Photos of film's demise

[sandymandy]

Ehh thats gonna be very pricy and exaggerated for keeping personal value photos. And im still not sure if it lasts 1000+ years.

[symmar22]

I don't think film will disappear so quickly. It's sure done for the mass market, but my guess is some companies will still produce at least B&W film for a while. Agfa was claimed dead, their film and chemical products (at least some of them) were resurrected by another company. Still you can find Ilford, Agfa, Fuji, Fomapan, Rollei, plus a few Chinese films. B&W is a fairly simple product to manufacture, and obviously there is still a market for it.

Colour is another problem, film are more complex to produce, as are the necessary chemicals to process them, and the best quality (especially with E6) can only be achieved with expensive and well controlled processing environments.

I started photography in the 80's when digital was not even a dream, I made the switch ten years ago. I work with digital, but for me digital cameras are just imaging computers, they nowadays produce good results, but the magic has gone.

As soon as I can picture for my pleasure, I use my Linhof 4x5 Technika 2000, or even the EOS 1v I bought a couple of years ago for 350 euros (I shot film Nikons since ever until the D200 and its disgusting sensor made me switch to Canon).

My guess is like the vinyl in music, film will stay as a niche market, my problem is I was a big fan of Kodak products, and although I will find some substitute for B&W (I will miss the Plus-X and Tri-X though), the choice for chrome is non existent any more. Now the EPP (for the 4x5) and the E100G for small format has gone, there's not much left for me. I can deal with the Velvia 50, but it's a bit over-saturated for my taste.

Fact is I still process and print B&W, kept my Leica Pradovit P600 projector, my Nikon Coolscan 4000 as well as my Epson v750 for for the 4x5. I regret I sold my Hasselblad 503CW a few years ago, but I needed the money then.

Film never had so much value to me, and I know I am not the only one...

[DigitalDivide]

Now the EPP (for the 4x5) and the E100G for small format has gone, there's not much left for me. I can deal with the Velvia 50, but it's a bit over-saturated for my taste.

Have you tried Provia 100F?  B&H has it in 4x5 sheets.  I've used it in 35mm format and find it to be a good landscape and general purpose film.  Definitely less saturated than Velvia.  I haven't seen Velvia in sheet form recently, can you still get it?

[Hillsilly]

Give Ektar a try.  It comes in 4x5.  Its very good at capturing detail.  If you're scanning it on the V750, then colour problems from your photo lab aren't an issue.  It has a greater exposure range (dynamic range?) than slide film and can give you a lot more post processing possibilities.

[symmar22]

Thanks DigitalDivide for the tip, I've tried almost every slide film available, I am not a huge fan of Fuji chrome in general. I like very neutral colours; Astia was not too bad, but they stopped it I think. The thing with Kodak is they had a very good line of slides for every taste : warm, saturated, cold, neutral. In the good old times they had like ten different chromes to suit everyone needs. Kodak main advantage over Fuji, IMO was colour fidelity and choice. For me, nothing ever matched the colour balance of the EPP, even the E100G though close is not as subtle.
Fuji's good, but their colour style is not my taste too much, agreed this is highly subjective. The Velvia 100 or Provias are very good film though, slightly finer grain and better resolution than Kodak, but in 4x5 format, the sharpness advantage is marginal. I guess i'll get used to it anyway. My favourite Fuji is still the Velvia 50, though the very saturated colours do not fit everything. Agreed, with digital post processing it's not such an issue. Problem with the Velvia 50, it's more like 40 iso actually, and the shades turn purple. It's some time I did not look for it, since I still have like 200 sheets of EPP and E100G in my freezer, but it won't last forever.... Rollfilm and 4x5 are still relatively easy to find, but 135 film has become a bit more problematic.


Hillsilly, thanks as well for the negative film input, believe it or not, I never used a colour negative in 4x5 format. I recently thought about it, mainly because of the increasing cost of slides, the extended latitude, and exposure flexibility. I have very little experience with the Ektar though. Until now I liked the Portra 160, but I admit my experience with colour negative is much less than E6 and B&W. I know the C41 films are extremely flexible and their IQ is fantastic, but I have bad memory from my photo school in the late 80's, when we had to print out of colour negative, it was very difficult to get a proper colour balance. Plus IMO nothing replaces a chrome on a light box. But you are right, I'll give the C41 a try for my 4x5, I'll buy a box of Ektar as well as a Portra 160 to compare. My fear is with Kodak on the bad slope, these films will likely disappear as well.

[DigitalDivide]

But you are right, I'll give the C41 a try for my 4x5, I'll buy a box of Ektar as well as a Portra 160 to compare. My fear is with Kodak on the bad slope, these films will likely disappear as well.

symmar22, if you wouldn't mind posting your experiences with the above it seems there are at least a few here who would be interested. 

I understand your view on Fuji chomes, it is a very subjective thing and everyone has their own favorites.  One of the great things about film is the ability to match a particular formula to your subject.  I suppose it must be possible to do something similar for digital with post-processing, but I'm just starting out and haven't tried messing with any of my shots yet.

As films gradually get phased out the number of options will decrease, and that will be a shame.  I'm actually rather pleased to see how many choices are still available for MF, as I have decided to stick to that format for my film shots.  Digital does what I need it to do for 35mm and will become my workhorse, and I'll break out the MF equipment when I feel like doing something different.

I've had a Bronica ETRSi for a long time, and it has now been joined by a mint GS-1 and a decent Pentax 67.  I'd like to add a nice rangefinder option and perhaps a TLR at some point.  The crazy Fuji GX680 appeals too, as does the oddball Noblex.  So many cameras, so little time...

[symmar22]

+1 on the fuji 680, but quite heavy/bulky, more for studio use, the fuji 6x9 rangefinders are fun to use, kind of rollfilm Leica M; Fujinon lenses are truly first class.

 I first switched to digital to replace the small format film, but I ended missing it, I used a Canon F-1 new, but I realized it was a bit stupid not to use all that modern EF glass I have and ended buying an EOS 1v. I have a lot of fun to use it, and will likely sell the F-1 and FD glass. 35mm film is more like a fun stuff to do for me, it hardly competes with digital for IQ, but still, I make different pictures with it.

4x5 is something else, it forces to carefully think the shot before you pull the trigger, but IMO it's worth it and competes still very well with digital IQ (I have a bunch of excellent Schneider lenses). It is simply a different kind of photography, opposite of the computerized imaging of digital work. I sometimes use 6x7 and 6x9 rollfilm backs on my linhof, since it allows me to use my enlarger (limited to 6x9) for B/W work, though I admit I got very lazy with enlargements the last 2 years, plus when I take the view camera outside, I feel it's a kind of wasted energy to make "only" rollfilms with it.

I really miss the Hasselblad, rollfilm is a kind of good compromise, and 120 films seem to be the easiest to find. Your are badly tempting me with the Fuji 680

I'll try to post some 4x5 negative as soon as I get some, but I do not have too much time for 4x5 pics these days.