Just Business
Everybody thinks the biggest and best is yet to come in the world of digital photography. But I beg to differ. Not only has innovation stopped in it’s track, but, in fact, the biggies are now running at a deficit. Look at Nikon. Unprecedented losses over the last 3 years. If we are to believe some of the financial soothsayers, both Nikon and Canon will continue this death spiral, (for their photo divisions), and will lose at least 50% of their market share over the next couple of years. 1000’s of jobs lost and plummeting stock. So what’s up? Has the ridiculous practice of using 500 images for HDR actually come to an end? Have the prices of pro gear reached a prohibitive level?
The Pro vs The Amateur
Well, first we have to talk about “pro” equipment. Pro cameras were ALWAYS subsidized by consumer/prosumer cameras. It was the “hobbyists” and family amateurs, (kids, vacation, etc.), who made these companies profitable. So much so that it made room for the (film) Yashicas, Minoltas, Pentax,…etc., point and shoots in days gone by. Quite a large and profitable niche. Now? Well, how are you going to get a ‘consumer’ to buy ANY digital camera when the whole world already has a camera? It’s called a cell phone. Sorry, Nikon/Canon,…whoever. 350 million + images are uploaded to Facebook alone per day. So, lots of people are taking pictures. Just with cell phones/iPads, etc.
Digital is Dead – The Bottom Line
Is this the beginning of the end? Like Kodak in 2002? Even Leica has committed to film by upping production of the M-A and throwing their hat into the Instax ring. (SoFort) Which is just a reflection of Fuji selling over 4 times the amount of Instax cameras as their own digital cameras! And while Canon did release a 5D Mk IV to “upgrade” from their 5D Mk III, the feature differential is almost microscopic. It’s more likely Canon did that just to proclaim “how big their balls are”. Especially when you consider that almost all their camera profits come from consumer level DSLR’s. But will Canon ever hop on board the film movement? I doubt it. More money in printers and business copiers.
Film Rules, Digital Drools
Why film? Gee, let’s see. You don’t have to upgrade every year. Film and developing costs are a lot less than upgrading digital equipment. Your images are physical and ‘real’. Different films and developing give you unlimited organic variety and a break from “digital sameness”. And you always have your cell phone for quick snaps. Biggest question I get? “How do I get my images to look like film?” Answer; Use film.
Digital Losses and Stagnation
And now the digital crowd is fighting over SLR’s vs Mirrorless? We’ve had “mirrorless” film cameras for 100 years. (rangefinders, p&s, TLR’s, field/view cameras) Oh, yeah, buy MORE! So, just face it; Analog shooters are no longer considered “luddites”. Film is back. Ask any of the line of young adults and teens clutching old film cameras,…from serious SLR’s to low and high end point-and-shoots. Rather than take photos on smartphones, these “serious” photographers are choosing to shoot on traditional film cameras and set-up darkrooms or go to the lab. Yes, it takes courage. Especially if you’re a professional. But, you cling to the digital mirage at what price? Is dealing with a professional lab worse than countless hours behind a computer? Are you so unsure of your talent that you need an LCD screen? Are you willing to compromise your vision to some ‘control freak’ Art Director?
But the mantra is not “Digital is Dead, Digital is Dead” across the board. Not even close. But even dedicated digital photographers, with their LCD’s and computer monitors, are opting in for various flavors of Polaroid/Instax images on shoots. There’s an increasing desire for people to have something physical. It’s human nature. Keep in mind that Fuji sold 100,000 Instax units their first year. They now sell 5 million+! And with “Instax backs” for medium format around the corner, the dam has broke.
Under 30 and Feelin’ Good
While people under 30 think of film as this new fangled invention, Ilford Photo found that 30 percent of film users were under 35 years old. Add to that, nearly 60 percent are just hopping on the film bandwagon, and that number is growing yearly. As the digital camera market continues to erode, what will the big companies do? They are not photographers. The only thing that matters is the bottom line. However,…changeover to “dead” technology? Well, it’s not only not dead, it’s not even on life support. As Oliver Zahm from Purple magazine said,...“Fashion is rediscovering the possibility and the quality of film photography…there’s a purity to film. It’s refreshing.”. Yeah, you’ll need a vision,… and a good helping of testosterone. (unless you’re a female,…then just being a badass) But a largely untapped market awaits to turn your images into something ‘special and unique’. For now. Can we start a hashtag, “Digital is Dead”? Not yet? OK. 😎 And I’m not telling digital shooters,….or those who shoot both, (most film shooters), to stop. Digital comes in very handy at times. (listing that doodad on Ebay, your daughter’s recital, uploading your party pics to Facebook,….etc.) Just add another process to your arsenal. Or not. 🥱
Great film cameras that will end up being cheaper than any high end digitals, even after film and processing….and last 50 years. Leica M6, Nikon F3HP, Mamiya 7, Hasselblad C/M,….and on and on. Prices ARE rising,…the REAL indicator on the health of the film movement. (a Contax T3 has doubled in price within 2 years) Hell, you can purchase a Nikon F80, (N80), for $50, and add a 50mm lens for another $50. Do you know how many rolls of film and processing that is in a year? A lot less than just one consumer grade full frame digital SLR. A lot less! So the excuse of it costs too much is really debunked. Hell,…Ren Hang used a $10 Minolta 110 Date for 99% of his indoor shots with the cheapest Fujifilm Superior! Whether you use film or digital, the equipment is never the issue. And if you shoot color, it’s not necessary to tweak color balance. Your choice of film got it right everytime. But digital definitely has valid uses. No one will argue with that. And even though Kodak alone has experienced growth of 15% to 30% every year,…they are still only at 2% sales of their peak years. I always tell my adamant digital friends, it’s not film they should fear,…it’s the purveyors of smartphones who find no use for a consumer level digital camera. And, hence, no support system for “professional” digital cameras. Just a thought. 😊
The video below is a bit long. However, if you are truly interested in the advantages of film in many cases, listen carefully to another man who’s been in the “trenches”. Trust me. We’re not all crazy luddites. In fact, David Milnor’s east coast doppelganger probably came to my studio on W. 13th in NY in the late 90’s with Kodak’s “amazing”, (🙄), 2 MP, $20,000 camera. As I wasn’t in the loop when clients drum scanned film,….the point of that camera escaped me at the time.
Thanks for another interesting post, Federico. I always look forward to your articles – always thought provoking and inspirational.
Film and digital, I use both, but I prefer film. I will always use it.
Hi Matt,
I’m just dealing in facts. (like Nikon losing 15%+ stock value) And I also occasionally use digital. Like pics of my children. (although they actually prefer Instax/Polaroid 😁) However, I’ve gotten a lot of ‘hate’ mail. Dudes,…they’re just cameras. And I’m just being facetious about #DigitalisDead. I’m just pointing out the decline of digital camera sales. Don’t blame me and don’t blame any film camera users,…blame Apple! 😂
Federico
This really says how it is. I am sure mobile digital will out sell what is now to the general public, bulky, complicated (sophisticated) digital cameras when they can get a usable and not too shoddy photo from their mobile devices. Film will always reign king with me but understand why specific digital cameras may well be done.
“But the mantra is not “Digital is Dead, Digital is Dead” across the board. Not even close.”
Hi Carol,
I really wish people would not skim read. This would prevent a lot of the hate mail I received. 😁 But that’s fine. It was respected business journals and government statistics that provided the numbers. For example, that “DSLR’s” have plummeting sales and mirrorless cameras are taking over. That more and more “consumers” have only a cell phone camera. And that dismal all over digital camera sales are the result. However, this has nothing to do with film. And for all the “ranters” who wrote me, professionals in many genres choose to use film, whether you choose to believe it or not. However, I never suggested anyone throw out their digital cameras and switch over. I was just saying film shooters tend to not sit around waiting for the next “big thing”. An M3 Leica works as well today as it did 80 years ago. Shoot film, shoot digital, shoot both. I don’t care. Even with the 5% to 9% yearly growth of film, analog will never catch up. Numerous comments derogatorily referred to me as a ‘hipster’. Well, all I can say is,…Thank You. I finally made the cut. 😊 P.S. Just please stop those “creepy” HDR pictures.
Hope you and Katherine are well.
Federico
I’ve said this quote on the show Single Shot, January of 2018, “Digital Photography is Dead,” which can be viewed here at the 4:50 mark: https://www.facebook.com/watch/?v=163507034270024
My opinion about digital being dead, well, it goes into the understanding that if Film has to be defined as being alive, or coming back from the dead, we have to understand that digital should be dead as well, because the foundation of film (tangible) photography is the basis for all of Photography would be that the medium would not have digital without film.
Hi Shaun,
Yes, of course. Actually digital cameras have been around a long time. Kodak, (curiously), was probably the start of the “digital revolution”. “Steven Sasson invented the first self-contained digital camera at Eastman Kodak in 1975. It weighed 8 pounds (3.6 kg) and had only 100 × 100 resolution (0.01 megapixels). The image was recorded onto a cassette tape and this process took 23 seconds.” 😳
Good day Anatomy, I hope that all is well. Historically wise, digital photography has not been around for a long time—neither has Photography overall. The word Photography is around 180 years old & the medium is around 193 years old. Roll film is around 130 years old. The 20th Century is the 1st full century of Photography. In contrast to other mediums such as Painting, Sculpture, Acting, Literature & Dance, Photography is still extremely youthful with its Age. This medium does not even have a classical era nor has it ever been a part of any Renaissances. There are no ancient camera photographs. Now, the profusion of photographs in our society, that is a whole other topic. However, I think Photography not being around for a long time, helps with its shape, because it has a newness to it, one which can always be an educational, as well as a cultural visual library.
😳 The ‘end game’… https://www.anatomyfilms.com/photo-print/ 😁
Well to be honest… analog photography will last as long as film are produced and labs to process the color negatives. B/W is pretty straigtfoward to do.. and can be done with household liquid like cafenol. However color is a bit more tricky… once color lab shut down It’s all over for color… color film production will stop and B/W will follow soon after… i just hope analog photography has another 10 years 🙂
Hi Christian,
OK. 😁 Fortunately, Kodak is expanding production and film sales are increasing by as much as 30% per year, up to 6 new films and formats are introduced per year, Ilford has had a resurgence in sales of chemicals, film and paper, (mostly propelled by people under 35), Fuji sold more Instax film and cameras than all their digital cameras combined, and many high end wedding and fashion photographers are using film. Fact is, there’s a film shortage right now. And you picked the perfect day to tell me “film is dead”. Press Release today; https://www.anatomyfilms.com/large-format-instaxly-advances/ “Our professional film sales have been increasing over the last two or three years,” confirms Dennis Olbrich, president of Kodak Alaris. Professional photographers are primarily fueling this growth, thanks to a new generation of practitioners who grew up with digital but have begun dabbling in film, says Olbrich: “They discover the magic of film photography and many of them simply fall in love with it.” The bad thing about this? Film camera prices are skyrocketing. 😥 However, I agree, most people should continue to shoot digital and fuel the 350+ million photos uploaded to Facebook every day. (including using smarthones) 👍
Federico
A provocative title for a short piece. No digital is not dead but the digital camera market is in significant decline due, as is said, to the smart phone. I have an extensive film camera collection and like to shoot all the working ones as much as I can (this past year has put a temporary stop to that unhappily) and am often sending the non working ones to the camera doctor. There is much speculation about the future of historical firms like Olympus and Pentax, and indeed Nikon now, due to the collapse to the digital camera market. I reckon due to the ageing nature of the film cameras we have any one of these companies would make a sustainable profit if they were to re-release one of their old classics. Pentax MX or 67, Olympus OM1 or Nikon FE perhaps?
It is good to see the small resurgence of interest in film and new stocks coming on the market, but let us not kid ourselves too much. Digital offers many advantages over film. I myself prefer it for telephoto, close ups and flash or light painting work. I appreciate the flexibility it offers from shot to shot regarding ISO setting and ability to easily adjust settings again from shot to shot to get the image just as I want it. Film for me though shines for street and travel photography. A small camera and standard and/or wide angle lens is all you need for most of the time, coupled with your favourite film stock (mine is XP3 Super) I find it more sociable (no chimping and annoying any wives, friends or girlfriends whilst you fiddle with your toy) and you get to relive your experience when you get your film developed and scanned/printed. For prints upto 12X18 35mm is perfectly adequate (120 looks gorgeous printed at this size) for normal viewing distances and scans can easily be shared.
Long live film! – And digital too!
This article is hipster nonsense,I started on film and it was and still is crap compared to digital.
Film was very expensive and you needed a lot of cash and room for all the equipment.
Repeatability was nightmare which made it very difficult to learn.
The fact that the average 10 year old now has an understanding of photography that only professional photographers had in the days of film is proof that digital is the most expressive way to take photographs.
I sense a pump and dump stock share opportunity from the amount of people prepared to believe in this hogwash.
Hi Paul,
Well then. Don’t ever shoot film again. And take solace in that you’re in the majority. A good place to be. 😊
Cheers
AF