I shoot Ilford FP4 Plus and buy ilford multifgrade paper for the dark room. I support Harman Ilford because I think this company is really important for the future of film. And I upload some of my photographs to Wikimedia commons making it very clear in the description and categories these pictures are shot on film.
A roll of kodak kodacolor 135 36 exposure color film without developing was $5.00 in 1975. That would be $29.32 in today's dollars. A five pack of Portra 400 at b and h photo is $75.95 today. $15.95 a roll. Film prices in 2005 hit an all time low in 2005 before rising again, a roll of portra nc in 2005 cost 9.19 in today's dollars. Depending on the year that you would like to compare film is generally less expensive today than in the past.
Fujifilm is actually shifting their 35mm production to china. Their new color film is being made now by lucky film or yes!star. This was done to covert the existing factories in japan to instax production(they actually make a lot of money from instax). And, the continued 35mm film is more of an after thought of legacy. Kodak on the other hand, is still tied to pension payments. They are contractual obligated to sell their products and chemicals to Kodak Alaris, an umbrella company for paying old kodak pensions. This was created during the infamous chapter 11 bankruptcy protection filing. Kodak(not kodak alaris) makes very little profit, as they don't inhairent the proceds by Kodak Alaris. Kodak Alaris net profit's goes to the old kodak pensioners. This not going away anytime soon, unfortunately.
@@masanthar at the end of the day.. Kodak, has about 30 or 40 million net profit a year. Which, leaves very little breathing room in terms of investment for materials and new products for next year fiscal. They are currently trying to spin off the us pension for extra income. But, the europe pensions still remains pretty sizable.
@@masanthar no, it doesn't go away. Employees contribution goes into a manage portofilo on the stock market, while their company match a certain percantge. The profits goes to the pensioners. While over time, the pensions gets adjusted with the cost living. The company contribution helps with this. In Kodak Eastman (Kodak US), the pension is at a point where it's over funded. This not case with Kodak Alaris or the European side.
@@JLHBio Hmm maybe things' ll get better on that regard with the help of tech and the need for less hands. Anyway thanks for taking the time to explain.
Ilford are experimenting with iterations of colour film production. The future should be stable. It's going to be niche, but the market is adjusting to demand.
You could buy a used nikon f100 with 35mm or 50mm lens and shoot a roll of 400h a week for a year for around $1,100.00, compare that to the cost of a Fuji X100VI with film sims.
You could buy blank canvases, paint, and brushes to create a painting once a week for less than the cost of an iPad and Apple Pencil. The point is that, while the method of creating the art may be similar, the medium and the final product are entirely different.
Digital film emulation is not the same. I'm sick of knock off solutions. You just can't create what actual film produces in real life. I don't want recreations, I want the real thing.
Except the grain structure and the halation almost everything can be replicated perfectly. What a lot of people refer to when talking about "film feel" or "film look" is actually the scanner colour science. I get you, I also love film, but a pro mist filter does the job pretty well.
Sims have come a long way since even 6 years ago. X-Trans III (of which I own, and my XH1 is the closest I'll come to taking a digital camera to the grave) really sucks at simulating film with the in-camera JPEGs. Comparing them to RAW images edited clean just looks like you tweaked the colour settings. Hardly any of the sample photos I see for X-Trans3, not even the ones on Fuji X Weekly, come close to looking filmic. The XT4 came close, but finally with the XT5 and X100VI are we finally getting the slightest bit of filmic realism to the in-camera JPEGs. I haven't used many film sim packs, but even then, stuff like HaldCLUT (as much as i love it) can't hold a candle to what's out there now.
On my side having worked in a lot of factories I m pretty confident for the future, we can see that in a lot of factories when you want to enhance you production tools, you plan a technical stop to perform your improvement. So I prefer to be optimistic for 2025
This is one of the more informed videos on this subject. As a film shooter of over 40 years, I believe that film will endure for the reasons why most serious film enthusiasts shoot it; the latitude, look, zen passion of the workflow, and the tactile experience contribute to the appeal of the newer generations of shooters who will determine its future value. Those who see it simply as an anachronistic novelty will drop out at a price point with that impact likely negligible to overall demand. The cost of film in 2014 was similar to the cost in the mid 70s without adjusting for inflation; it was always expensive. Harmon dipping a toe in colour film production is a bright spot for the future, given Kodak's near monopoly on colour emulsions. My understanding is that the majority of Lomo, Cinestill and Fuji branded colour stock is now based on contractual arrangements with Eastman. Further, given that Alaris is enforcing its own exclusive consumer distribution rights of Kodak film with Eastman, The recent "cinema production only" Vision 3 restrictions will likely be permanent, but it is understandable as too many resellers were profiting on unauthorized re-spooling and re branding. That said, It would be wonderful to see some agreement between Alaris and Eastman for limited purchases for consumer only use. It would seem a natural additional profit center for both as Vision 3 is a brilliant film for still photography (the annoyances of remjet removal aside). It would also send a positive message to a market weary of the monopoly.
After years of shooting real film I’ve become addicted to emulating it as the convenience is so great. Currently I’m using the latest Caleb Salvadori V5 film presets that use luminance masks for accurate grain. They are much better than the Fuji sims.
This is going to be the year for film. Cost be damned, there is no substitute for the tactile experience of creating photos with the technology that started it all. The hundreds of working cameras that I have will all be available for much less than current prices because I want to help those new to analog magic.
Lets hope you are right and we'll continue to have film for reasonable prices cause right now I think kodak at least is charging what the market will tolerate. It would be a pity for this artform to be lost
I have numerous film cameras from varied brands and was a regular film shooter until about 2 years ago. Film prices have just gone crazy, availability has become spotty and I struggle to find a development lab. Not only that but development prices are also nuts. I've parked my film cameras for the time being as it makes no economic sense to shoot film right now.
The day film dies is the day actual photographers the world over will mourne. Whether you're a film photographer or a digital photographer that shoots film to change up, the process offers something that can't be replicated. I really hope it will still be around for the future, and that companies will find new innovative ways to make shooting film both more environmentally friendly as well as more affordable.
I suggested to Kodak that they add more layers to their b&w emulsions. The point is to significantly increase latitude. Who knows if that will result in a viable product.
Film will continue to grow. Kodak will reposition prices and stabilise production. More labs are opening, driving down scanning/dev costs. Crucial will be Pentax's success - if they release a modern GR PAS a new generation of shooters will be set. With success they'll move on to SLR and MF. Their success won't go unnoticed by either OM, Nikon or a new Chinese manufacturer. Leica could release a premium PAS... Film shooters should shoulder responsibility too. We shouldn't blindly support everything but film shooters could give a lot less hate and be more constructive and supportive to manufacturers.
considering Kodak just doubled down on their contract with Cinestill, disallowing respooled cinema film, and their notion has been that film is slowly dying, I think that thought process has a lot of merit to it. Tell me Alexius, do you trust all these megacorportions PR teams that craft a wonderfully positive forward facing public image. As much as I would love to trust Kodak, I am weary.
Best of luck for film photographers, the cellphone defeated you. I'm beginning to believe film photographers are living in a very small bubble, and it is going to get smaller and smaller as people give up on the expense of the entire film experience. We are not living in the 70s or 80s.
In India, one roll of portra or cinestill 800T cost $30!!! Planning to shoot one roll per month. In India there are still young people who love to try film photography, but its just not affordable anymore.For one roll, developing, scanning cost one can pay EMI of decent mirrorless camera
Try Kodak Gold 200 or Ultramax 400 and Kodak Vision 3 500T. Though those are almost double price considering $ conversion factor. Getting a good quality lab another headache. Last month I have shoot with Ultramax, Kodak Double X and Vision 3 250D. Now loaded one roll of ORWO Wolfen NC 500, let's see
I never have, and likely never will shoot colour film. I just don't enjoy the results, B+W is more satisfying. Kodak killed the stock I'd used for decades in 2011, which I really didn't like as there's no alternative I've found, only different stocks.
I mostly feel the same way. Except some film stocks with an unusual colour palette like LomoChrome Purple or Cinestill (Kodak Vision 3) 50D can be really beautiful.
@@djtoman6875 I have thought about using one of those, LomoChrome Purple in particular, but haven't yet. Mostly because I was home developing, but I'm not now, at least for a while, so I may try some in the summer.
I had my shoot film phase about 20 years ago, and this year I decided to shoot a few rolls again with my trusty old EOS3 and 24-105f4 and 50f1.8. Yeah, I enjoyed it quite a bit, but scanning the negs, putting in the work to clean the dust - it‘s just a lot of pain in the ass. All for something you can very easily achieve with CC and grain emulation these days. I love the tactility of film, but if film gets even more expensive, it‘s not worth the hassle.
@@mstrshkbrnnn1999 That's what I've been trying to say actually - it's half for me, half not for me, I guess. I enjoy it, and I've been doing it since I was a child (in the 90s there weren't any digital cameras, and I got to use my dad's Minolta MD SLRs, even back in the 80s), but I'm a dad now, I just don't have the time anymore.
Prices of film cameras rose indeed if you compare them to dirt cheap prices from 15 years ago. Film cameras were dirt cheap and undervalued because of massive transition to digital. Now they gain in value but you can still buy a working film camera for 10-20% of the original price. If you must have a Contax, Leica or trendy p&s then you have to pay more but you if don’t need to show off you can get some nice cameras at the price of a few film rolls. I’ve a bunch of P. Spotmatic bodies that Im selling for next to nothing and nobody wants them because despite of being an excellent and reliable camera, the Spotmatic is very common so it’s not trendy. Shooting digital in film like mode is like converting pictures taken with a cellphone to daguerreotype. The results can be similar but you are missing the whole fun. If the process of shooting film is no fun to you, then you’re best bet is a digital camera which is cheaper and better in almost everything.
I bought a 3 pack today of ultramax 400 24 exposures for $24.99. Flic film is from Canada and Lucky film is from China so when the Trump Tariffs hit it won't be so cheap anymore. The reason I bought my 3 pack of ultramax today. To beat the price increase.
Love film. Digital is convenient but no one is looking. Have you been used to nikon Nikonos as intended: scuba diving. Despite what people are saying about digital film always seems to have something more tactile. I really hope that the future of film will be safe. Have noticed that when I hand someone a hand made print their eyes light up because he gets something physical not just the digital file.
If Pentax was smart they would release a SLR with auto focus that uses film. Pentax could also release a mirrorless camera just keep the same mount and just use the same lens that are already made. This way you can have film users and DSLR users and people that like the benefits of mirrorless.
There are already many extremely cheap autofocus SLR cameras on the used market. If they were to release such a model, they would be competing with the used market in a battle they couldn’t win. The only thing that makes sense from a business perspective are categories of cameras that are already expensive or rare.
@@nikoladimitrijevic8172 Wrong. Pentax released that crappy point and shoot and there are a lot of those on the market. The reason they would release a new SLR with auto focus is because it would work with all the newer and best lens. Also some film cameras like the Nikon F6 printed the date on part of the film. Pentax could do this and also put in a small number so when scanning in the images software would no what lens profile to add in for correction.
@@bigrobotnewstoday1436 Please give me a link where I can buy a half-frame camera for 15-50$ that could compete with P17... The P17 wasn’t built like a tank, but it is well-made and features an excellent lens. Considering it’s a half-frame camera, it holds a solid/unique position in the market. In that price range, there are plenty of autofocus SLRs available, complete with lenses. Today, locally in the city where I live, I could buy Pentax MZ-50 + SMC 35-80mm for 18$... Canon Eos 1000F + Canon Zoom 35-80mm for 20$... (just a quick search). These prices also show how much interest people have in that segment. And if we were to talk about the high-end segment, the arguments for an autofocus SLR would only get worse. The idea of using a profile for lens correction isn’t bad, but I think the best we could hope for is a lens profile in Lightroom.
Definitely. They are smart, they understand that SLRs will only survive through film photography, and they are working on a new SLR. Ricoh is also developing a film GR camera.
Yes, total death of film😂 Good grief, adjusting for inflation, the price is still low. Heck, I just bought 20 rolls of ProImage 100 for $100 on Cyber Monday. This hyperbolic reaction that Kodak is actually a business that needs to invest in new equipment for the first time in over 20 years is nonsense.
I can’t be the only one who bsolutely refuses to click on or watch video thumbnails with obviously clickbait…sorry, I realized halfway I’m bing a dick and this is not your fault, but I’m really completely sick of what the youtube algorithm does to content. So much so that i just wish there was an alternate platform to go to. Capitalism uins everything it touches….the promise of competition creating better choice is obviousy untenable, but neither is there a soluion yet. The only thing close is when a society chooses to allocate funds (ie. public or user supported television or radio) I just find everything on youtube withthe same two song types and “OH MY GOD” thumbnail faces unlickable at this point. So when a title about a topic even a little appeals to my fears…it reminds me of every other horrible piece of commercial media that just wants to fear me into a click. Sorry, its not us, its them. Which means it’s us…fuck.
Love digital and film, but… Digital camera sales have been on the decline since the early 2010s, with only a slight uptick driven by the introduction of high-end mirrorless cameras. Even ignoring sales numbers, digital photography faces an existential threat from “AI”/LLMs that is greater than the one digital posed to film photography. Add to that the fact that, by posting your digital photos/videos/content online, you’re feeding the machine that is destined to bury you (hopefully only creatively and vocationally-speaking), and creatives will be forced to become more and more mindful of how they release, sell, or share their work. Eventually, the digital space itself will die or be rendered useless as a result of all the LLM-created noise. But digital’s still cheaper than film? Digital photography’s price will be at the expense of your creativity and your ability to control your work. In contrast, the future of film photography looks bright, independent of Kodak’s greed (film’s still relatively affordable, adjusted for inflation, compared to previous periods) or the eventual death of electronics in our vintage film cameras.
The first 500 people to use my link skl.sh/metalfingers12241 will get a 1 month free trial of Skillshare premium!
I shoot Ilford FP4 Plus and buy ilford multifgrade paper for the dark room. I support Harman Ilford because I think this company is really important for the future of film. And I upload some of my photographs to Wikimedia commons making it very clear in the description and categories these pictures are shot on film.
Yep! I am all in on ilford too!!!
No way man. I shot more film in 2024 than the last decade altogether.
A roll of kodak kodacolor 135 36 exposure color film without developing was $5.00 in 1975. That would be $29.32 in today's dollars. A five pack of Portra 400 at b and h photo is $75.95 today. $15.95 a roll. Film prices in 2005 hit an all time low in 2005 before rising again, a roll of portra nc in 2005 cost 9.19 in today's dollars. Depending on the year that you would like to compare film is generally less expensive today than in the past.
I shot plenty of slide film in those days. Velvia was $4.59 a roll in 135. I bought it in 20-roll bricks.
Fujifilm is actually shifting their 35mm production to china. Their new color film is being made now by lucky film or yes!star. This was done to covert the existing factories in japan to instax production(they actually make a lot of money from instax). And, the continued 35mm film is more of an after thought of legacy.
Kodak on the other hand, is still tied to pension payments. They are contractual obligated to sell their products and chemicals to Kodak Alaris, an umbrella company for paying old kodak pensions. This was created during the infamous chapter 11 bankruptcy protection filing. Kodak(not kodak alaris) makes very little profit, as they don't inhairent the proceds by Kodak Alaris. Kodak Alaris net profit's goes to the old kodak pensioners. This not going away anytime soon, unfortunately.
Unfortunately?
@@masanthar at the end of the day.. Kodak, has about 30 or 40 million net profit a year. Which, leaves very little breathing room in terms of investment for materials and new products for next year fiscal.
They are currently trying to spin off the us pension for extra income. But, the europe pensions still remains pretty sizable.
@@JLHBio Yeah but pensions go away one way, thus "unfortunately" may raise a few eyebrows
@@masanthar no, it doesn't go away. Employees contribution goes into a manage portofilo on the stock market, while their company match a certain percantge. The profits goes to the pensioners. While over time, the pensions gets adjusted with the cost living. The company contribution helps with this.
In Kodak Eastman (Kodak US), the pension is at a point where it's over funded. This not case with Kodak Alaris or the European side.
@@JLHBio Hmm maybe things' ll get better on that regard with the help of tech and the need for less hands. Anyway thanks for taking the time to explain.
Ilford are experimenting with iterations of colour film production. The future should be stable.
It's going to be niche, but the market is adjusting to demand.
Kodak Gold is basically sold out everywhere. People either picked it up instantly when prices were announced, or places are holding it back.
You could buy a used nikon f100 with 35mm or 50mm lens and shoot a roll of 400h a week for a year for around $1,100.00, compare that to the cost of a Fuji X100VI with film sims.
Good point. But I can shoot over 1,000 frames in one evening. And there are many such evenings in a year.
You could buy blank canvases, paint, and brushes to create a painting once a week for less than the cost of an iPad and Apple Pencil. The point is that, while the method of creating the art may be similar, the medium and the final product are entirely different.
Always appreciate the work you put into these vids! 🖤
Bring back Ektachrome! We need a reasonably priced transparence film we can develop at home.
Digital film emulation is not the same. I'm sick of knock off solutions. You just can't create what actual film produces in real life. I don't want recreations, I want the real thing.
Except the grain structure and the halation almost everything can be replicated perfectly. What a lot of people refer to when talking about "film feel" or "film look" is actually the scanner colour science. I get you, I also love film, but a pro mist filter does the job pretty well.
Yeah but can you afford it
Sims have come a long way since even 6 years ago. X-Trans III (of which I own, and my XH1 is the closest I'll come to taking a digital camera to the grave) really sucks at simulating film with the in-camera JPEGs. Comparing them to RAW images edited clean just looks like you tweaked the colour settings. Hardly any of the sample photos I see for X-Trans3, not even the ones on Fuji X Weekly, come close to looking filmic. The XT4 came close, but finally with the XT5 and X100VI are we finally getting the slightest bit of filmic realism to the in-camera JPEGs.
I haven't used many film sim packs, but even then, stuff like HaldCLUT (as much as i love it) can't hold a candle to what's out there now.
Cool, now tell the difference
It's really important that new camera production (and non-Kodak film production) starts selling well. That's how this all stays sustainable.
On my side having worked in a lot of factories I m pretty confident for the future, we can see that in a lot of factories when you want to enhance you production tools, you plan a technical stop to perform your improvement. So I prefer to be optimistic for 2025
This is one of the more informed videos on this subject. As a film shooter of over 40 years, I believe that film will endure for the reasons why most serious film enthusiasts shoot it; the latitude, look, zen passion of the workflow, and the tactile experience contribute to the appeal of the newer generations of shooters who will determine its future value. Those who see it simply as an anachronistic novelty will drop out at a price point with that impact likely negligible to overall demand. The cost of film in 2014 was similar to the cost in the mid 70s without adjusting for inflation; it was always expensive. Harmon dipping a toe in colour film production is a bright spot for the future, given Kodak's near monopoly on colour emulsions. My understanding is that the majority of Lomo, Cinestill and Fuji branded colour stock is now based on contractual arrangements with Eastman. Further, given that Alaris is enforcing its own exclusive consumer distribution rights of Kodak film with Eastman, The recent "cinema production only" Vision 3 restrictions will likely be permanent, but it is understandable as too many resellers were profiting on unauthorized re-spooling and re branding. That said, It would be wonderful to see some agreement between Alaris and Eastman for limited purchases for consumer only use. It would seem a natural additional profit center for both as Vision 3 is a brilliant film for still photography (the annoyances of remjet removal aside). It would also send a positive message to a market weary of the monopoly.
I already switched back to Digital. I shoot film special occasions.
Ew
@@youravantgarde ewww @ your response
@@alexiscastro5055 ew at your response back
@@larcielist eww @ your face
After years of shooting real film I’ve become addicted to emulating it as the convenience is so great. Currently I’m using the latest Caleb Salvadori V5 film presets that use luminance masks for accurate grain. They are much better than the Fuji sims.
There also seems to be a new AGFA 400, recently seen in a German drugstore. It says „made in Germay. Maybe by Orwo 🤷🏼♂️
This is going to be the year for film. Cost be damned, there is no substitute for the tactile experience of creating photos with the technology that started it all. The hundreds of working cameras that I have will all be available for much less than current prices because I want to help those new to analog magic.
Lets hope you are right and we'll continue to have film for reasonable prices cause right now I think kodak at least is charging what the market will tolerate. It would be a pity for this artform to be lost
I have numerous film cameras from varied brands and was a regular film shooter until about 2 years ago. Film prices have just gone crazy, availability has become spotty and I struggle to find a development lab. Not only that but development prices are also nuts. I've parked my film cameras for the time being as it makes no economic sense to shoot film right now.
The day film dies is the day actual photographers the world over will mourne. Whether you're a film photographer or a digital photographer that shoots film to change up, the process offers something that can't be replicated. I really hope it will still be around for the future, and that companies will find new innovative ways to make shooting film both more environmentally friendly as well as more affordable.
When a channel posts too many doomsday sensationalist content -- thats when you know its time to un-sub.
Great video bro..Film is alive and well in my opinion
Waiting on the Pentax 85 before I throw in the towel!
I suggested to Kodak that they add more layers to their b&w emulsions. The point is to significantly increase latitude. Who knows if that will result in a viable product.
Film will continue to grow. Kodak will reposition prices and stabilise production. More labs are opening, driving down scanning/dev costs. Crucial will be Pentax's success - if they release a modern GR PAS a new generation of shooters will be set. With success they'll move on to SLR and MF. Their success won't go unnoticed by either OM, Nikon or a new Chinese manufacturer. Leica could release a premium PAS... Film shooters should shoulder responsibility too. We shouldn't blindly support everything but film shooters could give a lot less hate and be more constructive and supportive to manufacturers.
To be fair nothing >sounds bad< about Kodak upgrading their film factory. I dunno where you come up with that
considering Kodak just doubled down on their contract with Cinestill, disallowing respooled cinema film, and their notion has been that film is slowly dying, I think that thought process has a lot of merit to it. Tell me Alexius, do you trust all these megacorportions PR teams that craft a wonderfully positive forward facing public image.
As much as I would love to trust Kodak, I am weary.
Best of luck for film photographers, the cellphone defeated you. I'm beginning to believe film photographers are living in a very small bubble, and it is going to get smaller and smaller as people give up on the expense of the entire film experience. We are not living in the 70s or 80s.
Nice video but where's the link tho?
In India, one roll of portra or cinestill 800T cost $30!!! Planning to shoot one roll per month. In India there are still young people who love to try film photography, but its just not affordable anymore.For one roll, developing, scanning cost one can pay EMI of decent mirrorless camera
Try Kodak Gold 200 or Ultramax 400 and Kodak Vision 3 500T. Though those are almost double price considering $ conversion factor. Getting a good quality lab another headache. Last month I have shoot with Ultramax, Kodak Double X and Vision 3 250D. Now loaded one roll of ORWO Wolfen NC 500, let's see
I never have, and likely never will shoot colour film. I just don't enjoy the results, B+W is more satisfying. Kodak killed the stock I'd used for decades in 2011, which I really didn't like as there's no alternative I've found, only different stocks.
I mostly feel the same way. Except some film stocks with an unusual colour palette like LomoChrome Purple or Cinestill (Kodak Vision 3) 50D can be really beautiful.
@@djtoman6875 I have thought about using one of those, LomoChrome Purple in particular, but haven't yet. Mostly because I was home developing, but I'm not now, at least for a while, so I may try some in the summer.
Stone Cold could probably burst the bubble, but I hear he's a huge fan of film....
I had my shoot film phase about 20 years ago, and this year I decided to shoot a few rolls again with my trusty old EOS3 and 24-105f4 and 50f1.8. Yeah, I enjoyed it quite a bit, but scanning the negs, putting in the work to clean the dust - it‘s just a lot of pain in the ass. All for something you can very easily achieve with CC and grain emulation these days. I love the tactility of film, but if film gets even more expensive, it‘s not worth the hassle.
Well it is a different experience to digital, more intimate I think, that's what the hustle is about maybe...
If you consider the process a “hassle” then it’s clearly just not for you
@@mstrshkbrnnn1999 hustle would be more appropriate I guess. Not a native speaker
@@mstrshkbrnnn1999 That's what I've been trying to say actually - it's half for me, half not for me, I guess. I enjoy it, and I've been doing it since I was a child (in the 90s there weren't any digital cameras, and I got to use my dad's Minolta MD SLRs, even back in the 80s), but I'm a dad now, I just don't have the time anymore.
Prices of film cameras rose indeed if you compare them to dirt cheap prices from 15 years ago. Film cameras were dirt cheap and undervalued because of massive transition to digital. Now they gain in value but you can still buy a working film camera for 10-20% of the original price. If you must have a Contax, Leica or trendy p&s then you have to pay more but you if don’t need to show off you can get some nice cameras at the price of a few film rolls. I’ve a bunch of P. Spotmatic bodies that Im selling for next to nothing and nobody wants them because despite of being an excellent and reliable camera, the Spotmatic is very common so it’s not trendy.
Shooting digital in film like mode is like converting pictures taken with a cellphone to daguerreotype. The results can be similar but you are missing the whole fun. If the process of shooting film is no fun to you, then you’re best bet is a digital camera which is cheaper and better in almost everything.
In 30 years, film could be gone.
I bought a 3 pack today of ultramax 400 24 exposures for $24.99. Flic film is from Canada and Lucky film is from China so when the Trump Tariffs hit it won't be so cheap anymore. The reason I bought my 3 pack of ultramax today. To beat the price increase.
Love film. Digital is convenient but no one is looking. Have you been used to nikon Nikonos as intended: scuba diving. Despite what people are saying about digital film always seems to have something more tactile.
I really hope that the future of film will be safe. Have noticed that when I hand someone a hand made print their eyes light up because he gets something physical not just the digital file.
If Pentax was smart they would release a SLR with auto focus that uses film. Pentax could also release a mirrorless camera just keep the same mount and just use the same lens that are already made. This way you can have film users and DSLR users and people that like the benefits of mirrorless.
There are already many extremely cheap autofocus SLR cameras on the used market. If they were to release such a model, they would be competing with the used market in a battle they couldn’t win. The only thing that makes sense from a business perspective are categories of cameras that are already expensive or rare.
@@nikoladimitrijevic8172 Wrong. Pentax released that crappy point and shoot and there are a lot of those on the market.
The reason they would release a new SLR with auto focus is because it would work with all the newer and best lens. Also some film cameras like the Nikon F6 printed the date on part of the film. Pentax could do this and also put in a small number so when scanning in the images software would no what lens profile to add in for correction.
@@bigrobotnewstoday1436 Please give me a link where I can buy a half-frame camera for 15-50$ that could compete with P17... The P17 wasn’t built like a tank, but it is well-made and features an excellent lens. Considering it’s a half-frame camera, it holds a solid/unique position in the market.
In that price range, there are plenty of autofocus SLRs available, complete with lenses. Today, locally in the city where I live, I could buy Pentax MZ-50 + SMC 35-80mm for 18$... Canon Eos 1000F + Canon Zoom 35-80mm for 20$... (just a quick search). These prices also show how much interest people have in that segment. And if we were to talk about the high-end segment, the arguments for an autofocus SLR would only get worse.
The idea of using a profile for lens correction isn’t bad, but I think the best we could hope for is a lens profile in Lightroom.
Definitely. They are smart, they understand that SLRs will only survive through film photography, and they are working on a new SLR. Ricoh is also developing a film GR camera.
The ECN-2 bubble is about to burst. I think film will survive but it will be a luxury hobby. It’s way too expensive round trip for film
I think film will continue to grow in the US over the next 4 years since there’s going to be sanctions on imported goods
Cibachrome! Cibachrome! Cibachrome!
Yes, total death of film😂
Good grief, adjusting for inflation, the price is still low. Heck, I just bought 20 rolls of ProImage 100 for $100 on Cyber Monday. This hyperbolic reaction that Kodak is actually a business that needs to invest in new equipment for the first time in over 20 years is nonsense.
The end of film will come with the end of the parts supply chain for old(er) film cameras. Sadly - the end is near.
No.
I can’t be the only one who bsolutely refuses to click on or watch video thumbnails with obviously clickbait…sorry, I realized halfway I’m bing a dick and this is not your fault, but I’m really completely sick of what the youtube algorithm does to content. So much so that i just wish there was an alternate platform to go to. Capitalism uins everything it touches….the promise of competition creating better choice is obviousy untenable, but neither is there a soluion yet. The only thing close is when a society chooses to allocate funds (ie. public or user supported television or radio) I just find everything on youtube withthe same two song types and “OH MY GOD” thumbnail faces unlickable at this point. So when a title about a topic even a little appeals to my fears…it reminds me of every other horrible piece of commercial media that just wants to fear me into a click. Sorry, its not us, its them. Which means it’s us…fuck.
Love digital and film, but… Digital camera sales have been on the decline since the early 2010s, with only a slight uptick driven by the introduction of high-end mirrorless cameras. Even ignoring sales numbers, digital photography faces an existential threat from “AI”/LLMs that is greater than the one digital posed to film photography. Add to that the fact that, by posting your digital photos/videos/content online, you’re feeding the machine that is destined to bury you (hopefully only creatively and vocationally-speaking), and creatives will be forced to become more and more mindful of how they release, sell, or share their work. Eventually, the digital space itself will die or be rendered useless as a result of all the LLM-created noise. But digital’s still cheaper than film? Digital photography’s price will be at the expense of your creativity and your ability to control your work. In contrast, the future of film photography looks bright, independent of Kodak’s greed (film’s still relatively affordable, adjusted for inflation, compared to previous periods) or the eventual death of electronics in our vintage film cameras.
lol