Why 35mm is booming – And what might happen next – By Stephen Dowling
In a guest post, Stephen Dowling of Kosmofoto shares with us his thoughts on how the 35mm film market has changed in the last couple of years, and how it might change in the future. Check it out.
Agfa Precisa CT100. Fuji Sensia 400 and Neopan 1600. Kodak Elite Chrome 100VS and TMax 3200. Konica Chrome 200. And the wonderful, vibrant Agfa Ultra 100.
Every film photographer will have had their own variations over the last decade-and-a-half, presented with the news that yet another of their favourite films is no more. As digital became the dominant way of taking photographs, the companies used to making millions and millions of rolls of film struggled to adapt. They cut costs and cut staff. They cut all but the most popular lines of film in an effort to stay in the game.
This has framed the way we talk about film in the 21st Century – not the films we have to enjoy but the ones that have fallen one by one. It’s so easy to get fixated on what has gone that it blinds you to what you still have to enjoy.
I decided to do a list of which 35mm films are still on the market today (because 35mm is the format that most people still use, and which beginners are most likely to get an introduction on) for my blog Kosmo Foto. I didn’t really have any idea myself how many were left.
You can see which are left in Parts One, Two, and Three of the list. It’s by no means exhaustive as yet, as various film users from around the world have alerted me to more films that are still available.
What I didn’t expect when I started it would be that I would have to update it several times with new films that were coming on to the market. There are at least 75 now.
It’s no mistake that I’m writing this for Japan Camera Hunter, as Bellamy’s decision to release Street Pan 400 last year might have looked as if it kicked the whole thing off. I’m sure product development at film companies takes a little more time than that, but in the year since, there’s been some genuinely heartening news for film photographers.
In January, Kodak announced they were planning on bringing back Ektachrome slide film, only a few years after they pulled it. Italy’s FILM Ferrania announced the surprise release of an old black-and-white film P30. French firm Bergger also released Pancro 400, another 400-speed black-and-white emulsion. And there have been limited-edition releases too; Lomography’s F2 400-ISO print film, and Maco Direct’s Rollei Vario Chrome, a slide film that can be shot at different speeds for differing results.
So, for once, there appears to be good news.
The 35mm film market has done more than stay afloat – it’s showing the first signs of resurgence.
But what else can be learned?
Black and white is booming. Ilford makes black-and-white film and nothing but black-and-white film. It told me earlier this year that it was seeing more and more interest in its products. Ilford isn’t introducing a raft on new products, but neither is it cutting films – its range looks very similar to 15-odd years ago.
In the last decade or so it has brought out a pair of films under the Kentmere brand, which have been rebadged by a number of companies (Rollei 100 and 400, and most likely Agfaphoto’s Agfa Pan films as well).
There will be more competition for slide film. For the past five years or so, Japan’s Fujifilm has had the slide market to themselves – and has taken the opportunity to cut the number of films and jack the price up of those that remain. A roll of slide film in the UK can now cost nearly £15. That puts it out of the reach of most beginner photographers.
But both Kodak and FILM Ferrania have announced their intention to make slide film again. While we’re unlikely to ever see budget lines of slide films again, competition usually means better prices for the consumer. And the more slide film is made, the more labs will continue to offer E-6 processing.
We need more 100-speed colour film. There are currently only two 100-ISO colour print films left in most of the world – Kodak’s superlative Ektar 100 and Lomography’s CN100 (identity unknown, but probably Kodak’s ProFoto 100 consumer film). Most people want to take pictures when the light is good and they’re out and about.
Colour film is not cheap to invent or produce… but there seems to be a gap here that needs filling. I’ll wager a new 100-ISO colour print film surfaces next year.
More bespoke brands are coming. I followed Bellamy into the boutique film market in the summer by announcing my first film, Kosmo Foto Mono, a repackaged film made by… well, get in touch and I’ll tell you.
Repackaging existing film is nothing new. Everyone from mail-order processors to chemist chains to photo retailers made their own back in the heyday. And rather than cut in to the existing market, this variety seems to have an effect. Even if people know it’s merely repackaging of an existing product, they will buy a few rolls just for the packaging.
(Shameless plug alert – the first batch of Kosmo Foto Mono is still available, though only a few hundred rolls are left. Pre-order some now)
Many of us shot our first rolls of film on 35mm cameras. It’s a format that has allowed photography to become hugely portable while still capable of making huge prints. It’s one of photography’s most enduring mediums, and looks to be in good health for some time yet.
Stephen Dowling runs the Kosmofoto site and has been a champion of film for a long time. Congratulations to Stephen for releasing his own film, with arguably the coolest packaging of any film on the market.
Good article, but a little vague on why there is a resurgence. But, let’s all be glad there is a strong inventory of films to choose from. Here in the US, film costs are manageable, and cost of chemistry for processing is not out of sight. No so in other parts of the world.
What is still missing from our choices are the true super-fast films such as the above mentioned Neopan 1600. I understand why: B&W film users are a niche market of a niche market. We always will be in that position.
I’m just grateful that Ilford had the foresight to keep manufacturing their B&W products through the lean, scary years. That set the stage for the manufacturers of film from the former Soviet Bloc nations to continue to make their films and market them to a larger audience as economic conditions changed and evolved.
Now we have JCH, Kosmo & FILM Ferrania embarking on new products.
But, let’s not forget that living in a 24 news cycle demands instant images, and digital is the only platform that can deliver. Film is now, and will remain, a preferred method of making images for a select group practitioners that range from young to old. We may be small in number when compared to the general population who take pictures, but we have a huge impact.
Now, about that 1600 speed B&W silver-based film…
I’m left with the title question still unanswered?!? I suspect it’s boom is just so people can use the hashtag “film is not dead”, otherwise I don’t get it.
Sorry to say, but I am starting to find this kind of posts awkward.
Fact: the only film market that is probably still booming is the instant film segment.
Our issue: how could the 35mm market be booming with fewer cameras available new and fewer second-hand ones at a decent price?
It is not the disappearance of Agfa Precisa CT100, Fuji Sensia 400 or Neopan 1600 that we should be worried about today. It is the disappearance of Voigtländer Bessa, Fuji Klasse or GF670.
Since I came back to film in 2010, I had two Nikon FA and an FE, a Contax T2, a Minolta XD and a Pentax 645 die in my hands. That’s quite a bag of money, even at 2010 prices. Then I paid more to have my “indestructible” Nikon F2 and Leica IIIg serviced than I would have paid for a new Fuji X.
New films are coming? Cool. Shameless plug? Alright. But in which camera will the prospective newcomers put their film in before they realize how much of a dead end we are currently in? We may well have reached a plateau where we start to need more new boutique cameras than new boutique films. Is that a victory or the very last breath of 35mm?
1 million articles and vlogs, shameless plugs, and people talk (hipster talk, and carry, but don`t shoot nearly as much as they talk a single day about it), etc. that’s the boom, it’s a boom within a tiny niche, as while all these constant “brag-about-it” people buy cheap cameras to sell the defects at triple or more of the price, the legacy Joe and Mary late-switching film shooters have continued to replace their old good consumer SLR or P&S with their smartphone or something digital more expensive. Developing film or even printing film, nope, I bet there the boom is kind of neglectable, still. No print shops are opening beyond the few that kept that service centrally available. No additional labs, machines, E6 that can stay afloat with such a service. Only Hollywood like force-viral campaigns made Kodak announce what is a year after still not available. Kodak? No, they`re careful and wait as long as they can to enter such virtual market as the last player, safely. Ferrania? Italians, they have a history of nerdism (see cars, motorcycle companies that come and go and re-appear and get some success, go and re-appear).
Film is an enthusiast thing, Niche, and yes for many of us it feels like a boom, but it`s more a boom in “brag” and “vintage” sale, as the good examples become more rare and “vintage” is in at all levels today – fashion is the term. Think vinyl, think of the many classic cars, beetles, … the world is looking for a “reliable” grip, while transforming into this global application specialized smart service operation and consumption, automated, controlled, (super-)fast, transparent, … we have to move on, but we loved so much what we grown up with, easy, physical, slow, “reliable” (never really was!), …
Yes, the only real boom is instant – fashion, too for the same reason as mentioned above.
Re-packaged films to me are worthless, unless there are distribution- or format gaps to overcome, or they’re not rebadged but modified for good reason.
I use ilford or Kodak and will use Ferrania, as soon as available. The rest is occasional noise or experimental.
Cameras? Difficult, as there’s no manufacturer support available anymore. Yes, I include the Leica Bastards, who sell you an introductory service for non-broken camera (M6) that will cost you at least the value that the camera is currently offered on the market or create buggy new film cameras, that as soon as out of warranty will get the same “preventive” treatment.
Best is, find a really good specialised workshop, take the best fully mechanical camera they have fully serviced (i.e. Nikon F, Leica M, Rolleiflex; one with a lasting value) and use it, service-it with that person frequently (1/year) to ensure it stays perfect without major added cost. Prepare for developing and roll-cutting film yourself, for cost reduction and for being self-sufficient. Avoid money wasting into complex, electronic, cheaply build, niche products, unless you explicitly want to live GAS full force.
Hey, don`t get me wrong, neither is film dead – far from it, nor is this “fashion” here to stay in such relative large form.
In the end, if you’re a photographer like Bresson and the others in their time, you’d be using the most perfect smartphone camera these days for your art, not a DSLR or Mirrorless or Medium format. You’d be like the stinking Graphlex, Rolleiflex or, … photographers of that time. Sure, there’s no easy comparison. Shoot what you like and love, it’s about You – no rules valid.
#shootfilmordigitalbutshoot
Wow, the negativity, where’s that from? Complaints about niche blah blah blah
OK my 2 cents worth. There was a great article recently with dealt with the issues of cameras being necessary to film, and the answer to the gripe above about dying cameras is buy mechanical cameras. For now there are still plenty of skilled technicians who can service and repair them, and they will literally last forever with basic care and occassional service. My main cameras are a Contax D made in 1949 which only needed shutter curtain adjustment, and my Brooks-Plaubel Veriwide 100 made in 1959 which is good as the day it was made. You cannot expect any 10-20 electronic appliance to last; that is why there has been massive resuragance in the production of mechanical watches and the price of vintage watches. FYI I have a 1913 trench watch running as good as new. I would also point to the resurgance of other analogue technology like LP record players and records, mechanical typewriters, fountain pens, notebooks etc. This trend is well described in the book The Revenge of Analog, Real Things and Why They Matter by David Sax, and a host of articles.
Niche? Yeah so what, loads of artistic pursuits like oil painting, watercolours, marble sculpture, leatherwork, or a host more require rare, unusual materials, hard to obtain tools and are practised by limited amounts of people. That doesn’t mean they aren’t beautiful, or lack artistic merit.
Someone complained about repackaged film. Again, so what? It was done by the hundreds back in the day and back then almost no one had ever heard the name Ferrania, a great majority of their production was create “rebadged” film for the likes of 3M, Polaroid and a host of others. Kudos to Bellamy and Stephen for putting their blood, sweat, creativity and marketing into their own film brands. Who cares who made it, I will buy it because by supporting them you support the unpaid work they do to promote film photography in general. If you buy bottled water its exactly the same, you’re paying multinationals like Nestle or Coca Cola for water no better than what comes out of a tap.
Instead of criticising and nay saying, how about celebrating these successes? Instead of looking at it as a small “niche” success I prefer to look at it as the thin end of the wedge.
Film is something that has been part of my life since childhood back in the 60s, and if it disappeared altogether my heart would ache with that loss. God, less than a year ago when Fuji discontinued pack film and loads of slide films I thought we were on the brink of film dissapearing altogether.
So Vale to Bellamy and Stephen for their efforts to keep film alive!
Our comments are like the various sides or planes of a complex geometric figure…
Or like the old story about blind people asked to describe an elephant just by using their hands.
All contribute to the whole.
Buying a well designed, good 35mm or medium format used camera is like buying a backpack from LL Bean. They just don’t wear out; only a major incident will destroy them.
So, I love shooting film, missed the memo that film had died years ago, and drag my invisible dino tail behind me as I snap away.
Film will outlast me.
Look Cheyenne Morrison, if you take any word that doesn’t come out of your mouth as complaint, I can’t help you.
I describe my view, it’s NOT full of negativity, I just sort the different aspects the way I see them. I do NOT force them on others. Niche, is nothing negative for me, it’s great, I love niche, guess why I read this stuff? But it’s not mainstream, it is a small portion of the market, if not tiny.
After all it is about:
– Film is alive and will stay alive
– Shoot whatever you like and how you do like to
– Cameras can last “forever” if maintained, but that is not easy to do sometimes.
– Many new entries have substance, others are me too
– I support niche with substance! Not hype! Neither negative nor positive Hype! Is it real, maintaineable, consistent and reliable. Here I am, take my money.
– Result: I have a few Pledge/Kickstarters supported in the past and others still active, because I believe in them, buy for experiment one or the other crap or useless market offers, ride niche Bikes and Cars, but I don’t wear a Hipster Beard or my Cameras to show off, regardless of film or not.
– And NO, I will never celebrate anything as success that I don’t have proof that is is a success and that is not in my view, especially when it failed technically, commercially or in service.
YOU! instead take the shortcut to put that stamp of negativity on everything I wrote and twisting my general viewpoints as negative arguments onto products I do in fact support already for years.
Better sit back and get some more of those drugs if that helps you.
I’m with Dan – there are still literally tons of unbelievably good film cameras out there that have lasted a long time and still have many years to go. Personally I’ve been getting everything I buy CLA’d by various old pros around the world, so they’ll probably outlast me.
Complex P&S will eventually die out and vanish, but a good mechanical camera that’s well cared for will last almost indefinitely. Heck, my oldest useable cameras are pushing 100.
I agree that prices have gone up, sometimes radically, but you can still easily find a Minolta X-500 or 700 for a couple of dollars. Spend a few more getting the caps replaced and you’ve got your entry ticket to quality 35mm. And once those caps are sorted and light seals replaced, they’re great cameras.
I would argue that it is booming, but in a limited sense. Perhaps it has only met mainstream hipsterdom, rather than the general population.
Electronic P&S are all the craze, but they are dying. Minolta X-500 or 700 are amazing and take amazing glass, but they’re not built to last forever and can’t be repaired. Buy three of them to be on the safe side and that’s two hoarded cameras that are not on the market anymore for a budding film photographer. What’s more, this drives prices up.
Some mechanical cameras may last almost indefinitely, but there is a finite number of them. If there really is a film boom, these cameras will either become harder to find or more expensive. I am not even taking the price of the mandatory CLA into account. This won’t help film either.
Large format will survive. Pinhole photography will survive. Wet plate collodion will survive. 35mm, I don’t know. No more available cameras, no more 35mm film to sell.
I read somewhere that film photography is becoming something of a more conscious art form, just like watercolour or oil painting. Maybe. Still, there would be no companies making paint anymore if there were no companies making brushes.
I’d love to read an in-depth article that addresses the whole 35mm camera issue. The standpoint of what’s still available today is rather short-term thinking.
What camera company that still actively provide repairs for their film camera? or at least still have spare part around?. Leica? Arax? Nikon? Canon?
Leica only, as far as I know.
Repairmen working privately can work on much more, but they are either getting old, have a very long turnaround, start missing spare parts, cost an arm (rightfully), etc. Japan being the exception, I don’t see many young repairmen entering the business.
“Look Cheyenne Morrison, if you take any word that doesn’t come out of your mouth as complaint, I can’t help you.”
What the…???
Then I will be saving my money for Leica then.
PSA: There is a good Nikon repair facility in the Chicago area.
You know when you read or hear something, and it doesn’t seem quite correct? (this is a non-political opening to my comments.) That little box in your brain pops open it’s hatch and sends out a signal to question conventional wisdom?
I’m referring to comments that there is a finite number of film cameras (mostly 35mm, but to a more limited extent, medium format.) The unspoken, but implied intent is that they will be too expensive to operate & maintain, or may disappear altogether, and then where will film be?
I’d bet the original source of this “fact” was someone trying to obtain a particular type/model or brand of a camera, and found it was unavailable at the moment. Perhaps this lead to a blanket statement on social media that 35mm cameras were scare and the sky was falling.
But, take a moment, and think about the sheer number of cameras made between 1970 – 1990. All those Nikons, Canons & Leicas. How many Minoltas, Pentaxs and Olympus cameras rolled off the assembly line in that 20 year span? Did I forget anyone? Probably.
The point is, a vast number of cameras (and lenses were made). Now, granted, quite a few have been destroyed or rendered unworkable, but still, many, many survive. I would surmise that more cameras still survive than there are practitioners of film photography. I mean, when a photographer traded in their Canon F-1 for a DSLR, the camera store didn’t take the F-1 out back and run it through a metal shredder. It was sold or traded.
Some cameras are out of reach due to their limited initial production runs (mostly Leica.)
But c’mon, use your common sense. Many still reside on shelves tucked back in closets. The owners, finding that a Nikon F3 is now only worth (for arguments sake) $100 toward a trade, would rather keep it than suffer the sting of a low-ball trade-in price. If Leica made about 60,000 CL cameras, then where are they? I’ve got one, but that leaves a lot more cameras out there to be discovered.
I think the real problem lies in the spotty used market. Ebay is both a curse and an asset. Many people go to Ebay to set a used price. But, Ebay is an auction site, not a classified site. I would try and get the most for my gear, that’s just human nature. But, those prices really don’t reflect the actual worth of a camera. Just what we’d like to get for it.
Face it, the good camera are aging. Find a good one or two. Spend some money to get it put back in good working order. I bought a Leica M2 in 2002. It was on a dusty back shelf in an antique shop. I used it as is for 3 years. I then obtained a CL as a back up. the M2 went to Leica. It had worn parts replaced, it underwent a CLA and I got a note from the tech that said it was good for another 30 years. Then the CL went out for it’s physical. I don’t beat my gear, long passed are the days when I might have sprinted across a field of fire, or I followed and documented the Rolling Stones on a world tour. My gear will outlast me (I’m 66.)
I don’t have empirical data to back-up my observations, just common sense and a more global view than some have. Don’t worry about this.
I’d much rather see someone introduce a new, fast B&W film stock. We’ve got 400 & 3200. How about a nice, juicy 1200 ISO, silver halide film. Call it HP-10 or Quad-X. Just please, would someone make it? That would pump excitement into the film community.
If 20% of the films on the list are the same product in a different canister, is the news 20% less good? Don’t misunderstand me, I do see more people who are too young to really remember when film was king buying film cameras and the film to feed them. I’m as happy about that as the supposed film resurgence. But, I wonder how big that resurgence really is. Other than Fujifilm’s Instax line, none of the current film producers actually report production or sales volumes. Without actual numbers to point to, it’s nothing more than a lot of back-slappin’ and grinning. The author made a point of mentioning both Bregger’s new films and Maco/Rollei’s new color film. But the new Bregger films are widely understood to be Kentmere, and Maco/Rollei was pretty clear that their Vario Chrome is old-stock film. In fact in their product announcements, they talked about wanting to revive a film, like Belamy did with Street Pan, but found it too costly to justify. With all of that in mind, I’m happy to use what is available, but I wonder if there is a real sense of growth, or just a realignment of film users.
One other point w/r cameras: There are still a lot of good cameras that you can buy, but the total numbers of usable cameras is decreasing year by year (plus, cost is going up and there is a global redistribution of the more desirable models). Both are true, but so what. The bigger issue is that camera body manufacturers would have to advertise and market their products. If those products are film cameras, they they are also marketing film in a general sense. Word of mouth only goes so far, and there is a real advantage to us if costs associated with the marketing of film and film cameras was spread out over a larger pool of companies, while also reaching a wider number of people.
Dear Dan,
If you’re right -and I hope you are- this is big. This means that the film crowd has somehow knocked capitalism out. We don’t need new stuff. Mankind has produced enough. The stock is sufficient. Henry Thoreau and William Morris would be proud of us.
Let’s say that I am the pessimist and that you are the optimist. I wouldn’t mind being wrong. Still, I would love to read an in-depth article that addresses the whole 35mm camera issue, taking into account your opinion, my opinion, and whatever opinion may exist. Heck, maybe we should write it together?
As of me, I don’t need film cameras. I bought what I wanted when it was cheaper than it is now. I rather fear that budding film photographers won’t have that chance anymore and will only have access to expensive and less-than-good equipment which, in turn, won’t help the film market.
Hi Damien,
I like to think my developing tank is half full…and I tend to be long-winded at times…
There is a finite supply of cameras, but we haven’t reached critical mass in terms of scarcity.
I’d advise anyone getting into film for the long haul to buy a used camera whose manufacturer is still in business.
I agree w/you that essentially, if you’re getting into film now, you’ll see higher prices and ‘picked over’ stock (unless your grandmother stashed away her Hasselblad and will gift it to you.)
I’m also like you in the fact that I’ve got what I need for film cameras. I may look for another CL body before the year is out, but otherwise, I’m all set.
I’m happy to read this exchange among people. New ways of looking at things, hearing other film-pusher’s experiences, et al.
I live in an area where there is little or no exchange among other photographers, so I value these back & forth comments. All the local camera stores have gone, turned into mobile phone stores or Hello Kitty emporiums.
Well, I agree that camera shops around my place are packed to the gills with film cameras. You could enter any and buy a Topcon Auto, a Minolta AL-F, an Olympus ACE-E or a Ricoh Caddy. Have you heard of those? Me neither. Or maybe you did. Still, they’re 35mm cameras and they work brilliantly and they’re really cheap. So yes, in a sense, we haven’t reached critical mass in terms of scarcity. For some reason, however, nobody seems to buy them anyway.
If there is a future for film without new cameras being produced, is this what people will eventually consider buying once every Contax T2, Ricoh GR1v and Nikon 35Ti is gone? Possible.
On the other hand, I wouldn’t necessarily advise anyone getting into film for the long haul to buy a used camera whose manufacturer is still in business. Nikon’s still in business, but if you buy a Nikon FE or FA today, once it’s dead, it will stay dead. See, we have different opinions again. We should really think about writing that article together!
What I would advise is to buy something mechanical that’s easily serviceable. Think guerilla. Leica comes to mind if you have the money. Zorki and Fed come to mind if you don’t. Praktica Six comes to mind if you’re into MF. Or a cloth curtain shutter SLR if you’re into SLR. Go meterless and teach yourself Sunny 16.
Well… this kind of Luddite advice won’t help film much because electronic P&S cameras are the ones that feed the “new film boom” today. And yes, they become scarce. At least, that’s what he said: https://www.japancamerahunter.com/2017/05/compact-cameras-future/
Hey check out the cool box for the Kosmo film! Cool name too.
So…. why exactly is 35mm film photography booming then?
Nice description of film options out there, anyhow!
“Booming” is probably hyperbole.
But the thing where almost everyone switched from film to digital already happened. And since that time, many people have switched back, many more WILL switch back, and every day someone who’s never shot film is picking it up.
It’s a very slow process. But it must be working, because in this day and age of the Bean Counter-run company, we’re starting to see new filmstocks.
It’s not the rosiest of pictures, but it’s a hell of a lot better than it was five years ago.
Things are moving, and, for perhaps the first time in a long time, they’re not moving down (besides Fuji, which, let’s be honest, fuck Fuji [if, for nothing else, killing FP-3000B].)
I’ve shot film for a long long time and continue to do so (I also shoot digital but with a different purpose in mind). Revival? Maybe, but film is for those who understand. Digital is for the rest (and some of those who understand). Film will always have a role for those who want to learn about photography rather than those who use a camera just as a tool or as a visual notebook. In the UK and Europe film has kept a stronger hold than it has in Japan – the country of fashion and trend followers. Maybe the ‘revival’ is happening in Japan and, hopefully, to the embarrassment of Fuji who have cut some excellent B&W films.
Danny, I think that your main contention is probably right. Yes, the vast majority of photographers switched to digital, but that can only happen for so long. Eventually these things plateau, and sometimes they slowly reverse.
But the problem with film really lies with scanning options. Most scanners are really poor, even the ones used by premium labs. Something has to happen in that area.
The scanning an issue, but not for the reasons you state. It’s an issue because of what scanning is….its taking a photograph of something. So the image you end up with isn’t your film image. It’s a digital photograph of your film image. You may as well have taken the image with a digital camera. For whatever limitations your digital camera has in rendering an image, that is shared by the scanner. They are the same technology. So for all the expense of shooting in film, if you use the image electronically then you have wasted your time really. You may as well have taken it with a digital camera in the first place. Illogically I have read about photographers scanning their slides by using a DSLR to take a macro photo of them. What’s the point? You may as well have pointed that DSLR at the actual object instead.
Film is making comeback because many photographers are looking for an alternative to the look of digital. I just got back into film after leaving a decade ago for digital only. I think this movement will only grow, especially if companies see they can still make money off of film users. I would also not be surprised to see a new film camera or two being made in the next few years. With the popularity of instant polaroids, I could see a new point & click film camera being really popular within the photography community.
I see this oft-touted idea…the film look. and yet, even now, even as a prior film photographer I am hard pressed to see any quality that intrinisically belongs to the medium of film. The ‘film look’ is more about colour rendition and photography style. It’s been over 2 decades since the advent of digital and photography styles have changed. But that’s not endemic to digital, it’s just something that happened alongside digital and now everyone thinks that trend is somehow a quality of digital photography. I continue to view hundreds of photographs taken with film and hundreds taken with digital waiting to see the materialisation of this thing called the ‘film look’. I cannot find it in anything aside from the stylistic choices of the photographer. I even took a digital photo this week and gave it the ‘film look’ by changing the style of photographing and the colour rendition in post processing. Yeah, the film look is entirely possible in digital because it was never about the film. It was about the style of photography that was popular when film was popular. I don’t give a rats if a photographer prefers to work in the medium of film. Fine, it’s like a painter arguing that watercolour is intrisically better than oils. They are just different mediums. But I do get annoyed by the mythologising of film as if it has some magical ability to create intrinsically better photographs. The person holding the camera makes photographs, not the plastic film in the canister.
New films and the resurgence of interest in non-digital photography in all its forms can only be a good thing for creatives, its another tool in the art box. I wont go on about it here, maybe a full article soon, about the need to get people developing their own b/w film and regarding the process as another creative opportunity rather than a wet and smelly waste of half an hour.
I love the romance of film, I love the look and build and even feel of analogue cameras. I am not however about to take up film photography again.
Why? Because at $45 per roll (for film + processing) film photography is a rich mans sport, or the habit of the chronically broke. It like tossing aside your computer and writing your fictional masterpiece on a vintage typewriter. Yes I am certain some people, somewhere are actually doing that. But it makes for a lot of wasted time, paper and energy and for what? The romance of writing like Hemmingway did. The rise in film photography as a hobby is mostly to do with a generation of people who have never seen film based photography and the novelty of it. Its exactly the same thing as my fascination with french polishing furniture, this skill was packed up and obsolete by the time I was born. So it feels good to engage in something that has never been around in your lifetime. How long that fascination lasts? Who knows.