A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

End Of An Era:



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old June 3rd 18, 11:52 PM posted to rec.photo.digital
John Turco
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,436
Default End Of An Era:


I heard on the local news, last night, that Canon is going to
discontinue its final film camera (a 35mm model).

Yet another nail in films's coffin?

John

---
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
http://www.avg.com

  #2  
Old June 4th 18, 12:14 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default End Of An Era:

In article ,
RichA wrote:

I heard on the local news, last night, that Canon is going to
discontinue its final film camera (a 35mm model).

Yet another nail in films's coffin?


It was an expensive pro camera so no, film won't die on it's account.


it's already dead.

But
Leica junked the M7, Voigtlander dumped a couple. However, there are 100
million old working film cameras out there.


nearly all of which are not used.

they sit on a shelf, while their owners use smartphones to take photos.
  #3  
Old June 4th 18, 01:00 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Scott Schuckert
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 368
Default End Of An Era:

In article , nospam
wrote:

In article ,
RichA wrote:

I heard on the local news, last night, that Canon is going to
discontinue its final film camera (a 35mm model).

Yet another nail in films's coffin?


It was an expensive pro camera so no, film won't die on it's account.


it's already dead.

But
Leica junked the M7, Voigtlander dumped a couple. However, there are 100
million old working film cameras out there.


nearly all of which are not used.

they sit on a shelf, while their owners use smartphones to take photos.


My phone can take pictures? Son of a gun, so it can... Meanwhile, I
just spent a couple of hundred bucks to have my Nikon F100 body tuned
up.
  #4  
Old June 4th 18, 01:03 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default End Of An Era:

In article , Scott Schuckert
wrote:

My phone can take pictures? Son of a gun, so it can... Meanwhile, I
just spent a couple of hundred bucks to have my Nikon F100 body tuned
up.


you're the lone exception.
  #5  
Old June 4th 18, 02:31 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
PeterN[_7_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,161
Default End Of An Era:

On 6/3/2018 8:03 PM, nospam wrote:
In article , Scott Schuckert
wrote:

My phone can take pictures? Son of a gun, so it can... Meanwhile, I
just spent a couple of hundred bucks to have my Nikon F100 body tuned
up.


you're the lone exception.


Another airline survey?
i have posted an image of a professional NY photographer, who still uses
film.

B&H
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/browse/Film-Cameras/ci/9812/N/4288586278

Adorama
https://www.adorama.com/c/Cameras/Specialty-Cameras/Film-Cameras

Both of the above sell a lot of film cameras. I wonder why a lot of
professional photographers don't listen to you.

https://petapixel.com/2015/04/24/12-reasons-photographers-still-choose-to-shoot-film-over-digital/

We already know what your response will be. And don't bother with you
"most people .....," comment. We've heard it before.
If you really knew the future, you would understand the difference
between possibility, (as a premise for quantum computing,) and
probability, as used in binary.


--
PeterN
  #6  
Old June 4th 18, 04:02 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default End Of An Era:

In article , PeterN
wrote:

My phone can take pictures? Son of a gun, so it can... Meanwhile, I
just spent a couple of hundred bucks to have my Nikon F100 body tuned
up.


you're the lone exception.


Another airline survey?


city bus.

i have posted an image of a professional NY photographer, who still uses
film.


that makes two.

meanwhile, billions of digital photos are taken every day and uploaded
to various online services, nearly all of which with smartphones. more
than one *trillion* photos were taken in 2017.

B&H
Adorama

Both of the above sell a lot of film cameras.


nowhere near as many as they used to.

go ask them how their film sales have dramatically dropped off in
recent years.

I wonder why a lot of
professional photographers don't listen to you.


they don't need to. they already are on the digital bandwagon.

very, very few photographers are still shooting film and that number is
shrinking rapidly.

https://petapixel.com/2015/04/24/12-...-choose-to-sho
ot-film-over-digital/


what a joke. that is a completely bogus article. every single point is
*wrong*.

#1. Film Photography Was Already Perfect

nothing is perfect, however, film is a lot *less* perfect than digital.

that also contradicts his other point, #11, 'for the imperfections'.
either film is perfect or it's not. it can't be both.

#2. Higher Dynamic Range

absolutely false.

#3: It Slows You Down

nothing prevents shooting slowly with digital, and that's actually a
drawback. it's nothing more than rationalizing what is a limitation.

#4. The Pictures Are Permanent

no they definitely aren't.

film fades and/or can be damaged by moisture, mold, fire, physical
damage (e.g., tears, stains), etc.

digital does not deteriorate in any way and can easily last forever,
much to the chagrin of the people in the photos.

#5. The Chemicals Smell Oh So Good

apparently the author has been inhaling a bit too much, and more than
just photo chemicals.

#6. You Don¹t Need Electricity

good luck trying to print a photo or show a slide without electricity.

good luck trying to take a photo without electricity. film cameras
needed batteries to power the exposure meter, electronic flash (or
flash bulbs), and winder/motor drive.*

electricity is not exactly hard to find either.

he's grasping.

* selenium meters don't need batteries but they're difficult to find
and not that accurate. magicube flash cubes don't need batteries, but
good luck finding those either, plus they only work with instamatic
style cameras, not an slr the author presumably would be using.

#7. It ³Just Looks Better²

no it definitely does not.

digital has significantly higher resolution, dynamic range and colour
accuracy than film.

not only that, but digital gets *better* as technology improves.

modern displays show a wider range and more accurate colours as well as
a wider dynamic range than older displays did.

today's raw converters, noise reduction and other image processing
produces better results than in the past.

nevertheless, for those who want the 'film look', the quality can be
downgraded very easily.

#8. A Digital Photograph is Just a Pixel Mosaic

meaningless twaddle.

a film photograph is just a bunch of grains.

everything is just a bunch of molecules.

#9. Film Cameras Are Inexpensive

only because nobody wants them, with the exception of rare collectibles
which are not purchased to be used.

he's also neglecting the ongoing cost of film and processing, which
quickly adds up the more photos that are taken.

digital not only produces better results, but is cheaper to operate!

#10. To Be DifferentŠ A Talking Point

one can be different while shooting digital.

walk around with this:
https://www.wired.com/images_blogs/gadgetlab/2010/05/bleurrrgh.jpg

https://www.wired.com/2010/05/rainbo...requires-sungl
asses-to-use/

#11. For the Imperfections

that contradicts #1, where he said film was perfect.

nevertheless, the imperfections of film can be added to any digital
image, assuming one wants them.

#12. The Element of Surprise

that is not unique to film cameras.
  #7  
Old June 4th 18, 06:36 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
android
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,854
Default End Of An Era:

On Sun, 03 Jun 2018 17:52:15 -0500, John Turco wrote
in :

I heard on the local news, last night, that Canon is going to
discontinue its final film camera (a 35mm model).

Yet another nail in films's coffin?

Film is gonna die because of lack of film products and new advanced
cameras. The thing is that someone has to buy them!
--
teleportation kills
  #8  
Old June 4th 18, 09:15 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
RJH
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 228
Default End Of An Era:

On 04/06/2018 04:02, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:

My phone can take pictures? Son of a gun, so it can... Meanwhile, I
just spent a couple of hundred bucks to have my Nikon F100 body tuned
up.

you're the lone exception.


Another airline survey?


city bus.

i have posted an image of a professional NY photographer, who still uses
film.


that makes two.

meanwhile, billions of digital photos are taken every day and uploaded
to various online services, nearly all of which with smartphones. more
than one *trillion* photos were taken in 2017.

B&H
Adorama

Both of the above sell a lot of film cameras.


nowhere near as many as they used to.

go ask them how their film sales have dramatically dropped off in
recent years.

I wonder why a lot of
professional photographers don't listen to you.


they don't need to. they already are on the digital bandwagon.

very, very few photographers are still shooting film and that number is
shrinking rapidly.

https://petapixel.com/2015/04/24/12-...-choose-to-sho
ot-film-over-digital/


what a joke. that is a completely bogus article. every single point is
*wrong*.

Snip good points well made

Film might have perceived advantages, even if they're difficult to express:

* More care/time/thought might be taken over taking a shot because of
the cost/time consequences (developing, loading etc) and limitations
(fixed ISO, burst facilities etc);

* Much as the analogue/digital discussions in audio, the quality is in
the eye of the beholder - film is 'felt' to be better than digital.
Ironically, this is often to do with limitations of the medium. And no
amount of measurement or argument is going to shift that perception.


--
Cheers, Rob
  #9  
Old June 4th 18, 11:51 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Mike Headon
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 14
Default End Of An Era:

On 04/06/2018 09:15, RJH wrote:
On 04/06/2018 04:02, nospam wrote:
In article , PeterN
wrote:

My phone can take pictures? Son of a gun, so it can... Meanwhile, I
just spent a couple of hundred bucks to have my Nikon F100 body tuned
up.

you're the lone exception.


Another airline survey?


city bus.

i have posted an image of a professional NY photographer, who still uses
film.


that makes two.

meanwhile, billions of digital photos are taken every day and uploaded
to various online services, nearly all of which with smartphones. more
than one *trillion* photos were taken in 2017.

B&H
Adorama

Both of the above sell a lot of film cameras.


nowhere near as many as they used to.

go ask them how their film sales have dramatically dropped off in
recent years.

I wonder why a lot of
professional photographers don't listen to you.


they don't need to. they already are on the digital bandwagon.

very, very few photographers are still shooting film and that number is
shrinking rapidly.

https://petapixel.com/2015/04/24/12-...-choose-to-sho

ot-film-over-digital/


what a joke. that is a completely bogus article. every single point is
*wrong*.

Snip good points well made

Film might have perceived advantages, even if they're difficult to express:

* More care/time/thought might be taken over taking a shot because of
the cost/time consequences (developing, loading etc) and limitations
(fixed ISO, burst facilities etc);

* Much as the analogue/digital discussions in audio, the quality is in
the eye of the beholder - film is 'felt' to be better than digital.
Ironically, this is often to do with limitations of the medium. And no
amount of measurement or argument is going to shift that perception.


And nobody has mentioned - it's fun!
I use my four film cameras regularly (I broke the FT2 - at least I
tried to fix it and made it worse). But I wouldn't be without the DSLR
and smart phone.

--
Mike Headon
R69S R850R
IIIc IIIg FT FTn FT2 EOS450D
e-mail: mike dot headon at enn tee ell world dot com

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

  #10  
Old June 4th 18, 11:54 AM posted to rec.photo.digital
Scott Schuckert
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 368
Default End Of An Era:

In article , nospam
wrote:

meanwhile, billions of digital photos are taken every day and uploaded
to various online services, nearly all of which with smartphones. more
than one *trillion* photos were taken in 2017.


Shall we talk Scotsmen? One could say the vast majority of cell phone
images are what we used to call "snapshots" - images, true, but taken
with no consideration of composition, and all the technical details
left to automation.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 12:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.