Want to know how much film you and your camera are chewing through? John Sypal over at tokyo camera style does this by collecting box tabs. Regarding the photos above, he writes,
This is compiled from the box tabs of every single roll/pack of film I shot in 2012.
Since 2001 I’ve kept a tab from every roll of film I’ve shot in the backs of collage-based photographic journals. In the mid-2000’s I was shooting some 500 rolls a year- I’ve cut back to about 300 or so the past two years. A complete visual collection of all the box-tabs from the past dozen years would result in a much larger image.
It’s like a stamp or sticker collection book for photographers. You can find a larger collage of the photos above here.
P.S. A giant poster-sized collage of box tabs might make for a pretty wild home decor item.
San Francisco resident Ryan Tatar is passionate about two things when he’s not sitting at his desk at a Silicon Valley tech company: surfing and photography… and usually a combination of the two. He has attracted a good deal of attention in both worlds with his lo-fi photographs of surfers, captured with old analog cameras and expired and/or cross-processed films.
In the short video above, Tatar talks about his love for analog photography and introduces us to what he does. Read more…
Film photography has been taking a lot of hits in the business world, but while major manufacturers continue to discontinue film production, one small company is doing the exact opposite. Revolog — a small online shop founded by photography school graduates Hanna Pribitzer and Michael Krebs in 2010 — has been finding success by selling handmade specialty film.
And while you may think that specialty film wouldn’t be a very lucrative business to enter right about now, get this: yesterday the duo announced the sale of their 10,000th roll of film. Read more…
The Economist has published an article on photographic film’s “transition from the mass market to the artisanal,” writing that the future is bleak for film as we know it:
Consumers and professionals ditched film first. Then health-care services, which used it for X-rays, shifted to digital scans. The final blow came with the film industry’s switch to digital projection. IHS iSuppli [...] estimates filmmakers consumed 2.5m miles [...] of film each year for the distribution of prints at its height. That was just a few years ago. By 2012 this plunged by two-thirds. In 2015 it will be next to nothing.
Since 2005, photographer and photography lecturer Robert Burley has been documenting the demise of film photography through film photographs. He has traveled around the world with his 4×5 field camera in tow, capturing the demolition of buildings, the equipment that once powered a giant industry, and the desolation of factories that were once teeming with workers.
The photograph above shows a crowd watching the implosions of buildings 65 and 69 at Kodak Park in Rochester, New York on October 6, 2007. Read more…
Another sign of the times (and bad news for film-photography enthusiasts): one of the most prestigious photo competitions in the world no longer accepts film photographs. Earlier this week Nikon published a “call for entries” for its 34th Nikon Photo Contest. Here’s what the entry guidelines say about “Eligible Works”:
Image data files created with digital cameras (including medium- and large-format cameras). Images that have been retouched using software or by other means will be accepted. Both color and monochrome images will be accepted. (Scans of photographs taken with film cameras are not eligible.)
The contest has been held since 1969 to “provide an opportunity for photographers around the world to communicate and to enrich photographic culture for professionals and amateurs alike.” Read more…
In this guide, you will find out how you can save money on film photography. I will go over five basic ways on how any film photographer can pursue their artistic dreams and develop their creative outlets without having to spend a fortune. Read more…
Around this time last year, we featured a video on developing film using coffee and vitamin C. And now, the folks behind the Caffenol blog (which was named after the nickname given to the “home brew” developer) have put together a video showing that it’s possible to do something similar using red wine instead of coffee and photo paper instead of film. Read more…
Bloomberg writes that Kodak’s bankruptcy announcement yesterday was simply another step in CEO Antonio Perez’s grand plan to sell off the company’s photography divisions and patents in order to focus on selling digital printers and ink. At the same time, the company has been quick to reaffirm its dedication to producing film. Kodak marketing director Audrey Jonckheer was quoted by BJP today as saying,
Film (still and cinema) remains a profitable business for Kodak, and we have the broadest and most respected portfolio of films in both segments. We have taken steps to sustain the business as it has declined, and we know that there are hundreds of passionate fans of film for the artistic and quality reasons they cite. We remain committed to make film as long as there is profitable demand for it. And as I noted, it is still profitable.
That’s definitely good news for film photography lovers. Want film to survive? Just keep buying it, and hope other shooters do the same!
The Economist has a fascinating piece looking at the similarities and differences between Kodak and Fujifilm, two juggernauts of film photography that took different paths when digital photography came around:
While Kodak suffers, its long-time rival Fujifilm is doing rather well. The two firms have much in common. Both enjoyed lucrative near-monopolies of their home markets: Kodak selling film in America, Fujifilm in Japan. A good deal of the trade friction during the 1990s between America and Japan sprang from Kodak’s desire to keep cheap Japanese film off its patch.
Both firms saw their traditional business rendered obsolete. But whereas Kodak has so far failed to adapt adequately, Fujifilm has transformed itself into a solidly profitable business, with a market capitalisation, even after a rough year, of some $12.6 billion to Kodak’s $220m. Why did these two firms fare so differently?
