Hi Jens,
Thanks for your response. You mentioned the global market for film as a potential for keeping film alive. I wonder if that's the case though.
Where has the biggest film market been historically? In 'developed' or 'undeveloped' (no pun intended) countries? Maybe it's the huge purchase of film in developed countries that effectively subsidizes it's sale in smaller (don't know if I'm right) markets. If that is so, and past actions predict future ones, film producers may not care an iota if smaller/poorer country B's citizens do not have film. If it's not profitable it will simply cease to be produced. No digital camera, no pictures.
I'd say that if I have to develop the film myself... I wouldn't have the time. Nor would I likely wish to to trust my now more expensive medium to the postal system.
I definitely agree that film scanners have a limited lifespan...
Tom C.
From: "Jens Bladt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: RE: Future Practicality of Film Date: Tue, 18 May 2004 20:09:14 +0200
Hello Tom The journey from film towards digital photgraphy has begun. No one knows how long it will last. I guess they will produce and sell film as long as it is profitable. But:
We are 6 billion people in the world today. 30 years ago we were 3 billion. In 20 years time we will be 10 billion. I guess there' still a lot of places where they don't have a lot of computers (the worlds highest percentage of households owning computer/having inertnet access is in Scandinavia - appr. 60-80%). Lots of people in less developed countries can't afford that.
So, I guess there will be a market for film for the next 5-15 years. In 5 years time you may have to develop and enlarge your film yourself or go to a few, small and speciealized or expensive companies. I mean - you can still get Super 8 film with sound from small companies that buy Kodak film an add on sound tape - but is a hazzle and very expensive. In 10 years time you may have to buy film/and get them developed etc. in a few places - maybe 2 in Europe, 5 in Asia, 2 in the USA etc. Film scanners will not be manufactured anymore in 10 years time.
Film for amatures is quite cheep today, because of the huge sale to professionals. They will stop buying film within the next 2-5 years, if not earlier. This means film will soon be so expensive, that the film usage for an average amatuer can pay for a digital camera in a few months (for me - less than 2 years of film supply can buy a *ist D today)
Today a 4MP digital camera will cost you less than you earn in 1 day. In 10-15 years a 10MP digital camera will cost you what's equivalent to what you earn in 1 hour.
So, if you want a MF system, you have two choises:
1. Wait 2 years and you'll get it for almost nothing. You will be able to get film for the next 3-13 years. 2. Buy into a system supporting digital (imacon) backs.
Jens Bladt mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://hjem.get2net.dk/bladt
-----Oprindelig meddelelse----- Fra: Tom C [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sendt: 18. maj 2004 08:55 Til: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Emne: Future Practicality of Film
I realize this list has a number of clairvoyants and unlicensed psychologists (hahaa), but I'm still interested in a general opinion.
I have planned to buy a 67II for a number of years. I am now trying to determine the practicality of that course.
What if in five years most photography is being done digitally as opposed to film? What if it's impractical for amateurs, even pros, to use MF/LF photography for any but the most eliteist of applications?
Even considering the potential quality of MF over 135, it seems history may tell us that potential quality is not the sole factor in longevity and success. Both 620 and 828 saw their demise, even though they were a larger format than 135. If major players (camera and film manufacturers) are/were to move away from 135 film, how long is it until they move away from larger film formats which currently represent a smaller portion of the market than 135?
For a fraction of the price of the price of a decent/complete MF system, there are other things... hot tub, SCT telescope for astrophotography... a surgery my wife has always wanted...
I'm curious, what people think... is it possibly throwing money down the drain to 'invest' in additional film equipment? I'm not making a case for this, just wondering. The world is currently changing at a faster pace than most imagined was possible.
Tom C.
