can't fairly compare the 2. The may both render an image, but in very different ways.
Also I have noticed a shift within many fashion and product photogs moving back to film when quality is of paramount importance and surprisingly I am having more and more ADs request film when time isn't playing against us.
You are also forgetting a burgeoning movement amount young people. As always young people are looking for individuality and already embrace the "vintage" lifestyle and are quickly forming what is becoming known as the "Antiquine Avant Gaurde".
This is a group of artists and photographer both young and old that are embracing not only film, but alternative processes such as Daguerreotype, Platinum, Palladium, Salted Paper, Bromoil, Tintype and all forms of ancient photography.
So if you can still shoot a Daguerreotype or make a Bromoil, I'm sure that you will still be able to buy and use film for quite some time to come.
And just can't for the life of me understand why some people seem to wish film would "die". That's fine if you stop using it or find another medium that satisfies you (like going from 35mm to medium format) no one will fault you for that, but to wish that what you once used to be driven off the face of the earth and to so vehemently denounce it seems, well...silly.

[Michael Blum]

Phil Sanfilippo "In my experience as a photography instructor, the benefit afforded to the student by immediate feedback in digital photography cannot be surpassed by any film."

Sorry, Phil, I do disagree with you. I can't believe you ever shot and processed film, if you had you would understand how people learn. Having taught photography since the mid 50s I can testify to the feedback engendered by film. You can stand and watch a student process film, dry it, make a proof and decide which one to print. Then watch his eye as that print pops out in the developer. No, digital is mundane in comparison. Then when you compare the resolution, tonal range, and latitude of film against digital You will arrive at the answer. Film is the bast way to teach. Sitting in front of a computer is so mundane. Tether to that the fact that digital doesn't promote photography. All people learn is "What if I do it wrong? I can make it right in Photoshop!" If you can take a photo with beautiful clouds and nothing else in the photo worth discussing and place those clouds in another mediocre photo to give you a moderately half a$$ photo which you can print and show off to the boys ( and gals) at the corner bistro then yeah, digi is the way for you. But hey, don't try to snow me by calling multimedia projects photography. 'Taint the same, Jose, not even close.
Like Herbert and others here, I shot film for about 50 years and got a digital camera about 3 years ago; right after Canon introduced the 300D. Nope, that ain't photography. I can turn out multimedia with the best of them, I love abstracts. I have some sitting next to me and I really like them but they aren't serious effort to duplicate reality, or even close. When you take a photo of a river and don't like the brown color and dump blue in to make it prettier or take a red house you hate and turn it yellow, that is no longer in the realm of photography. Ansel would be turning over in his grave!

Oh, yeah, film, paper, chemicals, funny that some big companies don't seem to know about the demise. Take Ilford, broke and on the point of going belly up and they were bought out and are now world wide again. Agfa, ditto, still got Agfa film. Now some new players have got in the act. Freestyle is only one. There is a company in Canada which bought out Adox and are manufacturing in their own plant. Seems like Freestyle are going to manufacture film also. Get on the net and do a search, you'll find many, not only in the "3rd world" but all over Europe, England, Canada, the US, and many more. I can get film and paper from Shanghai, or Poland, or Czech Republic, or even in england, France, Germany. Seems like those people aren't aware of the death of film and are specializing in it. When is the Wake being held?

As Michael said, the move in Pro Photography is back to film, digital doesn't compare in the eyes of the people who care, the clients.

[Joseph Morla]

I love B&W film...specially Kodak tri-X, but I cannot be blind to progress and ease of use. I went into the computer field in the late sixties and remained until now. I've seen the IBM typewriter go away, mechanical calculators and a series of other old technology be no more. I still love film. I have an impressive array of Nikkor lenses and F3 cameras that I use with loving care for the pleasure they have given me through out the years. But my training and logical mind tells me digital is it, it may not be better, but it is easier and that is not bad. So I shoot B&W film, have the negatives put into a CD, use Photoshop to manipulate it and print at my desk.

I hope B&W film stays around for a while, may have to develop my own medium format and 35mm and that is fine. I will enjoy it...but I will go digital for color and be subjected to the 6 month cycle of "new and improved" products and enjoy the "ease of use", I may even get a picture phone. Who knows? I will probably enjoy the duality...I have a player for DVD and VHS...

So...Freestyle is my place...I hope they hang in there for a long time.

[donald ostertag]

When I hear people talk of the superior resolving power of digital, I just have to laugh. Fuji Velvia 50 is far and away the better choice. Is digital better than print film? Possibly...but who uses that stuff anyway other than snapshooters and wedding hacks.

[Ed]

I own both digital and film cameras.I am picking up from where I left off 20 years ago.With film shots 35mm and medium format,I really think the shot out,because of the expense involved in processing.This has made me a better photographer.I would be very surprised if film completely disappears altogether.There are still manufactures producing film cameras such as Nikon,Lecia,and Rollie.I believe there will be a film market for quite some time.

[A. R. Barrow]

Well, to be strictly honest, I just love film. I am a 15 year old from the UK, and own various digital cameras. But I still use film cameras. For christmas 2007, for instance, I am laying my hands on 2 film cameras which are a cross between normal 35mm cameras and SLR cameras. So many people use film still, and i hope it stays round forever. Unlike hanging round streets with a hoodie on terrorising the poor people of Britain, I have a special hobby which involves much photography. I am a birdwatcher by nature, and, every day, I take pictures of our local feathered friends. And, the other day, I tested whether or not digital photos are better than film. They are not. I found the digital photo to be a bit blocky, whereas the 35mm film photo was nothing short of superb. I also use a digital video camcorder from JVC, which produces brilliant pictures.

[Daniel]

Ed from Britain,
More power to you! I am 38 years old here in America and I have always loved photography, but I am just beginning to take the hobby seriously. I enjoy film also.

[Daniel]

Actually, A.R. Barrow...more power to you...(was looking at the wrong post).