In my area I have noticed that 120 film of any kind is not being reordered or reordered in small amounts of only one or two kinds. Even the person who sells film at the local camera show did not bring any 120 becouse he can't get any deals on it. I fear that as more pros dump medium format for pro quality digital the price and avalibility of 120 (already poor) will only get worse. I wonder if the same thing will occur to paper, chem's, and all other things in the film/darkroom world?

-- Andy Clements (a_clements2@juno.com), January 27, 2000

Answers

I suppose the worst case scenerio is that everything, 35mm included, will go away, and digital will take over! There are still enough pros using 120 that it should be quite a while before you can't get it. Local stores here have been cutting down on darkroom supplies for years, but there is always mail order if you can't get something locally. As the community of darkroom workers becomes smaller and smaller, the big firms won't be able to justify being in the market, and specialty firms will spring up to fill the needs, albeit at a higher price than when snapshooters were shouldering the manufacturing costs.

-- Conrad Hoffman (choffman@rpa.net), January 27, 2000.

Response to "is 120 film starting to go away?"

Hi everyone. still new to the photo world, i find myself asking the same question(s). "will digital take over?", "where/how am i going to get supplies when it does?", and all.... well, in the year that i have been into black and white, i find that i cant get enough of it. any of it. taking pictures, learning techniques for shooting and developing, etc. love and obsession. i also do quite a bit of digital art on photoshop and other popular software. i even "manipulate" and "process" my photos in this medium. BUT: its not enough. its not the real thing. i can mimick all kinds of technique digitally. grain. infra red. solarization. if one has a basic working knowledge of photography, its not hard to do with a computer and a digital camera. its not the same though. its not "photography". (wow, this is going to be long widned i feel). it is creative process, i mean, i've gotten to the point where i am taking pictures with my AE-1 of images on my monitor, just to see what the effect is. I am wowed by all the digital cameras out there. and attracted to the fact that i can do all my "processing" without even getting my hands covered with chemicals. they make it real "attractive" huh? (at work, we get a trade magazine called "ptn" i think. this currnet issue spent probably a good 75% of it content on digital related news and updates....interesting). but, a funny thing. the other day, i was at the universty photo dept. with a friend, and someone had their medium format film laid out on the table, reviewing the negs. THAT was cool. giant film. wow. now i can understand where some if these images i see come from, and now i am hooked on getting a medium format camera as well as my 35mm. so, i am kind of involved in a "duaL" evolouion, digital and film. only, digital is too easy (with the right software). and it leaves me feeling as though i am "cheating" (is it lacking soul?). it also leaves me feeling that i want to learn "the real way" to achieve a beatiful image on FIBER BASED PAPER. so, yea, digital will find its niche for big business and convienienc (like auto focus, motor drives and crazy 1,000 zone metering systems). but its a long way off in the area of pushing traditional mehtods out the door. yea, and in my area, its difficult to find a lot certain photo supplies, but, like the previous post said, there is always mail order. and strangest (perhaps) thing is: where i live, there is a growing underground of interest in the traditional methods of photography. i say strange because where i live, we are usually the last to catch on to the "hip" trends and all that....maybe we're actually on forefront for once buti doubt it... the existence of this forum should offer some solace to any worries about digital "taking over". besides, from what i just read, digital is kind of leveling off a bit as far as advances in resolution goes (about 3 megapixels or so in the consumer range). and i have a sneaking feeling that it takes a bit more than 3 million pixels to equal the information stored in a medium format negative. and at worst, digital is like getting at 7-11, film is like getting a full service fill up. you may have to hunt a little, but its still there for those who appreciate "tradition". sorry if this was a little "incoherent", its way past my bedtime. take care all.

-- Jerry (hazard01@earthlink.net), January 28, 2000.

And as we become more and more a society that orders everything via the computer the little corner camera store will carry less and less of the things we want to buy. I for one seldom order anything from the big supply houses if I can get it locally. Even if I have to special order it from the local guy. I implore you all to buy locally. So it costs you 10% more. Help the little retailer to stay in bussiness. As the country singer so recently sang, "there goes the little man.....". Are you the one who finally nails the coffin shut? James

-- Mr.Lumberjack (james_mickelson@hotmail.com), January 28, 2000.

Actually, I think that 120 is in less danger from digital than 35mm is. I would consider putting aside my 35mm cameras for digital, at least for colour work, but it will take a big advance in digital quality before my medium format gear gets forgotten, and it's not as if I've got an expensive MF outfit (Kowa 6, about 25yrs old). In fact with modern film being so good, medium format would be my equipment of choice nowadays. There really isn't much advantage to be gained, in terms of quality, from going any larger. (Blaze away, you LF freaks, I've been there and done that, and it's water off a duck's back to me now)

As far as little local shops are concerned James, I think they are signing their own death warrants. We only have four indepedent photo retailers left in a city of about 1.5 million inhabitants. Only one of them is interested in selling film, none of them carry processing chemicals, and all of them are biased towards the point'n'shoot brigade, rather than the enthusiast. I have to go to one of the big photo chain stores for anything darkroom orientated, and I rely on regular local "camera fairs" for hardware wants.

Anyway, back to 120. My money's on it outlasting 35mm, and maybe LF too.

-- Pete Andrews (p.l.andrews@bham.ac.uk), January 28, 2000.

Another factor to consider is the electronic nature of cameras, digital cameras in particular (what's a "tiff"? Please don't answer- I really don't care.). While this area of technology has come a long way, I still grab my FM2 in cold weather and I can still keep shooting even if my batteries die.

Also, I don't need a computer to review, edit, and print my photographs. That also means that Big Bad Bill Gates' fingerprints stay OFF of my photos. Unfortunately, the masses who financially support the photo industry prefer plasticized uninspiring P&S no-brainer cams...

-- Asher Schachter (schachter@a1.tch.harvard.edu), January 28, 2000.

Andy,

I agree with the statement that 'too many professionals are using 120 for it too go away any time soon'. I purchase mine by the brick from Calumet, and try to stock up before the summer heat might get to it in the UPS or Fed Ex trucks.

Will digital take over from film? Yes, sometime in the future, I believe that digital will be the dominant format among pros, serious amateurs, and fine art photographers. Tell me when digital photography will be able to deliver comparable image quality, and archival qualities, for a competitive price, and I'll tell you when this will happen. But, for now, if you are not willing and able to shell out a ton of money for digital backs and top of the line printers, film and paper remain king.

Ambivalence is the word for how I feel on this topic. I too have the nostalgic feeling for the silver process. I know how to expose/develop/print a good image. I have been doing it since the late 1960's. It may be hard to give up some day, but I do not fear it.

I belive the reality is clear. With digital we will be able to handle wider ranges of contrast and diversify our creative options to a greater extent. Digital will enable more of us do our own color processing. we will never have to worry about a lab changing technicians, failing to properly maintain chemistry, scratching our negatives, or having to send our stuff back for reprinting. We will be immediately able to know if our job has been properly shot. And finally, digital will be more environmentally friendly.

In My Humble Opinion

-- Stephen Burns (sburns@oregontrail.net), January 28, 2000.

Sorry to hear that your area has no stores that still sell a good assortment of photo related items like chems and papers. If you have to go out for the stuff then it doesn't matter. I just always give my little speech to whomever will listen to support the little retailer in all types of merchandise. And my Kowa produces excellent images. Not the same as my LF but only because I take different images with the different formats that I own. If any of you out there have the time you could drop a line to your local district sales reps for Kodak, Aghfa, and Ilford and let them know what you like and don't like about their products. Write to them in letter form because "all" the letters get read and responded to. The little guy still has some clout believe it or not. If you don't write, they won't know. And e-mail isn't as good as a personal letter. So please write. James

-- Mr.Lumberjack (james_mickelson@hotmail.com), January 29, 2000.

Sorry to hear that your area has no stores that still sell a good assortment of photo related items like chems and papers. If you have to go out for the stuff then it doesn't matter. I just always give my little speech to whomever will listen to support the little retailer in all types of merchandise. And my Kowa produces excellent images. Not the same as my LF but only because I take different images with the different formats that I own. If any of you out there have the time you could drop a line to your local district sales reps along with the corporate headhonchos, for Kodak, Aghfa, and Ilford and let them know what you like and don't like about their products. Write to them in letter form because "all" the letters get read and responded to. The little guy still has some clout believe it or not. If you don't write, they won't know. And e-mail isn't as good as a personal letter. So please write. James

-- Mr.Lumberjack (james_mickelson@hotmail.com), January 29, 2000.

Andy, I agree totally with Mr. Lumberjack(James) who is also a friend of mine. I work as a seasonal Ranger at a National Park in southwestern Colorado and there is only one photo store in the small town near there. They are geared toward the tourist trade from the Park. They had one roll of 120 film and it was color which I don't use and they cannot afford to keep stock on things have have limited call in that area. I instead trade with the best all-around camera store in Colorado Springs. Yes they are more expensive than NY, BUT, I can call them with ANY problem or wish list and they will get it for me. Personal service, honest advice and opinions, good prices, they know me by my voice on the phone, and cheap shipping even where I am out in the middle of the back of beyond. I feel that the extra $ goes toward the confidence that I have in my photo supplier. You have to value this above the saveabuck type establishment if you want the old fashioned customer service. My two pesos, Ranger Bob P.S. Lumberjack, I start back at the Park on March 26th and have a groovy photo for you so wing me an e-mail, Bob

-- Bob Smith (desertfoto@amigo.net), January 29, 2000.

Hi my name is yogesh I have been doing traditional photography since 1974, and I will continue to do the same until I find the last role of film in store or a giant supplier. Talking about the digital, I started working with digital camera from the June of 1999, the purpose behind using digital outfit is not for my benefit, but, for the companies' benefit. At this point digital outfit overwrites the issues with processing and buying the films, time and money, where as with the digital photos are ready on the spot. Honest to god, if your are working in place where you have to do digital photography for the printing pages you are locked in big time. because you will be working for the printing machines and printing machines do not no the digital bug yet. You could buy digital cameras anywhere from 200 to 15,000 dollars, in the 35mm range. But the idea is how to get, atleast long term archival quality of the photos. I did some experiments on the digital output. some got faded in a very short time, and others got carried away down towards the earth gravity with a drop of water. Do I face this with traditional photography ? Absolutely not. I will never except digital photography for "PHOTOGRAPHY" unless I am publishing newspaper. Talk about beyond 35mm format, like medium format and LF. What do you expect to hear. 15,000., 35,000., 50.000. You just keep looking the prices, and believe me with traditional one click of shutter and you done taking picture, but with this prices of digital backs or scanner behind you camera, forget it, because, digial backs cannot shoot moving objects - so you down with some in camera movement techniques - plues white balances. Do you want to know where this digital bug camer from. I think I know the answer, correct me If I am wrong. Remember the olden days when our parents bought camcorders and shot family videos, with no white balance, plus black faces and everything dark like coal. Well, that's it. Those camcorders were installed with a small piece of CCD which recorded a video. It's the same CCD thing that goes in the digital camera equipment. Either it's CCD or A SLOW 1, 2, OR 3PASSEs SCANNER. I would say don't get mesmerized with this high tech bug it will put you in a very high debt. Instead, keep up with traditional photography, and have peaceful sleep. You will always get great results. If you any question please feel free to write me few words. I will be

-- yogi (yogeshtailor@hotmail.com), February 15, 2000.

I'm not worried about digital - the whole of the USA seems to be obsessed with digital (I'm in the UK where the hype hasn't completely taken over yet). But - nothing can beat the excitement of developing your own film (not even electricity present!). No problem getting film.

-- Klaus Werner (kwerner@electronicsweekly.net), February 17, 2000.

Thanks for all the comments. I am going to start seriously using the mail order route. As for digital taking over film, I don't think so. I now have a consumer grade digital system. It has it's uses, but also has it's problems. I believe consumer grade digital photos are like printing your own cards from computer. Computer cards are regarded as CHEEP! So much so that the only time I use them is for a childs party. The digital photos of loved ones we recieved for christmas are very small and low quality, not at all like the 35mm ones. We got one MF photo (5x5) that was fantastic. Notice that the ability to make cards on computer has been out for a while now and has not seriously hurt Hallmark. I believe the best way to do digital is when things are predictable (not sports or long travel) and quality is not an issue. It's the fastest/cheepest way. However, When somthing showable is wanted, I still want 35mm/MF.

-- Andy Clements (a_clements2@juno.com), February 23, 2000.

I think that it will be decades before 120 is unavailable. Look at the film for the Cirkut rotating panoramic cameras. Those cameras haven't been manufactured for probably over 100 years, and yet the film is still available from Kodak. (Special order, but it's there.)

Yes, digital will make inroads into snap-shot photography, especially when decent digital cameras start being sold in the bubble packs for $50. But that market is only in 35mm, not 120. Even though Wal-Mart has carried the Chinese Seagull 120, I doubt many people purchased them.

As long as film is being made, I think all formats will be supported, except for "fad" formats like the disk camera, etc. After all, Kodak makes Tech Pan for 8x10.

-- Brian C. Miller (brianm@ioconcepts.com), March 09, 2000.