JMG-Galleries - Jim M. Goldstein Photography - Latest Comments in Film Is Dead. No Really!

Re: Film Is Dead. No Really!

Lillyjen — Mon, 04 Jun 2012 07:26:32 -0000

I realized film was dead when years ago I could no longer purchase the high speed B&W 35mm film at my local store. Being an ameture photgrapher my whole life. I have been experimenting with digital and my wife says,'I do not understand why you take the pictures you do!'. i do for 35mm is an art and I grew up with that and now I am trying to continue being that artist with digital. Extremely difficult, but now I can take a million pictures.

Re: Film Is Dead. No Really!

Brainburst — Tue, 22 May 2012 21:15:13 -0000

Underground as in buried...It's dead for all intents and purposes. Sure it goes on living, just like a corpse isn't completely dead. It slowly rots, the various micro fauna within and without assures "life" activity of a sort. Yes will continue to be alive like that. Artists never give up on any medium, from paint to meat, from pee to feces, why leave out film? But just because it will be used doesn't mean it will be alive in the same sense. Use of film will become sort of a statement, or performance art. Film will become the Bernie of A Weekend at Bernie's...

Re: Film Is Dead. No Really!

Julia — Tue, 24 Jan 2012 10:24:31 -0000

actually resolution on film is a lot higher than even the most expensive, medium format sensor digital slrs. A medium format film image can record an equivalent of approximately 50 megapixels, 4"x5" large format films around 200 megapixels and 8x10" about 800 megapixels. A medium format dslr provides from 42 to 50 megapixels, but cannot be enlarged with the same level of detail as medium format film.

The idea that film is dead is an understandable reaction to new dominant technology but it is in fact, not true. When photography was invented everyone said the painting was dead, same with tv and radio and countless other things. It has changed from being the mass commercial form of making images but if anything there is a resurge in interest in analogue now. It offers things digital just cannot do and we aren't willing to give up.

Re: Film Is Dead. No Really!

Kiefferma — Sat, 29 Oct 2011 03:08:11 -0000

I am currently running a black and white film photography project on kickstarter if anyone is interested: http://kck.st/vnfleZ

Re: Film Is Dead. No Really!

Flattville — Tue, 11 Oct 2011 03:35:03 -0000

Are you sure the store closed because of lack of interet in film, or because so many businesses and people are printing thier own digital photos, The header on the notice does say Express Digital + Photo.

Re: Film Is Dead. No Really!

jimgoldstein — Sat, 16 Jul 2011 15:13:01 -0000

No doubt there will always be admiration for film photographers and there should be. Really its a shame that its being scaled back so much, but it seems that since I posted this article there is a groundswell of interest in film again. That is a good sign.

Re: Film Is Dead. No Really!

equivocal photography — Sat, 16 Jul 2011 15:08:09 -0000

Luckily I can't afford a full frame DSLR. And I like shooting film. The words '35 mm' strike a level of surprise and admiration today on a scale never seen before. Go ahead, shoot something on film and tell someone you shot it on film... the look in their eyes is priceless.

film's not dead, it's just gone underground ;-)

Re: Film Is Dead. No Really!

Flynessv — Thu, 19 May 2011 12:03:43 -0000

Why were you paying $20 a roll??

Re: Film Is Dead. No Really!

CVena6 — Thu, 19 May 2011 08:35:04 -0000

Digital Shot,hows the tonal range.I still use film,have been for over 60 years.But the digital can be worked very well even for an old amateur like me.This was taken with a nikon D90/18-105 zoom/program mode/ISO400/windows crop/NX2 photoshop.

Re: Film Is Dead. No Really!

Sarah Vaughn — Fri, 06 May 2011 02:07:56 -0000

Film is dead to the casual consumer. However, as a die-hard who still processes her negatives in a tiny bathroom, I can say that film photography will always have a niche status. The more scarce the practice becomes, the more value it will retain as an art. You cannot deny the skill that is required to shoot with film. I am thirty two years old and I built my first darkroom when I was fourteen. In this Facebook age of instantaneous output, I can at least relish the consolation prize of knowing how to produce images that make digital look like shit. If you don't believe me: flip through your old photography books or watch an early Jim Jarmusch or Kubrick B&W. Our scarcity shifts us from 'photographers" to "artists"

Re: Film Is Dead. No Really!

Lee — Sat, 05 Mar 2011 03:22:32 -0000

Film isn't dead. It's just resting. If you want a digital SLR, you will pay a minimum of $500. If you want a film SLR, you can pay $20 and have enough left over to develop about 95 rolls of film.

Plus, film cameras have character. I recently bought a Kodak Retinette 1A for $5 off of eBay. http://www.associatedconten...

Sure, the vintage Kodak is a challenge to use, but it is very satisfying to use successfully.

Plus, film cameras capture memories and digital cameras can supplant them. If I take a film camera to the swamp, I take 24 important pictures. If I take a digital camera, I take about 100 pictures of everything. There's something to be said for enjoying a scene with eyeballs, with binoculars, and with your spouse instead of just taking a zillion pictures.

Re: Film Is Dead. No Really!

... — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 06:32:40 -0000

don't listen to this guy. He is talking crap... I bet this guy is an analogue fanboy that still think film is better than digital. Photojournalists will use DSLRs for both stills and videos. You never heard of DSLR video revolution? Check out these websites:

http://nofilmschool.com/dslr/
www.dslrnewsshooter.com

In my opinion, 3D-photography and cinematography will replace 2D digital still imaging and videos within few decades.

Re: Film Is Dead. No Really!

anonymous — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 06:18:07 -0000

DSLR's can take much more awesome videos than normal camcorders with tiny sensors. Check out the Canon 5D Mark II

Re: Film Is Dead. No Really!

jimgoldstein — Tue, 09 Nov 2010 23:48:06 -0000

As many concede here I think mass use of film is certainly dead. Not to claim that film will never be used, but it will fall / has fallen to niche use. Overall more types of film have been lost than gained. That is to be expected with the switch to digital from film for the mass consumer. Artists and some pros will never give it up and there will forever be a way to use film. I think the Impossible Project http://www.the-impossible-p... proves that where there is a following there will be revival... even if the market drives the profitability for larger companies to discontinue films. Again... niche audience though.

Re: Film Is Dead. No Really!

Robert Teague — Tue, 09 Nov 2010 23:30:08 -0000

Film is dead .... Really? Is that why Kodak introduced two new films in the past two years?

Sorry, I'm still 100% film, and I see no reason to change. For those who think that professionals don't use film, I suggest that you listen to the Inside Analog Photography podcast, you might learn something.

What has changed, is the way it is marketed. Granted, film manufacturers don't sell the volume they once did, and as a film photographer, I have to make adjustments ... but, I'll do whatever it takes to keep shooting film.

Re: Film Is Dead. No Really!

jimgoldstein — Tue, 09 Nov 2010 23:21:22 -0000

I hate saying Film is dead myself. The film store I first reported on is now a cell phone store and the film I swear I'll use again still sits in my refrigerator. While Film may be dead in day to day use it is not in my heart as I'm sure is the case for many who have commented here. I will shoot film again, but it will certainly be to satisfy pure passion of the art rather than the day to day effort that is undertaken with my digital SLR.

Re: Film Is Dead. No Really!

Paul — Tue, 09 Nov 2010 09:58:13 -0000

I've studied, taught and lived film all my life but yes film is dead. As a professional digital pays the bills...but I'll always respect film. Isn't that the point, gone but not forgotten? Is digital better than analogue...no, but I would have to write a book to explain why.

Re: Film Is Dead. No Really!

Dane — Thu, 17 Jun 2010 17:19:10 -0000

I realized film was dead on June 16, 2010 I went to my local Sams Club and I wanted to develop 3 films I had and they said they no longer processed film...I couldn't believe my ears...I was sad. Sometimes Technological Advances are too quick.

Re: Film Is Dead. No Really!

sean — Sat, 22 May 2010 23:53:57 -0000

Good post. Not to get off topic, but I believe this is similar to audio (I would consider myself an 'audiophile). I still buy CDs regularly, but I believe this is akin to digital music soon replacing the need for CDs. So what's the big deal? Absolutely, there are digital cameras that can rival most 35mm, and there are blu-ray discs that can rival CD quality sound. But unfortunately the trend in advancements isn't always matched by the content or devices. For instance, itunes reigns supreme as 'the' online music store. Does it offer losselss 5.1 audio mixes? Nope. Digital cameras are sold by the masses, but are they all of sufficient megapixel (and dare I mention) LENS quality to produce 35mm equivalent results? I'm not referring to pro dslrs here, I'm referring to the general consumer level devices and content. Nonetheless, I'm sure there are some nice dslrs out there (i've seen them). I'm probably just blabbing now. Those are my thoughts anyhow. :)

Re: Film Is Dead. No Really!

Jackamo — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 17:10:43 -0000

Printed digital files are without doubt absolutely superb and are now often better than scanned 35mm film but have you compared a 35mm slide projected on a quality projector against a projected digital file from whatever digital camera you want on whatever projector you want to mention. The digital camera may well in some cases produce files with more information than 35mm film but the problem is they cannot be projected at the same resolution. Why view a digital file projected at say 25% its resolution when you can enjoy a slide that knocks spots off it. If your goung to project images you are better projecting slides. Making a slide of a digital file somehow defeats the object, why not go out and take a thought out 35mm slide.
I am a member of a club that has just about maintained a slide catergory in its competitions but there is definitely a small increase in interest in slide projection.
Keep buying film and it will survive. Ignore it and it will pass away.

Re: Film Is Dead. No Really!

Tom Stappers — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 21:59:32 -0000

People love to say something is obsolete, for it gives them the feeling they can be cutting-edge... I still use b&w film (Kodak Tri-X and Ilford HP4 mainly) and make sure I have enough stock to continue comfortably for as long as possible. So while it may be dead for you, it's very much alive for me, hopefully for many years to go. I have the camera's, I have the subjects, it only takes one or two film/paper producers (and developers and stuff), and I'm satisfied.

Re: Film Is Dead. No Really!

jimgoldstein — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 23:48:55 -0000

Cindy great to see you comment on the blog. I read the article and found it interesting that Douglas still takes digital photos of his transparencies. Douglas Kirkland: From 8x10 To Digital And Back.

For the record I'm not against film although I haven't used it in years. It's just not used enough for many stores to keep supporting (if they weather the changing market) and is becoming niche. It's a shame more comments aren't showing up on this there were close to 100. I'm working with Disqus to sort out the problem of why they're not all showing. Stay tuned I'm trying to get them to display. Great comments made and I look forward to the conversation continuing.

Re: Film Is Dead. No Really!

jimgoldstein — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 21:48:55 -0000

Cindy great to see you comment on the blog. I read the article and found it interesting that Douglas still takes digital photos of his transparencies. Douglas Kirkland: From 8x10 To Digital And Back.

For the record I'm not against film although I haven't used it in years. It's just not used enough for many stores to keep supporting (if they weather the changing market) and is becoming niche. It's a shame more comments aren't showing up on this there were close to 100. I'm working with Disqus to sort out the problem of why they're not all showing. Stay tuned I'm trying to get them to display. Great comments made and I look forward to the conversation continuing.

Re: Film Is Dead. No Really!

Cindy Reed — Sun, 06 Sep 2009 01:36:27 -0000

DPP just wrote an article about Douglas Kirkland and his return to film. Remember, it's not the media, it is an individual's connection to the tools he chooses to use and the environment he chooses to interpret. Have you had a look at Michael Kenna's work -- it is film baby. There is a quality to film that digital does not have -- look again!

Re: Film Is Dead. No Really!

Cindy Reed — Sat, 05 Sep 2009 23:36:27 -0000