Film to be extinct in X years ?

[LittleWolf]

Woah... chill out man, I merely meant to say that there's a certain sense of, yes, fantasy involved in film that will forever captivate most, if not all, "photographers."


The digital age cannot be denied because of it's convinience, neither can u deny the analogue for the sheer understanding it provides the user for the art.

I think you got me wrong here. I'm not advocating film over digital or the other way round. What I'm speaking out against is quackery and pseudoscience that are meant to dumb down the reader. Selling sensual experiences like shivers down the spine in the darkroom as "science of light" is an insult to intelligence.

 

[Snoweagle]

Slide films are far better in quality than negatives.

 

[dbchoong]

Film won't become extinct. Production will slow down to a trickle and due to low production, cost will increase. Film will still be available, but at a pretty high price. Only the most loyal and rich film fans will buy them. My guess is that this will probably happen within the next 5 years.

Digital technology is taking over analog technology. Not only in the photography but in many other areas. In hifi, digital amplifiers are now gaining popularity over the older analog amplifiers (yeah, your new 7.1 channel Dolby Digital EX/DTS-ES AV receiver probably has an analog amp :think: ). In TVs, LCD/Plasmas/DLPs (or whatever else new technology) will soon rule. CRT TVs will also be seeing its end of days.

When new technologies comes out, try it. You might like it!

 

[Snoweagle]

Film won't become extinct. Production will slow down to a trickle and due to low production, cost will increase. Film will still be available, but at a pretty high price. Only the most loyal and rich film fans will buy them. My guess is that this will probably happen within the next 5 years.

Digital technology is taking over analog technology. Not only in the photography but in many other areas. In hifi, digital amplifiers are now gaining popularity over the older analog amplifiers (yeah, your new 7.1 channel Dolby Digital EX/DTS-ES AV receiver probably has an analog amp :think: ). In TVs, LCD/Plasmas/DLPs (or whatever else new technology) will soon rule. CRT TVs will also be seeing its end of days.

When new technologies comes out, try it. You might like it!

Now prices of film have fallen significantly over the years. In the past i use to buy a 36 exp ASA 400 film at $6.50 a roll, now only cost $2.70.

 

[fuwen]

Now prices of film have fallen significantly over the years. In the past i use to buy a 36 exp ASA 400 film at $6.50 a roll, now only cost $2.70.

Not quite agree as I am using Kodak professional negatives VC160. Price more or less the same or slightly higher and I used to have choices of Ektapress, Ektar, etc etc and now at Cathay I can only get VC160. Still very much miss the very fine grain / grainless Ektar25.

 

[Snoweagle]

Not quite agree as I am using Kodak professional negatives VC160. Price more or less the same or slightly higher and I used to have choices of Ektapress, Ektar, etc etc and now at Cathay I can only get VC160. Still very much miss the very fine grain / grainless Ektar25.

The ones i buy are the fuji superia x-tra 400.....price does fall a lot as compared to years ago. I never use professional negatives before, but may change to shooting slides soon.

 

[Shadou]

I honestly don't think film will ever go extinct as you still have plenty of people who refuse to move over to digital for one reason or another. Take for example one of the biggest travel magazines around today, National Geographic. It's been around for more than 70 years and the photographers that they hire to do an assignment are forbidden from using digital. They have to lug around hundreds of rolls of film with them when they go on assignment. You would think that they would "get with the times" and make things easier by just allowing them to go digital but they don't allow it for good reason. Say they send a photographer out on a shoot with a digital camera. That photograher then has the ability to "alter" the image as he/she sees fits. They can change whatever they want in camera, or after with the correct software and the end product is not exactly the true image. National Geographic has always had the policy of providing as real and unaltered image so the viewer gets to see what the photographer sees when he takes the image. At least with a film photographer you can always be assured that he/she knows what they are doing by the quality of their work.

So in my own opinion, I believe that film will always remain, even if digital is what a majority of the world uses. But I could be wrong...

 

[Snoweagle]

Yes...most of the magazines n photo books we see sold in bookshops, the pics are taken with film rather than digital.

 

[Canonised]

Whether you like it or not, film will be like the typewriter. When the computer arrived, the typewriter was wiped out of the whole market.... it's the market forces. There will still be some who refuse to change with the time, but those are far and few. As such, film will be "gone" when the FF DSLR costs sub-$1,000 in the not so far distance. Of course not extinct but almost.... :think:

 

[michhy]

I wonder when will the hollywood movie makers dump their films

 

[Snoweagle]

Whether you like it or not, film will be like the typewriter. When the computer arrived, the typewriter was wiped out of the whole market.... it's the market forces. There will still be some who refuse to change with the time, but those are far and few. As such, film will be "gone" when the FF DSLR costs sub-$1,000 in the not so far distance. Of course not extinct but almost.... :think:

FF DSLRs costs sub $1000? I think will be in the many many years to come.

 

[yyD70S]

Of course not extinct but almost.... :think:

In life, never say never!:nono:

 

[LittleWolf]

Take for example one of the biggest travel magazines around today, National Geographic. It's been around for more than 70 years and the photographers that they hire to do an assignment are forbidden from using digital.

If I'm not mistaken, NG had a recent feature shot entirely with digital cameras.

For a makagzine like NG, it would be foolish to cling to film forever. Their business is selling pictures and stories, and whatever technology achieves that is secondary. No doubt the printing process has changed during the lifespan of this publication; the authors use copmputers with word processing software instead of typewriters or pencil&paper; the typesetting is computerized, too. Why should they refuse digital imaging once they perceive it as more practical?