[pathdoc]

I'm wondering whether I'll live to see the end of the selfie era.

Stopping these people from falling to their deaths or stepping backwards into traffic is compassionate, but I can't help thinking sometimes that it's impeding natural selection. It is, after all, the stupidest and most unwary deer that are shot by hunters or eaten by wolves.

[dConvert]

I would define it as the day i bought my first digital camera.

Not for me! My first digital (1997?) was somewhat unimpressive, I continued to use my SLRs for any real photography for years afterwards.


I would consider the film era to be up to the point when digital photographs were more common than film ones. Not too far from 1900-2000, as before 1887 photography didn't use film (using bitumen, paper, glass or metal plates...) and it was only with the box brownie that film really took over.

[goatsNdonkey]

The end of the film era is still some time off in the future, as photographic film is still manufactured and available and people still use it to take pictures. The hey day of film photography is over, but not its era.

[baro-nite]

The hey day of film photography is over, but not its era.

That's a useful semantic distinction, even though it's clear pathdoc is using "era" in the sense you're using "hey day".

As far as I know every photographic medium (as distinct from format) ever invented is still being used, even Kodachrome (either as b/w or home cooked color).

[goatsNdonkey]

That's a useful semantic distinction, even though it's clear pathdoc is using "era" in the sense you're using "hey day".

As far as I know every photographic medium (as distinct from format) ever invented is still being used, even Kodachrome (either as b/w or home cooked color).

Let me make an analogy with vinyl sound recordings, the hey dey of which some people would mark as ending when CDs first became popular. Now, however, the production of CDs is plummeting, while the manufacture and sale of new vinyl records has increased greatly over the past 5 years or so. The hey day of vinyl is truly over, but its era is having a resurgence. Will the CD ever have a resurgence? Somehow I doubt it.

[Alex645]

I'm wondering whether I'll live to see the end of the selfie era.

I doubt it. I know self portraits are not the same as selfies, but pretty close and they go back to at least 1840 with Hippolyte Bayard's hoaxie.

Self Portrait as a Drowned Man

[pathdoc]

That's a useful semantic distinction, even though it's clear pathdoc is using "era" in the sense you're using "hey day".

Exactly. The golden age of film photography is definitely behind us. We are probably climbing out of the post-golden-age collapse/implosion, and if that is the case - if the last six to eight years were the darkest hour - then if we can sustain some (any?) growth in usage, the film companies will continue to back us by keeping at least some emulsions available.

What we are going to run out of first, I fear, is people like Eric Hendrickson. If we can avoid THAT catastrophe - if we still have people around in another thirty to forty years to give our just-freshly-CLA'd MXes and Spotmatics and what-have-you one more tune-up - then film photography could survive into the 22nd Century even on the back of the current secondhand market. Who knows whether my MX's circuit board could be replaced in 2057? But it will still shoot without it, provided the shutter curtains can hold out that long.

That's a point, actually - absent a HUGE resurgence in new-build film SLRs, probably the last surviving film cameras in full use will be the ones with all-mechanical metal shutters.


Will the CD ever have a resurgence? Somehow I doubt it.

Arguably not, because it was replaced by the very same thing that ended vinyl's reign - the presence of a smaller, more compact storage medium that was much less sensitive to violent movements of its player. The problem with CDs is that they have no compensating factors - being digital media just like MP3, there is no "ineffable, indefinable quality" to separate them from their successors. The one advantage they still have is that they are available as a hard-copy read-only medium that cannot be electronically corrupted or erased (as can the MP3 files in your music folder). Much like film, really...

(Let us not get into arguments over archival quality here.)

---

Last edited by pathdoc; 11-29-2017 at 09:15 AM.

[timw4mail]

(Let us not get into arguments over archival quality here.)

I'm not sure most film is that archival, anyway, as long as it's being produced on a cellulose triacetate base.

[dsmithhfx]

Who knows whether my MX's circuit board could be replaced in 2057

It's impossible to predict where manufacturing capabilities will be by then. But, some kind of 3d-printing and robotic assembly may be feasible for one-off/short-run replication of parts or even a complete film camera. For the luddite mob.

[photoptimist]

Film photography will survive forever even if every old film camera breaks-down for lack of parts and repair technicians. It's simply too easy to make a basic film camera (23 Pinhole Cameras That You Can Build At Home - DIY Photography). And the internet enables film aficionados to find each other, collaborate on maintaining old equipment, share ideas about the medium, and buy/sell stuff.

The weakest links in film photography are the emulsions, especially the color ones which require extremely specialized chemical and mechanical systems to manufacture with any useful degree of uniformity. B&W emulsion is a lot easier and has the added bonus of being the most retro of retro. B&W film, especially in MF roll or sheet form should be manufacturable in a boutique factory or even at home.

[timw4mail]

Film photography will survive forever even if every old film camera breaks-down for lack of parts and repair technicians. It's simply too easy to make a basic film camera (23 Pinhole Cameras That You Can Build At Home - DIY Photography). And the internet enables film aficionados to find each other, collaborate on maintaining old equipment, share ideas about the medium, and buy/sell stuff.

The weakest links in film photography are the emulsions, especially the color ones which require extremely specialized chemical and mechanical systems to manufacture with any useful degree of uniformity. B&W emulsion is a lot easier and has the added bonus of being the most retro of retro. B&W film, especially in MF roll or sheet form should be manufacturable in a boutique factory or even at home.

At home film would probably tend to have huge grain, and be really slow. While possible, I doubt film photography would survive as anything but a tiny niche art if/when it ceased to be manufactured.

Developing chemicals are a somewhat different story.

[CarlJF]

The end of the film era is still some time off in the future, as photographic film is still manufactured and available and people still use it to take pictures. The hey day of film photography is over, but not its era.

That's a useful semantic distinction, even though it's clear pathdoc is using "era" in the sense you're using "hey day".

If we want to go into semantic, we only have to give a look at a dictionary. It's quite clear that "era" isn't defined by the dissaperance of something. It's rather define as the period of time when this something was prominent or distinctive of the period.

Collins: Brit: a period of time considered as being of a distinctive character; US: a period of time considered in terms of noteworthy and characteristic events, developments, individuals, etc.

Merriam-Webster: a period identified by some prominent figure or characteristic feature

So, the end of the "film era" will not be when film photography totally dissapear from the surface of the earth. It rather was when film ceased to be the prominent media for taking pictures. Which happened, as discussed above, by 2006 or even slightly sooner depending on which criteria you used. No matter what, it's quite clear that in 2017 we're no longer in the film era. Even if some people are still using film, it's not prominent, distinctive or characteristic of photography today.

[photoptimist]

At home film would probably tend to have huge grain, and be really slow. While possible, I doubt film photography would survive as anything but a tiny niche art if/when it ceased to be manufactured.

Developing chemicals are a somewhat different story.

Grain size is controllable via various chemical, mechanical, and thermal tactics. Speed comes down to how much silver one is willing to invest (which does not have to be that much in the big scheme of things).

That said, I'm sure you are right. Even the hurdle of home development is a huge obstacle for many. Home concoction of emulsions is a big step beyond that.

Yet people still learn and practice the even older ways of tin type and wet collodion photography so film will never die even if it becomes exceedingly rare.

[dsmithhfx]

At home film would probably tend to have huge grain, and be really slow.

There are people now doing wet plate (collodion) large-format photography. This doesn't negate the technical accuracy of your comment regarding film.

Shane Balkowitsch Wet Plate Collodion Ambrotype Photography

[timw4mail]

There are people now doing wet plate (collodion) large-format photography. This doesn't negate the technical accuracy of your comment regarding film.

Shane Balkowitsch Wet Plate Collodion Ambrotype Photography

Along with tin-type, and daguerreotype images, are very niche, specialized processes, which never got to the point of true mass-production.

There are also a few photographers who have resurrected the K-14 process for KodaChrome, which is more representative of film emulsions, with its complex process.