35mm film photography comeback?

Discussion in 'Photography' started by Cursitor Doom, Apr 5, 2014.

  1. I see a lot of 35mm film cameras are still selling well on Ebay. The
    quality marques, anyway. Is there a resurgence of interest in film
    photography in general or is there simply a rump of vintage
    photography hobbyists and collectors who simply refuse to switch to
    digital?
     
    Cursitor Doom, Apr 5, 2014
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Cursitor Doom

    nospam Guest

    In article <>, Cursitor Doom
    <> wrote:

    > I see a lot of 35mm film cameras are still selling well on Ebay. The
    > quality marques, anyway. Is there a resurgence of interest in film
    > photography in general or is there simply a rump of vintage
    > photography hobbyists and collectors who simply refuse to switch to
    > digital?


    there is no resurgence. film is dead. if you looked at the prices
    people are getting for those cameras you'd realize just how dead it
    really is.

    some people like to collect old cameras and there are still some idiots
    who think it's better than digital, but that's about it.
     
    nospam, Apr 5, 2014
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Cursitor Doom

    philo  Guest

    On 04/05/2014 03:50 PM, nospam wrote:
    > In article <>, Cursitor Doom
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >> I see a lot of 35mm film cameras are still selling well on Ebay. The
    >> quality marques, anyway. Is there a resurgence of interest in film
    >> photography in general or is there simply a rump of vintage
    >> photography hobbyists and collectors who simply refuse to switch to
    >> digital?

    >
    > there is no resurgence. film is dead. if you looked at the prices
    > people are getting for those cameras you'd realize just how dead it
    > really is.
    >
    > some people like to collect old cameras and there are still some idiots
    > who think it's better than digital, but that's about it.
    >



    I have a friend who rents an antique booth and I really laughed at him
    when he bought up all the old film cameras he could find at rummage
    sales and EBay.

    The joke was on me because there are tons of collectors out there who
    will pay enough to make his business profitable. If he is asking $25 for
    a camera he paid $5 it may seem like a good deal to the many Chicago
    people who come up here looking for "small town" bargains.
    He also told me a lot of the purchases are to people from Europe and Asia.

    Also: Students often purchase 35mm cameras. There are a number of
    art-based colleges in town here that like to let the students get a feel
    for the older technology.


    Finally, there is a big "hipster"movement comprised of folks less than
    half my age who wear "retro" clothing and often have a 35 mm camera
    around their neck...which may be nothing more than a prop...but who
    knows maybe some of them really use the cameras.
     
    philo , Apr 5, 2014
    #3
  4. I personally prefer film photography by a wide margin, but I'm afraid
    the pricing for older cameras - high or low - doesn't signal a
    resurgence. Collectors, nostalgia freaks, or fools. It's literally
    become too difficult for anyone but the most maniacal hobbyist to get
    supplies and equipment. I sold my last film camera when the last
    Kodachrome processing plant closed.

    Fun thing is, I go to flea markets every weekend. An amazing number of
    people are pricing old Canon AE-1s and such as though it was still the
    90's.
     
    Scott Schuckert, Apr 5, 2014
    #4
  5. Cursitor Doom

    nospam Guest

    In article <lhq0ga$f9p$>, philo  <>
    wrote:

    > >> I see a lot of 35mm film cameras are still selling well on Ebay. The
    > >> quality marques, anyway. Is there a resurgence of interest in film
    > >> photography in general or is there simply a rump of vintage
    > >> photography hobbyists and collectors who simply refuse to switch to
    > >> digital?

    > >
    > > there is no resurgence. film is dead. if you looked at the prices
    > > people are getting for those cameras you'd realize just how dead it
    > > really is.
    > >
    > > some people like to collect old cameras and there are still some idiots
    > > who think it's better than digital, but that's about it.

    >
    > I have a friend who rents an antique booth and I really laughed at him
    > when he bought up all the old film cameras he could find at rummage
    > sales and EBay.
    >
    > The joke was on me because there are tons of collectors out there who
    > will pay enough to make his business profitable. If he is asking $25 for
    > a camera he paid $5 it may seem like a good deal to the many Chicago
    > people who come up here looking for "small town" bargains.
    > He also told me a lot of the purchases are to people from Europe and Asia.


    collectors collect. they don't actually use the cameras to take photos.

    > Also: Students often purchase 35mm cameras. There are a number of
    > art-based colleges in town here that like to let the students get a feel
    > for the older technology.


    that is a really stupid idea. it exists mainly because a bunch of film
    luddites won't accept that film is dead, so they think they have to
    teach the same things they learned when they were a student. what's the
    point in teaching obsolete skills to art students who will not only
    never used anything they learn but totally waste their time in the
    process? anyone teaching film photography these days should be fired on
    the spot.

    > Finally, there is a big "hipster"movement comprised of folks less than
    > half my age who wear "retro" clothing and often have a 35 mm camera
    > around their neck...which may be nothing more than a prop...but who
    > knows maybe some of them really use the cameras.


    doubt it, and it's extremely rare to see a film camera anyway. they're
    all on instagram, facebook, snapchat and whatever other social media
    platform is in fashion this month, using their smartphone for a camera.
     
    nospam, Apr 6, 2014
    #5
  6. Cursitor Doom

    nospam Guest

    In article <050420141845190497%>, Scott Schuckert
    <> wrote:

    > I personally prefer film photography by a wide margin,


    what for? digital blows film away in both quality and convenience.

    > but I'm afraid
    > the pricing for older cameras - high or low - doesn't signal a
    > resurgence. Collectors, nostalgia freaks, or fools. It's literally
    > become too difficult for anyone but the most maniacal hobbyist to get
    > supplies and equipment. I sold my last film camera when the last
    > Kodachrome processing plant closed.


    better late than never.

    > Fun thing is, I go to flea markets every weekend. An amazing number of
    > people are pricing old Canon AE-1s and such as though it was still the
    > 90's.


    it's not just cameras. i see all sorts of stuff at flea markets and
    swap meets that are ridiculously overpriced.

    on the other hand, there are also some very good deals to be had too.
    the fun part is you never know what you might find.
     
    nospam, Apr 6, 2014
    #6
  7. Cursitor Doom

    philo  Guest

    On 04/05/2014 05:45 PM, Scott Schuckert wrote:
    >
    > I personally prefer film photography by a wide margin, but I'm afraid
    > the pricing for older cameras - high or low - doesn't signal a
    > resurgence. Collectors, nostalgia freaks, or fools. It's literally
    > become too difficult for anyone but the most maniacal hobbyist to get
    > supplies and equipment. I sold my last film camera when the last
    > Kodachrome processing plant closed.
    >
    > Fun thing is, I go to flea markets every weekend. An amazing number of
    > people are pricing old Canon AE-1s and such as though it was still the
    > 90's.
    >




    There is an artist/photographer here in town who fits into sort of a
    niche market. He prints his 35mm B&W photos then hand paints them.

    He's been doing this since the days before digital photography and never
    changed his methods. The images are nothing at all like Photoshop. The
    paper used for digital printing would not lend itself to paint.

    I know he's not the only person in the world who does this, but people
    like his unique approach and he earns his living by doing that.
     
    philo , Apr 6, 2014
    #7
  8. Cursitor Doom

    Noons Guest

    On 6/04/2014 9:24 AM, nospam wrote:

    >
    > that is a really stupid idea. it exists mainly because a bunch of film
    > luddites won't accept that film is dead, so they think they have to
    > teach the same things they learned when they were a student. what's the
    > point in teaching obsolete skills to art students who will not only
    > never used anything they learn but totally waste their time in the
    > process? anyone teaching film photography these days should be fired on
    > the spot.


    The day morons like you stop calling film users "stupid" and "luddites"
    is the day digital will gain ANY credibility with film users. Until
    then, it's just noise from unidentified scammers like you pushing your
    digital wares under "kewl" handles in the "online market".
     
    Noons, Apr 6, 2014
    #8
  9. Cursitor Doom

    nospam Guest

    In article <lhqii3$la5$>, Noons <>
    wrote:

    > > that is a really stupid idea. it exists mainly because a bunch of film
    > > luddites won't accept that film is dead, so they think they have to
    > > teach the same things they learned when they were a student. what's the
    > > point in teaching obsolete skills to art students who will not only
    > > never used anything they learn but totally waste their time in the
    > > process? anyone teaching film photography these days should be fired on
    > > the spot.

    >
    > The day morons like you stop calling film users "stupid" and "luddites"
    > is the day digital will gain ANY credibility with film users. Until
    > then, it's just noise from unidentified scammers like you pushing your
    > digital wares under "kewl" handles in the "online market".


    i'm not pushing anything. digital surpassed film long ago and anyone
    still using film certainly isn't doing it for quality purposes. they're
    living in the past.
     
    nospam, Apr 6, 2014
    #9
  10. nospam <> wrote:
    >In article <lhq0ga$f9p$>, philo  <>
    >wrote:
    >> Also: Students often purchase 35mm cameras. There are a number of
    >> art-based colleges in town here that like to let the students get a feel
    >> for the older technology.

    >
    >that is a really stupid idea. it exists mainly because a bunch of film
    >luddites won't accept that film is dead, so they think they have to
    >teach the same things they learned when they were a student. what's the
    >point in teaching obsolete skills to art students who will not only
    >never used anything they learn but totally waste their time in the
    >process? anyone teaching film photography these days should be fired on
    >the spot.


    Every future design engineer who will work in the
    automotive industry, and for that matter every Saturday
    mechanic too, necessarily has to work for at least 6
    weeks in a horse stable shoveling horseshit. It helps
    later to understand marketing bullshit.

    Same basic principal as teaching film to teenagers who
    could otherwise never become real photographers, who
    smell like stop bath.

    --
    Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
    Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)
     
    Floyd L. Davidson, Apr 6, 2014
    #10
  11. Cursitor Doom

    Noons Guest

    On 6/04/2014 2:08 PM, nospam wrote:

    > i'm not pushing anything.


    Yes, you most definitely are.

    > digital surpassed film long ago


    Yes, and?

    > and anyone
    > still using film certainly isn't doing it for quality purposes.


    and did anyone mention quality, imbecile?

    > they're
    > living in the past.


    the only one still living in the past of film vs digital is YOU!
     
    Noons, Apr 6, 2014
    #11
  12. Cursitor Doom

    Noons Guest

    On 6/04/2014 2:58 PM, Floyd L. Davidson wrote:

    > Every future design engineer who will work in the
    > automotive industry, and for that matter every Saturday
    > mechanic too, necessarily has to work for at least 6
    > weeks in a horse stable shoveling horseshit. It helps
    > later to understand marketing bullshit.


    Exactly. And that is what is missing from you.

    > Same basic principal as teaching film to teenagers who
    > could otherwise never become real photographers, who
    > smell like stop bath.


    As opposed to reeking of would-be-photographer pretentious "knowledge"
    like you do?
     
    Noons, Apr 6, 2014
    #12
  13. Cursitor Doom

    philo  Guest

    On 04/05/2014 11:58 PM, Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
    >



    <troll snipped>
    >
    > Every future design engineer who will work in the
    > automotive industry, and for that matter every Saturday
    > mechanic too, necessarily has to work for at least 6
    > weeks in a horse stable shoveling horseshit. It helps
    > later to understand marketing bullshit.
    >


    Yep, to really learn something you need to go back to the roots.

    > Same basic principal as teaching film to teenagers who
    > could otherwise never become real photographers, who
    > smell like stop bath.
    >
     
    philo , Apr 6, 2014
    #13
  14. philo  <> wrote:
    >On 04/05/2014 11:58 PM, Floyd L. Davidson wrote:
    >>

    >
    ><troll snipped>
    >>
    >> Every future design engineer who will work in the
    >> automotive industry, and for that matter every Saturday
    >> mechanic too, necessarily has to work for at least 6
    >> weeks in a horse stable shoveling horseshit. It helps
    >> later to understand marketing bullshit.
    >>

    >
    >Yep, to really learn something you need to go back to the roots.


    BS.

    >> Same basic principal as teaching film to teenagers who
    >> could otherwise never become real photographers, who
    >> smell like stop bath.
    >>


    --
    Floyd L. Davidson http://www.apaflo.com/
    Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)
     
    Floyd L. Davidson, Apr 6, 2014
    #14
  15. Cursitor Doom

    Robert Coe Guest

    On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 18:32:40 -0500, philo  <> wrote:
    : On 04/05/2014 05:45 PM, Scott Schuckert wrote:
    : >
    : > I personally prefer film photography by a wide margin, but I'm afraid
    : > the pricing for older cameras - high or low - doesn't signal a
    : > resurgence. Collectors, nostalgia freaks, or fools. It's literally
    : > become too difficult for anyone but the most maniacal hobbyist to get
    : > supplies and equipment. I sold my last film camera when the last
    : > Kodachrome processing plant closed.
    : >
    : > Fun thing is, I go to flea markets every weekend. An amazing number of
    : > people are pricing old Canon AE-1s and such as though it was still the
    : > 90's.
    :
    :
    :
    : There is an artist/photographer here in town who fits into sort of a
    : niche market. He prints his 35mm B&W photos then hand paints them.
    :
    : He's been doing this since the days before digital photography and never
    : changed his methods. The images are nothing at all like Photoshop. The
    : paper used for digital printing would not lend itself to paint.

    I get everything you say except that last statement. With the enormous variety
    of papers available for digital printing, it's hard to see none of them being
    adaptable to painting. I've had a couple of prints done on watercolor paper,
    for example.

    : I know he's not the only person in the world who does this, but people
    : like his unique approach and he earns his living by doing that.

    Bob
     
    Robert Coe, Apr 6, 2014
    #15
  16. Cursitor Doom

    nospam Guest

    In article <lhr7oi$46i$>, philo  <>
    wrote:

    > > Every future design engineer who will work in the
    > > automotive industry, and for that matter every Saturday
    > > mechanic too, necessarily has to work for at least 6
    > > weeks in a horse stable shoveling horseshit. It helps
    > > later to understand marketing bullshit.
    > >

    >
    > Yep, to really learn something you need to go back to the roots.


    nonsense.

    it's much easier to learn photography with digital than it ever was
    with film.

    the only people pushing learning photography by studying film are those
    who don't know much about digital.
     
    nospam, Apr 6, 2014
    #16
  17. In article <050420141924588558%>, nospam
    <> wrote:

    > > I personally prefer film photography by a wide margin,

    >
    > what for? digital blows film away in both quality and convenience.


    Convenience, I'll give you. Quality is debatable. Maybe I'm using the
    wrong equipment (midrange Nikon body with mostly high-end legacy
    Nikkors) and don't get either the dynamic range or resolution I'm used
    to from 35mm film, let alone the medium or large format stuff I used to
    use.

    Then again, I used to have a fairly extensive darkroom, equipped for
    B&W and color, where I spent most of my time. It was a craft, not
    little bits of computer code. All I know is that I took far better
    pictures on film, every week, than I EVER have on digital.

    That's why I prefer it.
     
    Scott Schuckert, Apr 6, 2014
    #17
  18. Cursitor Doom

    philo  Guest

    On 04/06/2014 06:16 AM, Robert Coe wrote:
    > On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 18:32:40 -0500, philo <> wrote:
    > : On 04/05/2014 05:45 PM, Scott Schuckert wrote:
    > : >
    > : > I personally prefer film photography by a wide margin, but I'm afraid
    > : > the pricing for older cameras - high or low - doesn't signal a
    > : > resurgence. Collectors, nostalgia freaks, or fools. It's literally
    > : > become too difficult for anyone but the most maniacal hobbyist to get
    > : > supplies and equipment. I sold my last film camera when the last
    > : > Kodachrome processing plant closed.
    > : >
    > : > Fun thing is, I go to flea markets every weekend. An amazing number of
    > : > people are pricing old Canon AE-1s and such as though it was still the
    > : > 90's.
    > :
    > :
    > :
    > : There is an artist/photographer here in town who fits into sort of a
    > : niche market. He prints his 35mm B&W photos then hand paints them.
    > :
    > : He's been doing this since the days before digital photography and never
    > : changed his methods. The images are nothing at all like Photoshop. The
    > : paper used for digital printing would not lend itself to paint.
    >
    > I get everything you say except that last statement. With the enormous variety
    > of papers available for digital printing, it's hard to see none of them being
    > adaptable to painting. I've had a couple of prints done on watercolor paper,
    > for example.


    Yes. I forgot what a huge variety of papers is now available...anyway
    the person I know is not going to change anything with his processing.

    >
    > : I know he's not the only person in the world who does this, but people
    > : like his unique approach and he earns his living by doing that.
    >
    > Bob
    >
     
    philo , Apr 6, 2014
    #18
  19. Cursitor Doom

    philo  Guest

    On 04/06/2014 07:48 AM, Scott Schuckert wrote:
    > In article <050420141924588558%>, nospam
    > <> wrote:
    >
    >>> I personally prefer film photography by a wide margin,

    >>
    >> what for? digital blows film away in both quality and convenience.

    >
    > Convenience, I'll give you. Quality is debatable. Maybe I'm using the
    > wrong equipment (midrange Nikon body with mostly high-end legacy
    > Nikkors) and don't get either the dynamic range or resolution I'm used
    > to from 35mm film, let alone the medium or large format stuff I used to
    > use.
    >
    > Then again, I used to have a fairly extensive darkroom, equipped for
    > B&W and color, where I spent most of my time. It was a craft, not
    > little bits of computer code. All I know is that I took far better
    > pictures on film, every week, than I EVER have on digital.
    >
    > That's why I prefer it.
    >




    I got my first digital camera about 14 years ago. It's a 1Mp and I still
    have it but of course don't use it anymore. I used my 35mm and medium
    format camera for many more years and as I got better digital cameras
    used my film cameras less and less.

    By the time I got my 50D my film cameras were in disuse.


    One day I wanted to settle the matter once and for all...and waited for
    the day of perfect sun...then compared my medium format to the Canon.

    The digital camera was better so I am now a firm believer in the new
    technology. However I never did completely dismantle my darkroom.

    Years ago I built my own large format camera (using parts from an old
    enlarger) and produced a number of Calotypes. I just don't think I could
    ever quite get that effect digitally.
     
    philo , Apr 6, 2014
    #19
  20. Cursitor Doom

    Mike Trainor Guest

    On Sat, 05 Apr 2014 16:50:26 -0400, nospam <>
    wrote:

    >In article <>, Cursitor Doom
    ><> wrote:
    >


    >some people like to collect old cameras and there are still some idiots
    >who think it's better than digital, but that's about it.


    Specially the ones who care about dynamic range.


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_versus_film_photography#Dynamic_range

    is one place where this problem is addressed. I do not think
    that the Nikon D300 is close to good film .... but I can live
    with it for most of the time.

    And, I think in time the problem will be solved ... or become
    moot. Consider that hardly anyone know what good stereo
    sound is anymore. But the little ear things have won the game.

    mt

    ---
    This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
    http://www.avast.com
     
    Mike Trainor, Apr 6, 2014
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Similar Threads
  1. Joe Shapiro
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    753
    Nick Zentena
    Nov 5, 2003
  2. Chris
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    559
    Gordon Moat
    Oct 3, 2004
  3. Ryadia@home

    35mm SLR image compared to a sub 35mm DSLR image

    Ryadia@home, Jun 20, 2005, in forum: 35mm Cameras
    Replies:
    11
    Views:
    801
    Ryadia@home
    Jun 21, 2005
  4. The point of 35mm photography

    , Jul 5, 2005, in forum: 35mm Cameras
    Replies:
    40
    Views:
    758
    Gordon Moat
    Jul 13, 2005
  5. Stephen M. Gluck

    Studio lighting for 35mm and 4 X5 photography

    Stephen M. Gluck, Jan 10, 2006, in forum: 35mm Cameras
    Replies:
    19
    Views:
    473
    Alan Browne
    Jan 14, 2006
  6. Sting
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    788
    Henrik
    Aug 8, 2003
  7. Replies:
    48
    Views:
    1,236
    DBLEXPOSURE
    Dec 16, 2005
  8. Doug Payne

    Kodak stages a comeback

    Doug Payne, Jan 26, 2007, in forum: Kodak
    Replies:
    5
    Views:
    817
    AustinMN
    Jan 27, 2007
Loading...