The end is near.

Forum covering all aspects of small gauge cinematography! This is the main discussion forum.

Moderator: Andreas Wideroe

Tscan
Posts: 531
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2010 6:44 pm
Real name: Anthony Schilling
Contact:

Re: The end is near.

Post by Tscan » Mon Mar 28, 2011 11:04 pm

I don't think the still film market is as dire as some people think. Digital technology has turned millions of people into photographers that would only be shooting a roll of film on rare occasions. As for film, there is a major resurgance among young folks going for the asthetic and analog nature. I see tons of it on Flickr and check out what's going on at Lomography...
http://www.lomography.com/

Their film products offer a lot more asthetic than the neutral looking Kodak and Fuji stocks. It's gotten pretty popular. I think digital photography has helped lead a lot of kids into film who want more.
Reborn member since Sept 2003

User avatar
etimh
Senior member
Posts: 1796
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2005 4:15 am
Location: Los Angeles

Re: The end is near.

Post by etimh » Tue Mar 29, 2011 12:30 am

super8man wrote:Interestingly, I just bought some 828 film from B&H. Go figure.

Oh, and who waits days to pick up film? I have a pretty good lab in the form of Costco and I pretty much wait the 1 hour for my dual set of prints along with a CD/DVD of the files for a whopping $10-ish. Can't be beat.

The nice thing about 1hour processing is you really are supporting their staff and local operation. In everything else though they are pretty mucha China-factory-direct outlet.
Are they digitally printing the photos? Someone told me that is what a lot of 1-hour places do--not optically and chemically printing to photo paper like the old days.

Tim
FilmAid International
http://www.filmaid.org

User avatar
MIKI-814
Posts: 662
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 11:53 pm
Real name: Miguel
Location: BILBAO, Basque Country, EU
Contact:

Re: The end is near.

Post by MIKI-814 » Tue Mar 29, 2011 12:32 am

I totally agree with Tscan

nickrapak
Posts: 81
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 12:51 am
Real name: Nicholas Rapak

Re: The end is near.

Post by nickrapak » Tue Mar 29, 2011 3:20 am

First of all, when I saw the title of this thread and the person who started it, I thought this was going to be about Kodak discontinuing the CAT numbers for regular 8mm film! I'm glad that's not the case.

As for the Fuji lab situation, what I'm seeing this as is the continuation of the the general consumer trend of film dying. No one I know (that is not in the photography/cinematography field) shoots film anymore. Whether or not there is a resurgence among photographic enthusiasts is one thing, but those people usually mail the film out to a lab or use a local lab. Despite the drop-off in film processed by Fuji, I don't think that Walmart will end send-out film processing anytime soon. They are more than willing to take a loss on the developing cost just to get you in the store. Granted, what used to be a two-day turnaround will now be a week (for 35mm C-41), but Walmart will probably keep doing it until Fuji stops.

As for the cost, when not using Walmart, the cost goes up by much more than shipping alone. A roll of 8mm can be developed and processed at Walmart for $6.49 a roll plus tax. At Dwayne's, the cost is $16.50 a roll for the first roll, and $12.50 a roll after that (shipped). Adding on my cost per cartridge of $9.80, 400' of Super 8 footage would run me a total of $130.32 via Walmart, or $182.40 via Dwayne's, not including the postage to send it off. Maybe for you the difference is not that much, but for me, $50 is enough to make me reduce the amount that I shoot. Granted, the economies fall apart with still film, as there are mail-order labs that will process 35mm film fast and cheap (cheaper than Walmart, in some instances).

As for the end of film in general, I have a feeling this is still a long way off. I'm afraid of the future of E-6 film, as the number of E-6 films available seems to be ever-shrinking. However, in the past three years, Kodak has come out with three newly reformulated C-41 films, and Kodak won't be looking to discontinue something new right away.

Sorry for the block of text, I just needed to vent a little.

carllooper
Senior member
Posts: 1206
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 1:00 am
Real name: Carl Looper

Re: The end is near.

Post by carllooper » Tue Mar 29, 2011 4:06 am

In Australia the consumer trend away from film has been pretty much complete for a while now. This is simply because Australia has an extremely small marketplace compared to the States. In a photographic shop the response to film related questions will be met with either a quizzical expression or if you're lucky: disbelief followed by a condescending education regarding film as obsolete technology.

For film users there are no suprises here.

But on occasion you will get an enthusiast behind the counter with useful information on what you need and where to get it.

On another tangent I was in the market recently for a 4K monochromatic screen and was asked for some medically realated ID numbers, (the monitors are made for doctors) so they could look up what I needed. They are very expensive monitors. But when I explained why I needed one (digital to film transfer) the seller became immediately excited and explained how I might be able to get a second hand one for free - because these monitors just go straight to the tip when a new model comes out.

With respect to film it will be the enthusiasts that keep it alive for howsoever long as there are enthusiasts. The consumer trend to digital can be regarded as a very good thing because it means less stress on the remaining supplies of silver (ie. by those who never cared about such in the first place).

Carl
Carl Looper
http://artistfilmworkshop.org/

super8man
Senior member
Posts: 3980
Joined: Wed Oct 15, 2003 11:51 pm
Real name: Michael Nyberg
Location: The Golden State
Contact:

Re: The end is near.

Post by super8man » Tue Mar 29, 2011 4:38 am

I don't disagree that $50 is a big deal - it is. But then again, I have to state that it's a bit of champagne tastes on a beer budget. Let's face it, we all can't do everything we want to do. Well, some can, true enough. But it really does come down to honestly assessing whether your budget can afford it. And this pursuit of shooting a roll of super 8 and then expecting it to be a fairly inexpensive undertaking is not really an accurate assessment of the state of filmmaking. Basically, it's a case of "if you have to ask how much it costs to shoot film, (you can't afford) - I learned that saying from the world of boats..."

It "can" be cheap, sure. But I have to say, if the cost of shipping is making or breaking your choice to shoot film, you may want to consider digital. Heck, I shoot way more digital movies on my Canon S90 than I do on film. I have three rolls of B&W 16mm waiting to be sent to Spectra right now. Just waiting for my "hobby budget" to allow me to mail it off to them...And then wondering if my hobby budget allows me to get a 16mm Sniper. But that's a ways away...

Long live film - 35mm, 16mm, Super 8mm, and Regular 8mm!
My website - check it out...
http://super8man.filmshooting.com/

grainy
Posts: 253
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 6:51 pm
Real name: Erik Hammen

Re: The end is near.

Post by grainy » Tue Mar 29, 2011 5:45 am

I'm with Super8man. Sure it's more expensive than digital, if you don't include having to rebuy your entire technology every third year.
The point is whether you enjoy the medium. That is the logic. I enjoy the tactile elements of it, I enjoy the way it looks aesthetically, I enjoy the way the gear looks, I enjoy the sound the camera makes when I shoot film. I enjoy going to the lab and I enjoy getting my dinky little reels back, untaping the end and holding them up to the light to see the teeny tiny little images, miraculously reproduced one after another.
Frankly, the idea that someone can argue me out of (or into) a medium is totally asenine. If kodak and fuji (and agfa) stop making film, there's nothing I can do about it. But then you hear about the Impossible project and despite its problems, it just makes me smile, because I understand.
G
Newest feature film: "Lake Street Detective" Check out the trailer here: [url]https://www.grotonbridgefilms.com/lake-street-detective[/url]
Also: in post-production: "The Boulevard of Semi-Reconstructed Dreams" (short, Super 8)

Tscan
Posts: 531
Joined: Fri Sep 03, 2010 6:44 pm
Real name: Anthony Schilling
Contact:

Re: The end is near.

Post by Tscan » Tue Mar 29, 2011 8:12 am

Still photography is now a total nitch format. Everyone shooting film today is doing it because they want to at this point, it has nothing to do with people lagging behind on technology or being unaware of what digital has to offer... who have yet to make the switch. It will never be the mass market that it once was, and it doesn't need to in order to survive. If there are enough enthusiasts out there keeping it alive now, then there always will be. There are plenty of young new users out there all the time embracing still film for what it is. There is not a mass market of old timers out there ready to drop the old technology for digital (because they already did) and kill the format.

On another note I should add... when it comes to shooting photos of my 5 month old daughter, I feel really good about keeping the negatives safe and knowing that I can have them scanned or printed 30 years from now. When it comes to digital pics, there is no way I can count on hard drives, servers, discs or whatever they may be stored on to make good 30 years from now. My best friend has a 13 yr old... his baby and toddler pics are mostly digital and trapped on a frozen hard drive. If he wants to retrieve them, he has to pay $1000 for it to go into a clean room and have someone get them off.
Reborn member since Sept 2003

CinemanUK
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Sep 07, 2010 8:18 pm
Real name: Robert Lewis

Re: The end is near.

Post by CinemanUK » Tue Mar 29, 2011 9:12 am

MovieStuff wrote: No company does anything for altruistic reasons. It's business.
I think we can say we agree on this!

Angus
Senior member
Posts: 3883
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 11:22 am
Contact:

Re: The end is near.

Post by Angus » Tue Mar 29, 2011 1:34 pm

Last week one of the kids at the school I work in was photographing her Science work using a 35mm camera. Normally these days they'd use their phone or bring in a digital camera....or borrow the department's digital camera.

I had a nice discussion with this 12 year old about how the film looked better and she felt she could "do more" with the 35mm SLR.

So it's not just old fogies.
The government says that by 2010 30% of us will be fat....I am merely a trendsetter :)

User avatar
S8 Booster
Posts: 5852
Joined: Mon May 06, 2002 11:49 pm
Real name: Super Octa Booster
Location: Yeah, it IS the real thing not the Fooleywood Crapitfied Wannabe Copy..

Re: The end is near.

Post by S8 Booster » Tue Mar 29, 2011 1:45 pm

ever heard of Lomography and Kentmere (BW) films?....;)

shoot.....
..tnx for reminding me Michael Lehnert.... or Santo or.... cinematography.com super8 - the forum of Rednex, Wannabees and Pretenders...

User avatar
MovieStuff
Posts: 6113
Joined: Wed May 01, 2002 1:07 am
Real name: Roger Evans
Location: The wilds of Pipe Creek, Texas
Contact:

Re: The end is near.

Post by MovieStuff » Tue Mar 29, 2011 2:08 pm

grainy wrote:...Sure it's more expensive than digital, if you don't include having to rebuy your entire technology every third year....
But you don't. If you are satisfied with the results of any technology, whether film or digital, you don't have to ever move to anything else unless what you prefer is simply too expensive to favor.

Roger

carllooper
Senior member
Posts: 1206
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 1:00 am
Real name: Carl Looper

Re: The end is near.

Post by carllooper » Tue Mar 29, 2011 7:35 pm

And now, the end is near,
And so I face the final curtain.
My friends, I'll say it clear;
I'll state my case of which I'm certain.

I've lived a life that's full -
I've travelled each and every highway.
And more, much more than this,
I did it my way.


Johhny Rotten's rendition of this song is ironic because the lines of the song are not his. If we interpret the words as something Rotten agreed with - that doing something his own way was important (and it has this sense) - then it's not at the level of lyric writing - since they are not his lyrics. It would be in terms of the way his version differs from Sinatra's version - ie. that it is a punk version of the song.

There is also a tragic aspect here - that life is over. And for Rotten that would turn out to be the actual case not much later.

But there is also a defeatism and fatalism going on here. While celebrating life and individualism (ironically or otherwise) there is also an embrace of death - that it's somehow okay to embrace death, especially when you've done it your way.

But it's not okay. Death is not good. And you often don't get a chance to do it your way anyway. So it's doubly not good.

As usual I don't know where I'm going with this. The thread topic has sent me off on some tangent ...

CUT.

SCENE 2. NO WHERE IN PARTICULAR. INT.

SOMEONE sits silently in a dark room.

SOMEONE (V/O)
The digital image represents a philosophy in which the existence of the universe is an error. The universe doesn't exist. Or shouldn't. The digital image represents an attempt to correct that error - an attempt to restore the universe to non-existence. But since the universe does exist the theorised error can't be corrected . The theorised error is itself an error. The result is a digital image.

CUT.

Bergson says that before there was nothing, there was thing, to which a negation operation is applied, the result of which is nothing.

One of the interesting things about quantum teleportation is that you can't teleport information. Information, transmitted by non-teleportation means, is a necessary component of quantum teleportation.

So what is being teleported?

It means there is something about the universe that is not information. And it is this which can be teleported.

SCENE 42. TELEPORTATION LAB. INT.

LAB ASSISTANT 1
Is Geneva in the US?

LAB ASSISTANT 2
No, why?

LAB ASSISTANT 1
According to this article Americans invented quantum teleportation.

LAB ASSISTANT 2
Well they did. Haven't you seen Star Trek.

CUT.

The concept of quantum teleportation, first postulated in 1993 by IBM researcher Charles Bennet, has been likened to voodoo. But it is a reality, due in large part to the work of Nicolas Gisin, 52, and his 20 or so graduate students and research assistants at the University of Geneva's Group of Applied Physics. In the basement of the university's old medical-school building, Gisin commands a series of laboratories crisscrossed with laser beams and crowded with the gizmos that make teleportation possible: photon counters, interferometers and plain old mirrors that bounce the lasers around. Last year Gisin was able to teleport a photon over four miles.

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/artic ... z1I19ex3RS[/i]

CUT.

The concept of such travel long predates the modern term, and appeared in various myths, fairy tales and philosophies. For example, in the tale of Alladin in the Arabian Nights the Djin is able to travel instantly from China to Morocco and back, and even take a whole palace with him. The Tarnhelm in Richard Wagner's Der Ring des Nibelungen is a magic helmet conferring, among other things, the power of such travel. Kefitzat Haderech in Jewish tradition and Tay al-Ard in Islamic philosophy both referred to it. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleportation#Antecedants

CUT.
Carl Looper
http://artistfilmworkshop.org/

carllooper
Senior member
Posts: 1206
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2010 1:00 am
Real name: Carl Looper

Re: The end is near.

Post by carllooper » Tue Mar 29, 2011 10:58 pm

MovieStuff wrote:
grainy wrote:...Sure it's more expensive than digital, if you don't include having to rebuy your entire technology every third year....
But you don't. If you are satisfied with the results of any technology, whether film or digital, you don't have to ever move to anything else unless what you prefer is simply too expensive to favor.

Roger
I agree with Roger here.

Well sort of.

Normally you buy into something because you want to do that. For example, you buy into Photoshop CS5 because it has better features than CS4. Its not as if you have to buy into CS5 just because you bought into CS4.

On the other hand quite often you are forced into buying into new tech. For example you find you can't open a file produced by someone else with whom you might be collaborating. You find yourself having to upgrade.

But there is no alternative here. Tech can't start out at version Infinity. It has to start at version zero. But what it can and does do, is have a measure of backwards compatability.

You can ask your collaborator to send you a version of a file in CS4. The fact that you then start salivating over CS5 is a reflection of the manufacturer doing their job well.

The same paradigm is being applied to hardware. Versioning. Hyper modernism.

Now where I disagree Roger is that seemingly illogical comments such as "rebuy your entire technology every third year" are actually completely understandable.

It is not necessarily indicative of someone considering buying into new tech (which they do not have to do as Roger has argued), but indicative of someone who has been burned by it. Or better: someone properly theorising what could happen if they were to buy into it. The comments become a good way of summarising why one doesn't want to buy into it.

Carl
Carl Looper
http://artistfilmworkshop.org/

User avatar
MIKI-814
Posts: 662
Joined: Tue Feb 20, 2007 11:53 pm
Real name: Miguel
Location: BILBAO, Basque Country, EU
Contact:

Re: The end is near.

Post by MIKI-814 » Wed Mar 30, 2011 12:59 am

MovieStuff wrote:
grainy wrote:...Sure it's more expensive than digital, if you don't include having to rebuy your entire technology every third year....
But you don't. If you are satisfied with the results of any technology, whether film or digital, you don't have to ever move to anything else unless what you prefer is simply too expensive to favor.

Roger
or unless your electronic device die in a very few years...

Post Reply