What happens after ISO 800 is gone?

[B&Wpositive]

I'll have to take a look at my films and see if the higher speeds seem to expire quicker.....

They do...even if they're not marked as such. I remember someone here saying he throws away film ISO 800 or higher that has under a year left till expiration date. I think that's extreme though. You can simply add a stop of exposure compensation and use it if it's slightly outdated.

[IloveTLRs]

Superia 1600 and Natura 1600 aren't the same things, are they? Natura seems to be quite popular over here.

[2F/2F]

Five years is a long-ass time in terms of technology, economics, and other things that will influence the future of film materials.

Five years ago, things were still pretty cool, as far as what materials one could get. Five years before that, we were just a little way into the film-to-digital switch in the journalism/magazine industry, and we still had a huge selection of analog materials. Five more years, and I think color film photography will either be totally dead, very close to dead (give it another five if not dead yet), or literally on its last legs.

Even though digital cameras have not, IMHO, improved in any hugely significant way from a practical standpoint in five years now (I would say ten, but I don't want to start any craziness here), we have lost tons of analog materials. Of course, the ones that go first are the ones that digital largely replaces for most shooters. Tungsten films (white balancing in camera takes care of that), high-speed films (high ISO settings take care of that), instant prints (LCD previews and tethering/wireless take care of that), transparency films (speed of digital work flow renders the entire reason for their near-total dominance in commercial photography moot), etc.

In other words, the coolest of the cool analog $hit is what is the "most replaced" by digital!

It is not any one specification of any one digital camera that has killed the films we have lost so far, but the innate ability of the digital medium to provide the things that these special, unique, and esoteric materials provided...and that were the very reason for their existence in the first place. The loss of the largest variety of instant prints has already occurred, after a gradual picking away at selection. The loss of all tungsten films (sans MP films) has already occurred, after a gradual picking away at selection. High speed films have been gradually picked away. They are even removing Tri-X Professional now, of all the damned things! Fuji Pro 800 was axed, and amid complaints, was brought back. The way I see this, it now must be hanging by a thread; a money-losing product kept on board just to keep people from getting too pissed off at the company at large. (Take a hint from this, Kodak.) It is bound to go again, as I can't see the market changing much. (Lots of complaints to Fuji, but how many of those complaining will actually buy huge quantities of the film on a regular basis?) Where else do you see high speed films going except for bye bye?

However, a medium speed daylight film has actually been added recently...as if we need more of them! The irony to me is that what I view as the most unique and special analog materials, the ones that give the results the most different from digital, are the very ones that digital has killed off. I would gladly see all the low, medium speed, and daylight film go away long before all the tungsten, high-speed, and transparency stuff that we have lost, and that we will soon lose totally. I would much more gladly use digital as a replacement for these lower-speed daylight materials (which I rarely use in comparison to the higher speed stuff) than for what has already been lost, or will be soon. I see less difference there. It is not about maximum ISO speed (higher with digital for sure now), or instancy (new word, BTW ), or easier color balancing, but about the individual properties and character of these lost products; fundamental aspects of an image's aesthetic and hence emotional qualities, not mere details of workflow, convenience, and ease. The focus on detailed, consumer-oriented specs as opposed to over all aesthetic effect by most shooters is a vapid judgment of materials, IMO, and has killed all these cool films and papers.

All of this is why I see the run-of-the mill stuff that 90% of plain-ol' photographers use (100/160 daylight color neg films, and a few 400s, maybe) sticking around longer than the cool unique stuff, that has already largely made its exit. The reason for these special analog materials existing in the first place is nullified by the very existence of digital (instant previews, in-camera white balancing, and high ISOs). The very existence of digital does not nullify anything that the lower-speed daylight films provide. Therefore, there is less for these materials to fight against; just details of whether the market for film in general is big enough to support their existence. Meanwhile, the high-speed/tungsten/instant/transparency stuff has to fight against something that, for most people, nullifies the entire reason for their existence (which was originally to do all the cool stuff that digital now does for most people).

[B&Wpositive]

All of this is why I see the run-of-the mill stuff that 90% of plain-ol' photographers use (100/160 daylight color neg films, and a few 400s, maybe) sticking around longer than the cool unique stuff, that has already largely made its exit. These reason for these special analog materials existing in the first place is nullified by the very existence of digital (instant previews, in-camera white balancing, and high ISOs). The very existence of digital does not nullify anything that the lower-speed daylight films provide. Therefore, there is less for these materials to fight against; just details of whether the market is big enough to support their existence, not the entire reason for their existence (which was originally to do all the cool stuff that digital now does for most people), like the high-speed/tungsten/instant/transparency stuff has to do.

That about sums it up. A self-fulfilling prophecy for certain. Twenty years from now, students will ironically be saying "Man, color film is so cool!", even though all we will have left in color is Gold 400 and Ektar 100. LOL! Nearly all serious film shooters will probably be using primarily black and white by that time.

[2F/2F]

That about sums it up. A self-fulfilling prophecy for certain. Twenty years from now, students will ironically be saying "Man, color film is so cool!", even though all we will have left in color is Gold 400 and Ektar 100. LOL! Nearly all serious film shooters will probably be using primarily black and white by that time.

Sorry to be a downer, but I think we will be hard pressed to find much b/w in 20 years, let alone color! Just one man's opinion...and not a happy one at that. If Ilford survives, we may have some films then. We shall see.

[Athiril]

I'll have to get into coating plates then...

In any case, when I finish being a student and get some reasonable $ aside, a few thousand+ on a big freezer and a bunch of film sounds good

[perkeleellinen]

Superia 1600 and Natura 1600 aren't the same things, are they? Natura seems to be quite popular over here.

This was a hot topic on a flickr film group once. Some people claimed they were different, another claimed he had a letter from Fuji that said they were the same.

I looked at both data sheets and couldn't spot where they differed.

[hrst]

Sorry to be a downer, but I think we will be hard pressed to find much b/w in 20 years, let alone color! Just one man's opinion...and not a happy one at that. If Ilford survives, we may have some films then. We shall see.

Sorry, but I just can't see your logic no matter what. You are just repeating... "film will die film will die no I don't want it but film will die boohoohoo"... Giving no arguments.

People are buying film and want to use it, like you and me.

So, it is made.

It is indeed logical that 5 years ago people went digital. It was a new medium that time and gave new possibilities to many.

But exactly what makes people abandon film now or in 2015, in large scale??

[AgX]

I don't consider keeping stability that a problem. In times when at least special films will be sold via postorder companies and not via the photo shop next street, keeping films in cold, very cold storage should not be that a problem logistically and financially for a major dealer.

[hrst]

Yes, I agree. And for manufacturers, storage problems of more sensitive films mean simply that there is less choices. That doesn't mean it wouldn't be wise to manufacture one or two good ISO 800-1600 films. If it is now profitable to manufacture even 8 different ISO800-1600 films, it is 2x more profitable to select 4 from them and manufacture them. Then it's also more difficult to make a decision to discontinue them, because it's always more difficult when there is no substitute. I just can't understand the "chain reaction" theory. It's just the opposite; by discontinuing less used products, a manufacturer can restore the balance and get more profit from the remaining ones and keep them in production. That's the very basics of any industrial process.