Is Oz the canary in the coalmine for film?

Eye-level

Banned
I've read reports out of Australia that 35mm slide film has went through the roof and is hard to find and very costly to develop. One report is of Kodak 100 bringing 21 bucks a roll...

I would assume they have the same sort of supply channels as anyone else maybe they are at the end of the road?

So perhaps this is the future of film within the next few years...20 bucks a roll!!!???
 

buckton

New member
I had some friends here that were from Scotland, it was cheaper to buy rolls of film over there and get them sent here, same with prints, they'd send exposed rolls home and prints sent back.
 

AxeMan - Rick S.

Senior Member
It was my understanding "Slide Film" was dead, Kodak stop making it a year ago if not longer. The only place in the US that did process it no longer processes it. As for out of country, I don't know.
 

Eye-level

Banned
That is interesting buckton...I wonder why that is??? I'm mean jeez it is cheaper to buy and have it shipped from Scotland - do they have something against the film users of Oz???

Rick you are thinking of Kodachrome sir...mama took it away last year...but there are many other types of slide films available...it is a real PITA to get slide film developed though...cost per roll from start to finish for regular old film about 12 bucks per roll...slide film about 20-25 buck per roll...if it goes up to 21 dollars for a roll then that means it will cost about 50 bucks to shoot and develop a roll of said slide film...about a buck forty or something a snap..high dollar!
 

buckton

New member
I guess its because you can get 10c prints at digital kiosks, so everyone ran out and bought digital cameras and digital is approaching the resolution of 35mm so professionals aren't using it as much anymore, niche market, high Aussie dollar makes importing cheap so that's not a factor. I was just talking about regular 35mm film before too.
 

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
That is interesting buckton...I wonder why that is??? I'm mean jeez it is cheaper to buy and have it shipped from Scotland - do they have something against the film users of Oz???

Well, don't forget that these film companies usually have authorized distributors for other countries. Now, we'd like to think that these distributors are there to supply us with products, but, they are there for their profit, to make a buck. So, they control the market and can charge whatever they want for the product since they control the market. And you know what, I think Nikon is part of this game too. Why do you think they fight the grey market so so much? To make more money. I think Nikon was slapped by some justice dept in europe because they didn't allow people to buy Nikons in other countries (I just read that in, I don't know where, another forum.
 

Eye-level

Banned
This just reported in the UK...the #1 film chemistry outfit in the UK - Boots - is shutting down over 150 minilabs and apparently is no longer going to process film...this has already been happening in America for a few years now at all sorts of drugstores and grocery stores...some how I get this image in my head of a small whirlpool in the sink drain... :(
 
Last edited:

SamSpade1941

Senior Member
Film is not dead and positives like fuji velvia are not dead. Velvia killed most of Kodaks slide film because velvia is better at rendering color. What I see dying is 35 mm which was primarily used by print journalism. Everyone else was using medium format or larger. It cost $8 to develop a roll of velvia using the pre paid mailers you purchase if you purchase them when you purchase your film from an outfit like B&H. I don't see film totally being replaced till you see a medium format digital back for less than $5000 once that happens its a very real possibility.
 

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
Film is not dead and positives like fuji velvia are not dead. Velvia killed most of Kodaks slide film because velvia is better at rendering color. What I see dying is 35 mm which was primarily used by print journalism. Everyone else was using medium format or larger. It cost $8 to develop a roll of velvia using the pre paid mailers you purchase if you purchase them when you purchase your film from an outfit like B&H. I don't see film totally being replaced till you see a medium format digital back for less than $5000 once that happens its a very real possibility.

Try finding Velvia 3200 iso, try so shoot HDR with film, try go see your shot right after it's done. Film is still around, yes, but is it still practical? I vote no. But I'm keeping my Hasselblad for the day a full 6x6 digital back is available for under the price of a D800. I'm not holding my breath on this one.
 

SamSpade1941

Senior Member
Try finding Velvia 3200 iso, try so shoot HDR with film, try go see your shot right after it's done. Film is still around, yes, but is it still practical? I vote no. But I'm keeping my Hasselblad for the day a full 6x6 digital back is available for under the price of a D800. I'm not holding my breath on this one.

You make some very valid points sir and I don't disagree, but slide film is not about shooting in near dark conditions at fast exposures. Camera equipment are all wrenches in a tool box and everything has its place. I will not lies many years ago when I worked at the news paper I would have killed for a D40 or any other DSLR for that matter. The ability to shoot the image and then immediately preview the image is awesome. Its even nicer to not have to wait for the images to come from the dark room and wait for prints to dry.

However the technical quality is not there yet with for digital cameras to totally replace film either. There are still a lot of professionals who are shooting medium and large format , there are just not a lot of professionals who are shooting 35mm anymore. It was the mainstay of newsprint journalism , when digital SLRs became practical they abandoned 35mm speed is the name of the game news paper journalism. People who have more lead time and need more technical quality can and do still use the larger formats of film. I would love to have a medium format digital camera as I primarily shoot landscapes but I also like living under a roof, for me the option is I probably can afford a used Mamiya , Bronica or Maybe Hassleblad at some point to shoot film. I can never afford to shoot a leaf or phase one back or even a D800 Nikon. I foresee a market for medium format film for sometime to come , I see a 35mm film market which very well may be dead in less than 15 years. JMTC nothing more.
 

Marcel

Happily retired
Staff member
Super Mod
First let me say that I in no way want to argue or sell anything. What I find is that the usage of pictures has changed enormously. When I started a few years ago there were two outputs for pictures. Prints and enlargements (portraits and weddings come to mind), advertising-commercial (using mostly large format transparencies for later color separation and printing of billboards or magazine ads. Some professionals are still working for these outputs and a few are using large format but most of them are using medium format digital. Having a proof right there in the studio with the client present is an invaluable asset. Photoshop post production is not left to the hands of the lab tech anymore as the photographer himself usually controls his output. I'm not in the market anymore and only am an amateur so I don't want to speak for the majority, but for me, I will not go back to film because I find it so impractical and my output consist more of sharing photos and photo tips on internet and with friends.

As much as I would love a Hasselblad digital, it would be just for bluff since my output would virtually destroy the quality of the original (compression for web).

As far as which format will die first, I suspect 220 is very close to it's natural death and 120 will follow. 35mm could take more time since there are lots more usage for this format (film industry) but they are experimenting with digital and I suspect that eventually they will go that way.

I don't know if you are old enough to remember the vinyls records. When CDs came around, the sales dropped because of the ease of digital music. Now CDs sales are sluggish because of MP3-4s. I think photography is no different and weather it's good bad or fantastic, the market will decide where the profit is and that's where the research and marketing money will go. And what marketing wants to sell, people will buy.

Nice discussion, I'd love to read what others have to say as well.
 

Eye-level

Banned
220 is next to impossible to find and 120 is becoming so. 35mm film is getting pretty rare you can still find it at walmart and a few drugstores and dedicated camera stores or online but it expensive.
 
Last edited:
Top