Jump to content

The future of film cameras ...


Jon O'Brien

Recommended Posts

Who will service film cameras as the years go by, as most camera techs still extant are getting on in years somewhat, are they not? (well, ye know, sure the same might be said of meself, says I leaning on me shillelagh). Are the flashier, more 'electronic' models going to encounter internal problems? For instance an ST or 416 might pop a circuit board in years to come and it might be difficult to replace it. I'd think market prices for film cameras should reflect that reality.

Edited by Jon O'Brien
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess it will become a very niche industry.. the camera,s can be bought relatively  cheaply .. but repairs will be a fortune.. like most classic cars .. it might be a good job for some youngsters to start training  up for now !.. they will be making more than the DoP.s..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Christopher Santucci said:

Market prices for film cameras DO reflect that reality.

I've just lately seen some rather high prices asked for things in the late model top of the line film cameras. I don't even want to quote what I saw. Seems like it could be getting unrealistic.

 

7 minutes ago, Robin R Probyn said:

it might be a good job for some youngsters to start training  up for now !.. they will be making more than the DoP.s..

That's what I'm thinking. School leavers take note (maybe).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

Yea, the technician issue is going to be a problem. I wish I wasn't a creative because I'd love to be a tech, but sadly that career path takes a long time to really bloom and I can't start all over again. I know enough to be dangerous and that's all I need to know for now hahaha. I mean there will be trickle down because the current service techs do know how important it is to keep things alive. My concern is how GOOD the trickle down will be. 

If we look at a different industry... Steam engines for instance. Nearly everyone who made or serviced steam engines in the US dead, yet the skills have been handed down through the generations there are so many young people involved. Yes, film is different as it's more of a niche, but I'm not TOO fearful. 

Ohh and yes, the 435, Arricam's and 416's are a big problem. All electronically controlled and so prone to minor electronic glitches. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/24/2019 at 4:05 PM, Tyler Purcell said:

 

435, Arricam's and 416's ... All electronically controlled ... 

Is the 35-III also somewhat electronically controlled as well? I notice in pictures that it has a couple of push buttons and a small led display. Some cameras have circuit boards and some don't. Presumably the Arri II and 35-III will go on almost indefinitely provided the parts don't get too worn.

If real film is to survive as a viable production alternative eventually some company is going to have to start making replacement parts. It could happen if interest grows enough. Presumably Panavision still makes parts for their cameras - or has a stockpile of parts that will last a long time. There is talk about photographic film itself maybe dying but the hardware that runs the stuff won't last forever at peak operating condition. Of course some aren't too concerned about that but people who use film equipment would have to be at least curious about the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
On 3/24/2019 at 12:54 PM, Robin R Probyn said:

I guess it will become a very niche industry.. the camera,s can be bought relatively  cheaply .. but repairs will be a fortune.. like most classic cars .. it might be a good job for some youngsters to start training  up for now !.. they will be making more than the DoP.s..

Ha! Once a month someone asks me to service a film camera and half the time they back out even when you give them a heavily discounted quote. Film enthusiasts are always the broke ones. Young people would be better off learning the noble art of blacksmithing rather than getting into film camera service.

3 hours ago, Jon O'Brien said:

Is the 35-III also somewhat electronically controlled as well? I notice in pictures that it has a couple of push buttons and a small led display. Some cameras have circuit boards and some don't. Presumably the Arri II and 35-III will go on almost indefinitely provided the parts don't get too worn.

If real film is to survive as a viable production alternative eventually some company is going to have to start making replacement parts. It could happen if interest grows enough. Presumably Panavision still makes parts for their cameras - or has a stockpile of parts that will last a long time. There is talk about photographic film itself maybe dying but the hardware that runs the stuff won't last forever at peak operating condition. Of course some aren't too concerned about that but people who use film equipment would have to be at least curious about the future.

The 35III is often paired with a Cinematography Electronics base which allows greater control, but the camera itself is not so electronic. Not as basic as a 35II, but far from a 435.

For people to invest in making parts there needs to be a demand, as well as all the relevant machining documentation, sometimes jigs to properly calibrate the fitting, and people who know which parts actually need replacing and how to fit them. Maybe some enterprising people like the Logmar chaps might be willing to do something, but it's unlikely. The cost of individually re-making precision parts would be exorbitant, there are many camera models each with hundreds of parts, and film people are always broke. 

A company like Panavision may be the only ones left who have the continuity of experience, access to documentation and ability to maintain some of their cameras into the future, but again it will depend on the demand. It takes a lot of money and resources, so that demand can't just be students and indie filmmakers wanting to shoot their ultra-low budget movies on film.

I think the current pro cameras will keep working until they fail, then people will use older cameras that are easier to maintain. It will just be much more of an artist's medium than a mainstream one. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
2 minutes ago, Dom Jaeger said:

Ha! Once a month someone asks me to service a film camera and half the time they back out even when you give them a heavily discounted quote. Film enthusiasts are always the broke ones. Young people would be better off learning the noble art of blacksmithing rather than getting into film camera service.

With Australian labs closed and very few film resources available, I'm actually shocked anyone asks to get their cameras serviced. Here in LA, Andre Martin (AM Camera) is an Arri and Aaton certified technician, with excellent rates and he turns around things fast. He also has an electronics specialist in house, so he can do both hardware and software/electronic service. I've sent dozens of clients to him and so far the largest bill I've seen from them was $500 for a complete re-build of a BL4 (not including parts), which I think it's a killer deal. 

Everyone is looking for a deal, but at the same time the prices to shoot film have actually gone up thanks to there being fewer labs and nearly no competition. If labs would simply charge what they need to charge in order to stay a float, we would have less issues with this, but alas, it's all about satisfying the pockets of the men at the top of the food chain with the few remaining big labs. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
3 hours ago, Jon O'Brien said:

Is the 35-III also somewhat electronically controlled as well? I notice in pictures that it has a couple of push buttons and a small led display. Some cameras have circuit boards and some don't. Presumably the Arri II and 35-III will go on almost indefinitely provided the parts don't get too worn.

When I mean electronically controlled, I mean no belts. I mean several individual motors controlling the shutter, movement and magazines. This means you have a very complex motor control assembly that needs to identify where the motor is located at any given time for alignment in relationship to one another. 

Sync sound cameras like the BL series, use one motor and drive belts to run all operations. Thus, the electronics consist of a very complistic motor control system which is made of off-the-shelf parts, which are easy to identify. If all else failed, anyone with some electronic experience could make a new board to operate the single motor drive. When you have multiple motors in a very complex arrangement, you need specialized software to control the motors which is not easy to do without gobs of experience in motor controls. You can't just build a new board or even replace integrated circuits because there is firmware involved to do the timing. Plus imagine a motor failing, you can't just put in any motor. You've gotta use something very special, where in a BL you could theoretically use any motor that has timing control capabilities. 

So where the individual motor cameras have some cool special effect features, as a camera owner, I don't want to be responsible for dealing with the potential issues down the road. Having see how Arri treats their long-term customers when it comes to part that are sitting on shelves in germany collecting dust, it's clear they don't care about keeping their cameras running. They'd rather put all the parts in deep storage and never sell them, like some museum piece, then charge a slightly discounted rate for them. As a kid I grew up loving Arri, but I despise them as a company. The way they treated film people has been horrible. If they could, they'd probably buy back all the film cameras they made and smash them. 

Panavision does not appear to care about film cameras. The new upper management has given a decree that any film cameras that come back to them broken, are going to be either destroyed or dismantled for parts. I have close friends who work there and they say the Gold II's are not serviced anymore. They keep renting them until they break and that's the end of their life. The XL and XLII's are the only one's they're still servicing on a regular basis here in Los Angeles according to them.  The only good news for now is their staff are very into film cameras, so they haven't given up the ghost entirely. However, I've heard some internal war's going on between the old staffers and new staffers about dropping the program entirely due to the cost of even storing the equipment vs how much they make off it. They literally give away Gold II bodies with lens rentals, so they aren't really making much. 

So the good news is you can still buy new processing equipment. You can still buy film and there are two new film companies ramping up production right now, so that should be happening in the next few years. There are plenty of labs and plenty of new-modern scan equipment. There are also quite a few technicians, some of them pretty young, so here is hoping they keep their skills up if they aren't servicing film cameras anymore. Knowledge and parts supplies are the two biggest issues. As the career lab techs and camera tech's retire, there will be a gap in knowledge. Roger Deakins noticed this when he shot Hail Caesar, the consistency of the lab work wasn't what it use to be. He even said Kodak's consistency was nowhere near what it use to be, which is surprising. Maybe he watched work prints, but never the less it's clear we're not at the level we use to be, but we are still making movies on film. 2018 had the highest amount of theatrical movies shot on film since 2013! This year also looks to be heading the way of film as well, with 28 titles already with release dates and probably still more to come as the year goes on.

I disagree that film will turn into an "artists" medium for many reasons. It would be impossible for any lab or even film manufacturer to stay in business off the money coming from artists.  So if it did turn into an artists medium, it would be dead. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I once did real blacksmithing work, at the forge on the job - on rainy days. Yes, like Joe Gargery himself.  In the mid-eighties (that's last century, not the one before that). The boss liked doing things the old way. True story.

Only in Queensland, I guess.

Dom, keep going, might get you to do some tinkering on a camera of mine, one of these days. If you want to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes it is a noble art. There is something mesmerising about that glowing, smoking centre in the coals, and the air being pumped up through it - the forge had a hand operated air pump. It breathes a strange energy. Sparks flying and the pure acoustic notes from the struck iron and steel. The working job plunged into water. Good heavens, I'm starting to get all philosophic about it.

Edited by Jon O'Brien
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
3 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

With Australian labs closed and very few film resources available, I'm actually shocked anyone asks to get their cameras serviced. 
 

Neglab in Sydney is still processing 16 and 35 neg, and Nanolab in Melbourne does all manner of reversal.

 

4 hours ago, Tyler Purcell said:

2018 had the highest amount of theatrical movies shot on film since 2013! This year also looks to be heading the way of film as well, with 28 titles already with release dates and probably still more to come as the year goes on.

I'm curious where you get your statistics from? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dom.. haha maybe wishful thinking !.. .. personally I think film is just bound to die out purely by economics and the ruthless thrust of technology..  ..  but if it does stay at the very high end of production.. instead of now, the very high and the very low .. then someones going to have to maintain the camera,s.. might only be hand full world wide but their hourly rate will have to be high..

 

I think Tylers been saying this every year since 2005.. ? 

Edited by Robin R Probyn
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
1 hour ago, Dom Jaeger said:

Neglab in Sydney is still processing 16 and 35 neg, and Nanolab in Melbourne does all manner of reversal.

 

I'm curious where you get your statistics from? 

I have some friends who said, neglab is not open, as of 2017. They re-opened in 2013, but it was short lived according to them. There is no website and the google images depict a different business in the building as of 2017. Nanolab in Melbourne seems to be running, but for unusual "artistic" formats only. 

The film statistics are available usually every December on IMDB. If you google search "What films were shot film in X year" you will find a list that IMDB provides. It usually contains all the theatrically bound features, but not TV shows or indy, non-major features. 

Here is a sample: https://www.imdb.com/list/ls027818797/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I communicated with Werner at Neglab only a few months ago, and all sounds like it is still rolling along fine. I will have some more footage to send him soon. Cameraquip in Melbourne scans 16mm and 35mm neg. And so all is well. Interest is high in the film industry here - with the people I speak with. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
22 minutes ago, Robin R Probyn said:

Dom.. haha maybe wishful thinking !.. .. personally I think film is just bound to die out purely by economics and the ruthless thrust of technology

I think the "ruthless thrust of technology" has already happened. 

Theaters are digital 
Distribution is entirely digital 
Long term storage is digital 
The last hold out's have finally moved to digital post production 
Film screenings of new movies are reducing, not increasing

Yet, the labs are very busy. 
Yet, the camera rental houses are very busy renting film cameras. 
Yet, there were more mainstream movies shot on film in 2018 then 2013! 
Yet, there is a huge movement in the tech world to provide better service 
Yet, used camera prices are going back up again. 
Yet, Kodak is introducing new stocks! 
Yet, there are two other manufacturers of film going on line in the next few years 

I could go on all day, but technology has spoken, it isn't doing anything to dent film anymore. People have "experimented" with digital and likewise, they are starting to move away from it. I understand as a commercial DP,  it's nearly irrelevant what people do with their money. You have X cameras and you shoot Y product. However, when you're telling an artistic, creative and compelling story, film can really be that difference which puts you over the top. For me, it's imperative I deliver an image that film provides, that digital just doesn't unless you spend A LOT of money. Oh and by the time you've raised the money to buy that fancy new digital camera that looks like film, it will be out of date and you'll have to raise even more for the new one. With film, I already have more resolution and more feeling in every frame then I will ever need.

In this perfect world, it's now the imperfection people are looking for; the resurgence of analog standard definition video, the resurgence of vinyl, the resurgence of instant cameras using a photochemical process, the resurgence of film still photography, the resurgence of super 8! These are not flukes, the analog movement is happening and it will continue to grow, which is why Kodak and the labs have bet their businesses on it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Somewhere in orbit, two powerful figures stand in a darkened room by a wide viewport overlooking the Earth. One is tall, somewhat thickly set, and clad in shiny black armour and helmet, with flowing black cape. His breath rasps softly through the grill in his mask. His companion is of lighter build, an older man with receding hair, and carries a serious expression in his eyes. The two in silence survey the shining globe before their view. And then the taller one turns to his companion and in deep, resonating voice says, "Today will be a day long remembered. It has seen the end of digital's claim of utter victory, ...and will soon see the end of the rebellion."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Two things.. Spotify .. look up the percentage .. sell those vinyl resurgence stocks..  never trust IMDB "was shot on" if the dir had a bolex in their bag back in the hotel they will report its shot on film..  tis a false dawn sir.. film is not coming back.. and now Arri releases a FF mini... the dogs are off the leashes sir.. buy male hair bands and flannel .. trust me on this.. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's kind of silly to assume the geniuses at Arri, Sony, or wherever won't eventually release digital cameras which perfectly replicate certain eras of Vision3. Not worried if film is gone for good.

Edited by Max Field / Macks Fiiod
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
8 hours ago, Robin R Probyn said:

Two things.. Spotify .. look up the percentage .. sell those vinyl resurgence stocks..  never trust IMDB "was shot on" if the dir had a bolex in their bag back in the hotel they will report its shot on film..  tis a false dawn sir.. film is not coming back.. and now Arri releases a FF mini... the dogs are off the leashes sir.. buy male hair bands and flannel .. trust me on this.. 

IDK man, there are 7 record stores within a 20 mile radius of my house. The number 1 household electronic device sold in 2015 were record players. You can buy nearly everyone on LP these days and when you visit any of these stores, on a tuesday at 3pm, there are people buying records! It's been this way for quite a while as well, it's not a "new" thing. 

The google search and listing I gave you is very cool because it only cross references features that were shot on film and released to theaters. If you bothered to look at the list, you'd see it's all mainstream fodder. I actually verified the movies that I was not familiar with and yes, they were in fact all shot on film. Yes, some of them were mixed formats, film and digital, but very few. It's a common trend to shoot different stories within a movie on different medium's as well. You can always tell by how much film they shot in a particular movie by simply watching the trailer, it's easy to see the stuff shot on film within the trailer. Also, Kodak's own website verifies the titles pretty conclusively. Plus remember, none of that includes the indy films, short films, music video's and commercials shot on film. I'm pretty tight with the guys at CInelab London. In 2017, they had over 150 short form projects go through their shop, music videos, commercials, etc. That's a lot of business when you're the top boutique lab in Europe. Forget about the dozen features they do each year. Fotokem here in LA is so busy right now, they sometimes can't process/prep next day anymore. That happened to me few weeks back, they literally ran the lab longer then they have in a decade.

Mentioning the Arri FF in a statement about film and digital, just shows you have no idea what film is about. None of the film guys give two shits about a new digital camera. Furthermore, one that's 4.4k! Are they insane? Red is making 8k cameras and Alexa is still mucking around with 4k? What planet are they on? 

Plus all of this looks like crap in my eyes. It's too crisp, highlights are undefined and lacking detail, the colors have no contrast/depth to them, the entire image looks overly flat, and the use of medium focal length lenses does not show the benefit of the large imager camera. I'm sorry but this demo reminds me why I shoot film. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Robin R Probyn said:

 buy male hair bands and flannel .. trust me on this.. 

Or extra large wallets, sound recordists for the use of.

Oops, Tyler's taking you at face value again........he can't help it, he's not English. No offence, T.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
1 hour ago, Max Field / Macks Fiiod said:

It's kind of silly to assume the geniuses at Arri, Sony, or wherever won't eventually release digital cameras which perfectly replicate certain eras of Vision3. Not worried if film is gone for good.

It would have to be a multi-layer imager system, which of course means not CMOS or CCD. This means transparent photosensors that only drop luminance by a very small amount per layer. How would you make a dye that only has edge pins for the photosensors? There just isn't enough room on the edges to make that happen unless you reduce the size of the pixels. Then, what about the base layer constantly moving? You'd have to develop an organic potentially liquid based layer that reacts to electricity that would give you the organic grain that is present in film. Of course, how would you get rid of the pixel edge issues (aliasing), which stand out like a sore thumb on any digital recording. You'd either need A LOT of pixels to mask it or you'd need some sort of digital filter. Then of course you'd need a lot of dynamic range. Currently no digital camera has the ability to shift base ISO's. You'd need multiple sets of preamp's, one for each ISO group. So when you change ISO's, you have the full dynamic range available at every ISO. Then after all that, you'd need to develop a better system of how the preamp's deal with overload. Currently the photosensors have major issues dealing with overload, which is why we all protect our highlights. That would need to be solved in order to create a filmmic look. Outside of bad scan's, highlights are the #1 identifier of something shot digitally. A nice daytime exterior shot and I can tell with one frame if it's digital or not. 
 

The camera manufacturers have spent millions developing CMOS and they are not going to suddenly change technology in order to fulfill some wild escapade to re-create a film look. Furthemore, part of the great thing about film is not just it's presentation, but also shooting it. No menu's required ? 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
8 minutes ago, Mark Dunn said:

Or extra large wallets, sound recordists for the use of.

Oops, Tyler's taking you at face value again........he can't help it, he's not English. No offence, T.

I take everything at face value, unless it's clearly a joke, which I didn't see in Robin's response. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...