Do you know how many books are sold before you have bestseller? Or how many patients go through emergency rooms? Or the significance of 8,000 an hour? No, then read on.
All authors would love for their latest book to become a best seller. But it's not easy. Sales in the order of 3,000 per week are needed to get onto the New York Times best sellers list, so it helps if you are famous or get to chat with Oprah.
Hospital emergency departments vary in size but on average each ER treats 600 patients every week.
A medium–sized high school might have 1,500 students enrolled.
A suburban train with eight carriages can ferry 1,600 commuters at time from their homes to offices in the city.
A person who goes about their business but does not take much exercise will take 6,000 steps in a day, whilst active individuals might manage 10,000.
At rest a human adult will breathe steadily, roughly 12 times in a minute and 720 times in an hour.
And here is another one. Every hour of every day there are 8,000 more people on earth.
That is two and a half times the number of book buyers, the weekly throughput of 13 ERs, enough for five high schools, and the passengers from five commuter trains, every single hour of every day. If you prefer bigger numbers, 8,000 an hour grows to 192,000 per day, 1.3 million per week, and 70 million per year.
Every year there are more people added to the global population (births minus deaths) than there are Frenchmen. In two and a half days we add more people than there are elephants in Africa.
Amazing isn't it. Staggering even.
This entry was posted in Big picture and tagged Big picture. Bookmark the permalink.


The leadership of UA Local 190 is proud to welcome you to our new website. This site contains a wealth of information both for the general public and the membership. We encourage you to learn more about us and for the membership to log into the members only section where you will be able to find additional information.


text:
Q: Stack Exchange API: How to get a suggested edit in Markdown? The API doesn't seem to provide body_markdown field for suggested-edit objects. I wonder why. Is there any way to get an edit as Markdown?

A: As you probably suspected, there is no such way via the API. The Stack Exchange Data Explorer does contain the Markdown for suggested edits and may be used as a workaround: here is an example.

The obvious downside is that SEDE is refreshed only once a week, on Sunday morning, so you'll miss recent suggested edits.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
Home | Resources | Archived Webinars
Winter Provider Update Webinar
We held a webinar on December 14, 2022, where we shared information about opportunities for publication, an upcoming Call for Comment, plans for the 2023 Joint Accreditation Leadership Summit, and more.
View the archived webinar.
Summer Provider Update Webinar
We held a webinar on June 9, 2022, where we shared compliance tips and strategies, opportunities to build our interprofessional continuing education (IPCE) community of practice, information about awarding IPCE credit, and more.
Getting Started with Joint Accreditation Workshop
We held a webinar on April 2, 2020 to provide an overview of the Joint Accreditation process and criteria as well as allow time for participant questions.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Sport AFL ASADA fines Western Bulldogs $10,000
12:35pm, Dec 10, 2013 Updated: 5:23pm, Dec 10
ASADA fines Western Bulldogs $10,000
The Western Bulldogs have been fined $10,000 for failing to provide adequate paperwork to the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Agency (ASADA) during a recent US training camp.
AFL players have to be available for ASADA testing at all times and clubs are required to keep the agency informed of their whereabouts.
AFL general counsel Andrew Dillon said the Bulldogs had told the AFL about an overseas training camp but an administrative error meant ASADA was unaware 12 players would be training in Colorado in November.
"The club has a strong history of compliance with all the paperwork requirements of the Anti-Doping Code to ensure that ASADA is fully informed at all times and can perform its duties," Dillon said in a statement.
"In this instance, while the AFL had been notified of the club's activities, ASADA was not separately notified. While this was an administrative error, it is important that the rules are fully complied with," he added.
Half the fine is suspended until the end of 2015 pending the club's continued co-operation.
Harry O'Brien to be known as Heritier Lumumba


Biology, Chemistry and Mathematics @ HL is definitely for those who know that they want to do something biology related in the future, may it be medicine, psychology or dentistry. I do suggest looking at the subject requirements for the course that you are looking at for a wide range of universities, because local and overseas universities can have different requirements.
I chose BCM not only because of competency but also interest and passion. BCM is no doubt one of the toughest and taxing combinations, with constant IAs and assignments to be completed on top of EETOK and CAS. However, with the unity and support of an intact class and a never-say-die spirit, you can definitely manage this. CCA can and will affect your juggling of academics and CAS, so do be tactful with your commitments to your CCA and outside activities.
LangLit and Econs and Chinese @ SL seems to be the most common, "convenient" and comfortable subjects to go along with BCM, which I agree with. Choosing Chinese and LangLit is quite the no brainer for most people, but do be prepared for alien obstacles, i.e. weird and awkward mark schemes and a whole lot of ambiguity, (coming from an O level grad).
Econs is highly theoretical, but it does give a nice change from what can sometimes be overwhelmingly science-y combination.
As a BCM student, I did choose BCM over BCE, why?
Beverly Yeap (6.05) is from the graduating batch of 2015.


Tony is a certified Chef, with a CDM from Fontbonne University. Tony chose his profession as a Chef because he feels that food brings people together. He enjoys making people feel good when they eat and knows that cooking for the residents is truly what he is called to do.
Tony was just in his first Chef Competition and placed 2nd. Cooking is definitely a passion of his. He enjoys cooking for the residents because some of them may not have family and they really enjoy their time when they come to the dining room. Tony feels that if can provide them with a meal to brighten their day he wants to make that happen. His favorite dish to cook is his own recipe for stuffed chicken topped with a roasted red pepper cream sauce, a great choice of comfort food for him and the residents.
We are very fortunate to have Chef Johnson on our team, we love his food!
Our Employee of the Month for January is Jamena Griffin. Jamena was born and raised in St. Louis. She graduated from Vashon High School in 1996. She worked various jobs until she found her passion working with the elderly population. She got certified as a Certified Nurse Assistant and began working in long term care. Jamena has worked for Garden View Care Center for 3 years. Jamena has been with her husband Antonio for 15 years. She has 2 children, Jayana and Demetrius. In her free time, Jamena enjoys relaxing and watching TV. It is apparent Jamena loves her job as she works very hard to care for our residents and families with all their needs. We love you, Jamena!
Quinton is our December employee of the month! Quinton is a CMT at Garden View and has been working here for a little over a year. Quinton is from the St. Louis area. Quinton shared that he likes to spend his free time with his three nieces who all range in age. He shared he enjoys playing games with them and being together. Quinto's favorite part about working at Garden View is helping the residents. He shared that "making them happy, makes me happy". We greatly appreciate all Quinton does here at Garden View and always being so quick to lend a helping hand to others! Thank you Quinton!
Our Employee of the Month for November is Gwen Daniels. Gwen is a mother to beautiful six year old twin daughters, Savanna and Madison. She currently lives in University City. She grew up in the small town, that's actually considered a village called Caledonia, Missouri. She moved to the St. Louis area when she was 19 years old. She is the youngest of 4 children. She has one brother and two sisters. Right out of high school she became a Certified Nurse Assistant. She worked as a CNA for almost 20 years. She then came to Garden View looking for a change. She states she still wanted to help people, just in a different way. She now works in the laundry department and says she loves what she does. Most of her free time is spent with her daughters. She says when she does get "me" time, she loves to curl up on the couch and watch a good movie. Gwen is a hard worker and dedicated employee at Garden View. We love you, Gwen!


text:
Q: foreach loop multidimensional array but only loop through array elements with specific key I am creating following array that contains all products and all their categories:
$result = $wpdb->get_results("SELECT product_nr, category FROM erp_product_categories",ARRAY_A);
$product_categories = array();
  foreach($result as $row){
    $product_categories[$row["product_nr"]][] = $row["category"];
  }

(product_nr is an integer and category is a string)
Then i want to check if one of the categories of a product matches with an other variable and return true if thats the case:
foreach($product_categories[$ean] as $product_categorie) {
    $manages_post = in_array( $product_categorie, $this->term_link_conditions );

    if($manages_post == true){
        break;
    }
}
return $manages_post;

But I am getting the error

Invalid argument supplied for foreach()

is it not possible to loop only through elements of an array with a specific key?
Edit:
The array looks like this
Array
(
    [10001] => Array       //product_nr
    (
        [0] => 1           //category
        [1] => 4           //category
    )

    [10002] => Array
    (
        [0] => 1
        [1] => 20
    )
    //...
)

A: You should check that what you are passing to foreach is an array by using the is_array function
If you are not sure it's going to be an array you can always check using the following PHP example code:

if (is_array($product_categories[$ean])) {

  foreach ($product_categories[$ean] as $product_categorie) {
   //do something
  }
}

Check out all your foreach statements, and look if the thing before the as, to make sure it is actually an array. Usevar_dump to dump it.

A: Try this :
if(is_array($product_categories) && sizeof($product_categories) > 0) {
    foreach($product_categories as $key => $product_categorie) {
        if($manages_post = in_array($key, $this->term_link_conditions)){
            return $manages_post;
        }
    }
}

A: I figured out a way to do this
$product_category = $product_categories[$ean];

            if (is_array($product_category)) {
                $matches = array_intersect($product_category, $this->term_link_conditions);
                if(sizeof($matches) > 0){
                    $manages_post = true;
                }
            }


text:
@interface NSObject (CJSharedInstance)

+ (instancetype)cjSharedInstance;

@end

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


The Boston Red Sox dropped their fourth straight game Tuesday night, but Alex Cora didn't leave Oakland-Alameda County Coliseum consumed by frustration.
The Red Sox fell to the Oakland Athletics 1-0 in a game in which they squandered a handful of opportune chances, none more glaring that Xander Bogaerts' unfruitful base-running decision in the ninth inning. But despite the unfavorable outcome, Boston's skipper is deciding to focus on the positive as his team's struggles mount.
To be fair, fight hasn't seemed to be the problem for the Red Sox. Their lone win of the season came via a thrilling comeback against the Mariners, and they nearly followed suit in their final two games in Seattle. The more glaring trend has been the lack of complete-team efforts, as Boston starters were shelled in its season-opening series and the bats have yet to post a run through the first two games in Oakland.
The Red Sox will try to notch a much-need convincing win Wednesday night when they battle the A's in the penultimate contest of their four-game series.


The Ursula Drop Counter Table is a slice of modern design. The tempered glass top is supported by a sturdy chrome-plated steel tube frame. Refreshing burst of functionality and beauty, The Ursula Drop Counter Table is a perfect place to share drinks or a small meal.


If you're planning on visiting North Wales this year to explore some of the amazing roads there but don't know where to start well this is for you!
We've put together a one-day road trip map just for you, featuring some of our favourite roads. You can download the map for free, yes we did say FREE, and drive the route at your leisure.
We've included the Horseshoe Pass, Evo Triangle, Llanberis Pass and more. There's a bit of something for everyone in there, with numerous points to stop at your leisure for photos and refreshments.
An early start (8am or earlier) would see the roads with less traffic on them for better driving pleasure but if you were to be later in the day you'll still enjoy the roads and scenery.
Be especially careful on the Evo Triangle (made famous by Evo Magazine) as the police are very vigilant with regards to speed given the popularity of this section of driving road in North Wales. So drive with care and attention throughout.
Bets-y-Coed is a great place to stop for refreshments with a selection of cafes and ice-cream huts. Bring change for parking and approach the speed bumps with caution.
The route can also be driven in the opposite direction, making the Ponderosa Cafe on the Horseshoe Pass your finishing point.
So download, print, get a tank of v-power and get yourself out there. We hope our favourite roads in North Wales also become your best driving roads in North Wales. Enjoy.


A Medical Body Area Network (MBAN) consists of small, intelligent devices worn on or implanted in the body which are capable of establishing a wireless communication link. Applications of MBAN sensors include for example, blood pressure monitoring, body temperature measurement, or prolonged recording of an electrocardiogram. Using a MBAN untethers the patient from traditional wired equipment and affords physical mobility and freedom, such that they may be no longer compelled to stay in the hospital. Recent advances in wireless body area networks applications are focused on integration of RF transceiver modules with embedded signal processing and sensor circuitry for small, low power wireless nodes. Therefore, it is important for the wearable devices to be of small in size, low cost and lightweight. They must be also comfortable and conformal to the body shape, at the same time maintaining high performance in terms of reliability and efficiency. The desired antenna for on-body or over the body surface communication is a monopole antenna due to the nature of the radiation pattern. However, the height of the monopole antenna from the surface of the body means that it is impractical and uncomfortable for the wearer to carry around. The WiSAR antenna team investigate and develop low profile antennas with high on-body efficiency and with similar radiation characteristics to that of a monopole antenna. The antenna are designed and optimised through simulations using CST Microwave Studio and the prototypes are experimentally tested using R&S ZVB8 network analyser.
One solution to a flexible antenna is to make it entirely from textile materials. Textile materials are an interesting choice of substrate for flexible antennas due to the fact, they can be easily integrated into clothing. These textile materials generally tend to have a very low dielectric constant, which reduces surface wave losses and improves the antenna's impedance bandwidth. Textile antennas offer low-cost, lightweight, flexible alternatives when compared with their rigid counterparts. WiSAR have successfully designed a fully textile antenna, utilising a felt fabric substrate and copper and nickel plated polyester as the conductive radiating and ground elements of the antenna.
The measured and simulated results of the WiSAR designed 2.45GHz fully textile patch antenna are shown below. The antenna was designed and simulated with the use of CST Microwave Studios, which is a state of the art electromagnetic simulation software package. Once the design was optimised through simulation the antenna was then fabricated and measurements were then performed on the WiSAR's Rhode and Schwarz two-port ZND network analyser. The design demonstrated excellent free space performances and showed promising results in various positions around the body. The measured performance along with the fact the antenna is flexible, make the design an excellent candidate for WBAN applications.
Flexible antennas that conform to the shape of the human body can vastly improve the comfort of the wearer. WiSAR have been investigating the suitability of various flexible materials, which could be utilised as the substrate for antenna designs. One such material, which WiSAR have successfully used in the design of a flexible antenna, is Polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS). PDMS is an organic polymer and is the most widely used silicon-based organic polymer, particularly known for its unusual rheological (or flow) properties. PDMS is optically clear, and, in general, inert, non-toxic, and non-flammable. It also has desirable RF characteristics, which make it suitable for antenna design.
Shown below are the measured and simulated results of the WiSAR designed half-wave dipole embedded in a PDMS substrate. The antenna was designed and simulated with the use of CST Microwave Studios, which is a state of the art electromagnetic simulation software package. Once the design was optimised through simulation the antenna was then fabricated and measurements were then performed on the WiSAR's Rhode and Schwarz two-port ZND network analyser. The design demonstrated excellent free space performances and showed promising results in various positions around the body. The measured performance along with the fact the antenna is flexible, make the design an excellent candidate for WBAN applications.


The price list contains prices of the basic ayurvedic massages and treatments. More information about the procedures and their combinations you may find after clicking on each item. Also check the treatment programs under the heading BRATISLAVA – TREATMENT PROGRAMMES.


This week my grandfather turns 95. Most people his age would have retired many years ago, but he has continued to work in to his golden years because he feels that God's calling on his life isn't through. The burden he has had for most of his life to reach people for Jesus Christ hasn't lessened; if anything it has grown as he understands that amount of time he has to reach people with the Gospel is growing short. And he wanted to preach one more time.
At 94, I imagine it's difficult to do most things. Preaching in a stadium just wasn't a possibility for him. So, my grandfather began to prepare a message that he could share from his living room, and that's just what he's going to do.
For months video crews from BGEA have visited the home of my grandparent's in Montreat, NC and with the help of my dad, my grandfather's pastor and others, they have been able to capture the message that he has been preparing to give for years. Through a ministry at BGEA, called My Hope, my grandfather was able to tell people about the cross, the ransom paid for each of us through Christ's separation from the Father in that moment of His death, and how no matter the trials in their lives, it's not too late to come to the foot of the cross and accept Jesus Christ as their own personal savior.
It's incredible. It's a message that he has preached for over 60 years and on his 95th birthday my grandfather's message, "The Cross", is going to be shown on TV's across the U.S. FOX News will be broadcasting the program at 10 p.m. ET, and other stations across the country will show it between Nov. 7-10. It's a powerful, amazing message filled with truth and I hope you will join me in not only watching "The Cross" but telling people you know about it as well. My dad describes it as a message that can transform the nation and in my heart of hearts I believe that this is true.
To find out when you can watch "The Cross" in your area go to www.watchbillygraham.com.


The UnityJDBC driver can integrate and query any number of JDBC-accessible data sources (including Oracle, SQL Server, MySQL, and Postgres) in a single SQL query. UnityJDBC contains a built-in database engine and optimizer that can be used separately from the integration system. It also contains a new, faster join algorithm and syntax for matching/merging data beyond simple joins. It runs on any Java-enabled platform.


text:
import * as fdsndataselect from '../../src/fdsndataselect.js';
import * as util from '../../src/util.js';
let moment = util.moment;

test( "query setter test", () => {
  let dsQuery = new fdsndataselect.DataSelectQuery();
  const NET = 'CO';
  const STA = 'JSC';
  const LOC = '00';
  const CHAN = 'HHZ';
  const DURATION = 300;
  const timeWindow = new util.StartEndDuration(new moment.utc('2018-01-01T12:34:45.000Z'), null, DURATION, 0);
  const MIN_LENGTH = 120;
  const QUALITY = 'D';
  const FORMAT = 'miniseed';
  expect(dsQuery.networkCode(NET)).toBe(dsQuery);
  expect(dsQuery.networkCode()).toBe(NET);
  expect(dsQuery.stationCode(STA)).toBe(dsQuery);
  expect(dsQuery.stationCode()).toBe(STA);
  expect(dsQuery.locationCode(LOC)).toBe(dsQuery);
  expect(dsQuery.locationCode()).toBe(LOC);
  expect(dsQuery.channelCode(CHAN)).toBe(dsQuery);
  expect(dsQuery.channelCode()).toBe(CHAN);
  expect(dsQuery.startTime(timeWindow.startTime)).toBe(dsQuery);
  expect(dsQuery.startTime()).toBe(timeWindow.startTime);
  expect(dsQuery.endTime(timeWindow.endTime)).toBe(dsQuery);
  expect(dsQuery.endTime()).toBe(timeWindow.endTime);
  expect(dsQuery.minimumLength(MIN_LENGTH)).toBe(dsQuery);
  expect(dsQuery.minimumLength()).toBe(MIN_LENGTH);
  expect(dsQuery.longestOnly(true)).toBe(dsQuery);
  expect(dsQuery.longestOnly()).toEqual(true);
  expect(dsQuery.quality(QUALITY)).toBe(dsQuery);
  expect(dsQuery.quality()).toEqual(QUALITY);
  expect(dsQuery.format(FORMAT)).toBe(dsQuery);
  expect(dsQuery.format()).toEqual(FORMAT);
  expect(dsQuery.nodata(404)).toBe(dsQuery);
  expect(dsQuery.nodata()).toEqual(404);
  expect(dsQuery.specVersion(1)).toBe(dsQuery);
  expect(dsQuery.specVersion()).toEqual(1);
  expect(dsQuery.port(80)).toBe(dsQuery);
  expect(dsQuery.port()).toEqual(80);
  expect(dsQuery.host()).toEqual("service.iris.edu");
  const url = dsQuery.formURL();
  expect(url).toBeDefined();
  // net is first, so no &
  expect(url).toContain('?net=');
  for(const k of ['sta', 'loc', 'cha',
   'starttime', 'endtime',
   'minimumlength', 'longestonly', 'quality', 'format', 'nodata']) {
     expect(url).toContain('&'+k+'=');
   }
   expect(url).toContain("http://"+fdsndataselect.IRIS_HOST+"/fdsnws/dataselect/1/query?");
});


Assembled by hand in the USA from the shop of Fire Water Survival in Monroe, GA. Every AEGIS Survival Kit is made with quality materials, mostly source from companies in the USA.
Each AEGIS Pocket Survival Kit weighs 3.6 to 4.0 ounces and fits in the palm of your hand! They are lightweight and compact for everyday carry. Every car, backpack, go-bag, day pack and hunter's pack needs one...or two.
Fire Starting Kit: magnesium ferrocerium fire starter, hack saw blade striker/scraper, 8 inches jute twine (tinder) and 1 foot nylon cord (lanyard).
Fishing Kit: 12 feet of 8lb. test fishing line, #6 and #4 bait hooks, cork (pre drilled), 2 re-usable fishing line weights.
Wire: 2 feet 22 gauge stainless steel wire (for hanging cup, trapping, general use).
Small Carabiner for clipping survivor kit to bags, etc.


text:
Q: React Native - App is Crashing when opening Tabs My App always crashes in Android Emulator.
Every time I navigate my App into Main Tabs my App Crashes with an error.
I think this is not caused of the React Native Navigation, I think because of the React Native Vector Icons because in Android it requires to Add Icon for the Tabs. This error just suddenly appear without changing any of my codes.
This is the error from React Native Debugger:

Uncaught (in promise) TypeError: Iterator value v is not an entry object
  at new Map (native)
  at file:///D:/Downloads/rn-debugger-windows-ia32/resources/app.asar/js/bundle.js:9:8044
  at anonymous

These are my Dependencies:
"react": "16.6.3",
"react-native": "0.58.6",
"react-native-maps": "^0.23.0",
"react-native-navigation": "^1.1.493",
"react-native-vector-icons": "^6.4.1"

Feel free to ask for my codes and any questions. Thank you!

A: Usually this error happens when debugging via RND. If this is your case try the following:

*

*Try to close and open debugger again. For some reason it fixes the situation sometimes.

*If your debugger`s version is out of date try to update it.

*Finally the step that usually works if the previous didn`t: reinstall react-native-debugger and clean your cache (npm start -- --reset-cache).

To reinstall RND (OS): brew cask reinstall react-native-debugger.
For windows use standard procedure of deleting (via Control Panel) and then installing RND again.


The optimization of completion techniques, most commonly referred to as "fracing," has been a driving force for the evolution of the oil and gas industry for over 150 years. In the 1850s, it was common to throw gunpowder downhole. Today, optimization involves adjusting fluid mixtures, and changing pump designs. Through technological advancement and successful designs, the industry has been able to continually improve completions, with the goal of increasing recovery factors.
Some formations are blessed with good rock. These reservoirs are highly productive without much dependency on the completion. However, much of that low-hanging fruit has been developed. The shale reservoirs and other complex unconventional reservoirs, which are now driving the US onshore oil boom, are not so blessed. These reservoirs are rich in hydrocarbon, but are only productive if completed effectively. This has put pressure on the industry to further optimize fracing techniques. The industry definitely understands that completions matter, but to what extent?
To understand the impact of completion design in the Wattenberg field, in Weld county, Colorado, the PetroValues technical team analyzed a radical completions test.
In 2014, two different completion methods, "standard" and "strategic", were tested on 2 adjacent 5 well pads. The standard design required 17 bbls of fluid per foot, at a cost of ~$4.5MM. The strategic design required 50 bbls of fluid per foot, at a cost of ~$6MM (data from public sources). The team ran the economic valuation at the NYMEX Price Deck on 07/17/2018, assumed a working interest of 100% and net revenue interest of 80%.
The wells produced for the last 4 years and the results were intriguing.
Click this link to view the full analysis.


Roger Federer has crushed his Olympic gold medal-winning doubles partner Stanislas Wawrinka to win the Australian Open warm-up event at Kooyong.
Federer, one away from equalling Pete Sampras's record 14 grand slam titles, broke Wawrinka's serve three times in the first seven games to win the all-Swiss final 6-1, 6-3.
He said he wanted to use every chance to build momentum for the season and put his friendship aside for 57 minutes against Wawrinka.
Federer also won the Kooyong Classic exhibition tournament in 2005, the year he lost in the Australian Open semifinals to eventual champion Marat Safin.
With the Australian Open starting on Monday, Federer didn't want to waste a minute of preparation time.
"New season, big opportunities for me," he said. "I'm chasing a lot of records."
Federer had three wins in the eight-man draw this week and said he saved his best for last, ripping some trademark backhand winners down the line and rarely letting Wawrinka get into the points.
"Sorry Stan!" he said. "It's a wonderful preparation for the Australian Open. I'm excited. It was serious, not crazy serious. We have to be tough against each other, but we played some great tennis."
Federer and his Davis Cup teammate frequently hit together and the No. 2-ranked Federer considers himself a mentor and "like a brother" to Wawrinka. They combined to win the Olympic doubles final in Beijing in August.
Federer wins all-Swiss Kooyong final Jan 17, 2009 - 10:32 Roger Federer has crushed his Olympic gold medal-winning doubles partner Stanislas Wawrinka to win the Australian Open warm-up event at Kooyong. Federer, one away from equalling Pete Sampras's record 14 grand slam titles, broke Wawrinka's serve three times in the first seven games to win the all-Swiss final 6-1, 6-3. He said he wanted to use every chance to build momentum for the season and put his friendship aside for 57 minutes against Wawrinka. Federer also won the Kooyong Classic exhibition tournament in 2005, the year he lost in the Australian Open semifinals to eventual champion Marat Safin. With the Australian Open starting on Monday, Federer didn't want to waste a minute of preparation time. "New season, big opportunities for me," he said. "I'm chasing a lot of records." Federer had three wins in the eight-man draw this week and said he saved his best for last, ripping some trademark backhand winners down the line and rarely letting Wawrinka get into the points. "Sorry Stan!" he said. "It's a wonderful preparation for the Australian Open. I'm excited. It was serious, not crazy serious. We have to be tough against each other, but we played some great tennis." Federer and his Davis Cup teammate frequently hit together and the No. 2-ranked Federer considers himself a mentor and "like a brother" to Wawrinka. They combined to win the Olympic doubles final in Beijing in August.


text:
Now reading: Ferrania to restart film production in still and movie formats 257 comments
Ferrania to restart film production in still and movie formats
Published Oct 13, 2014 | Damien Demolder
Italian film and camera brand Ferrania is set to come back to life after a Kickstarter fundraising project reached its target with over two weeks left to run. A company called FILM Ferrania will use the money raised to re-commission and redesign existing machinery from closed sections of the Ferrania factory to begin the manufacture of film. Initial production will be for 35mm and 120 roll formats for stills, and Super 8 and 16mm movie film. The first batch of film, pledged to Kickstarter backers, will be an E6 process transparency film based on the 100 ASA ScotchChrome from the late 1990s, but the company says it wants to go on to produce color negative and black and white emulsions in a wide range of sheet and roll formats.
Ferrania was founded in 1923 and became a well-known stills and movie film manufacturer as well as a maker of cameras that were very popular in Italy and Europe. Before the film plant closed in 2010 it had been owned by the 3M Corporation and Imation, and had become a major supplier of private brand 35mm and APS films for supermarkets, processing houses, camera stores as well as for films sold as Scotch, Konica, Lomography, Polaroid and Samsung.
With the original buildings still standing on the factory site, and due to be demolished soon, the new FILM Ferrania project intends to rescue machinery from a large scale coating line, a triacetate film base manufacturing plant and a chemical lab so that film can be made, coated and cut. The company has already secured one small production line, on which its first batch of slide film will be made, but it says it is slow and expensive to run. The large scale line, called Big Boy, is capable of producing up to 3300 square metres of film per hour, enough for 329 million rolls of 36-exposure 35mm film in a year, but the company wants to reduce this capacity to a level more realistic for today's digital-focused market.
The Kickstarter project has a goal of $250,000 but with 16 days still to run had reached almost $256,000 via 4520 backers. Those pledging funds for FILM Ferrania will receive gifts of the first batch of 35mm, 120, Super 8 and 16mm film, as well as stickers and their name on the Founder's Wall in the new plant.
For more information visit the FILM Ferrania website, or the Kickstarter project
Tags: film
tonybelding
I'm kind of amazed how this article brought the whole film-versus-digital argument out of the woodwork. Hey guys. . . 2003 called and wants its internet flame war back! But I guess if there was anywhere that this would still be controversial, it would have to be on DIGITAL Photography Review.
Most of the film shooters by now have accepted that digital cameras are going to rule the world of photography, and most digital shooters by now have accepted that film isn't going away. And the whole idea that somehow you have to choose one, film or digital, and can then never use the other anymore has been dead and buried for a while. (And yes, I put my pledge in the pot for a few rolls of 120 format Ferrania film.)
Oct 19, 2014*permalink
GothtinPowers
Agreed. In my opinion most film is, or is approaching the classification of 'art supply'. Painting is a lot harder than digital photography yet it is still popular and supplies are available. As will be the case with film photography.
Oct 21, 2014permalink
LEGACYMOMENTSPHOTOGRAPHY
I think the same will be for Mirrorless in the future why cant both DSLR and Mirrorless co exsist! There will like film fans be DSLR fans as well! I use both mirrorless and DSLR why do we have to choose! and the same with film and digital :-)
Jan 29, 2015*permalink
AksCT
Cost of Digital: Myth
(Due to character restriction, I have split it in 3 parts)
To compare the cost of film and digital photography, I have done the following analysis. Note that I have kept it simple as possible to contrast the cost. I have excluded items that have identical cost for both systems (such as lens, flash, …). I used Nikon D750 and F6 for comparison, but you can replace it other brands.
Nikon F6 was introduced in 2004 for street price of $2,300.
Both D750 and F6 are rated at 150,000 shutter cycles
Digital Setup:
Nikon D750	$2300
Memory Card $100	for 64MB Sandisk Extreme Pro (90MB/s, beyond minimal requirement of D750)
Let's say that you buy a computer for just storing and viewing your images and nothing else (which I don't)
Computer: $2000	(Dell XPS fully loaded, top-of-the-line workstation with 3TB disk and 32in monitor is $1800)
Let's assume you need to upgrade your computer once during this period (150,000 shots) and forget price decline due to Moore's law; thus total cost of computer: $4000
Total Exposure: 150,000 images
Avg JPG size:	10MB (adjust calculation if stored in RAW)
Total disk size for 150,000 images: 1,500,000MB = 1,500GB = 1.5TB
2T hard disk is listed around $100 in Amazon, to be in the safe side buy 5 of those for a 5-Tier RAID and double that for any additional cost for housing and archiving/backup software that you may need (triple this number if you keep RAW)
Cost of Storage: $1000
Total Cost of digital: 2300+100+4000+1000=$7,400
Part 3 Film
Nikon F6 was introduced in 2004, let's assume you either have a film camera or you can get if for free.
Camera: $0
Film: Fujifilm 1014258 Superia X-TRA 400 35mm Film - 4 Pack at $21.19 (listed on Amazon). This is not the high quality film. Those who want to go through full joy of film photography are willing to spend much more for higher quality film. For the sake of comparison, let's go with the cheapest option.
Film: $5 for 24 exposures
Roles of film needed for 150,000 (assume you get 25 exposures from each role) 150,000/25= 6,000 roles
Cost of film development: $7 (the cheapest offered by Walmart with single print; I would imagine those spending $$ for higher quality film, would pay much more for processing).
Cost of Storage: $0	Assume film and prints are kept in the same envelope provided by Walmart
Total cost for film over 150,000 = 0 + 0 + (5+7)*6,000= $72,000
Compared Total cost of digital: $7,400
Lassoni
Stopped reading @ computer. You mustn't be very informed if you think you need 2k dollar computer for photog. A good gamer desktop can be had for 700-900 euros, so I have no clue how you came out with the 2k dollar number.
With 2k you get computer with 1 high end CPU and 2-3 fast GPUs. That's not something even 90% of the gamers need.
Mar 29, 2015*permalink
It sounds like something worth trying at some point. Thanks for the idea!
Jun 3, 2015permalink
Film: Drawbacks? Slow. Not right now. These days, takes a day or two to see the results...or longer depending on the format you shoot. Hard to find film, though eBay and Amazon have bridged that gap. If you are lucky enough like I am, you have a local place to not only supply digital cameras and equipment, but also 35mm, 120 and sheet films in color and B&W of a good range of ISO. And that place also develops, and drum scans in house. Lucky, right? Yep I am...but it took me years to find the guy...used to have to send film to develop to Kansas and then back to LA to get it scanned! I suppose the other drawback is not being able to over shoot. But again, I really don't think so.
Not to make a comparison entirely...but the record industry reports a steep increase in vinyl record sales. 40% from last year. What's wrong with CDs?
Film and digital both have their merit and drawbacks.
Digital: I need it now...photography for appraisers, mechanical work that requires remembering a sequence or order of items before tearing apart, etc. Quick, easy...and honestly...all done with my iPhone anymore. I've sold my stock in Canon. I've sold my stock in Pentax. Drawback? Storage. Back up storage, buying and replacing hard drives. Constant uploading. Tons of pictures I don't want because I got trigger happy and will never look at them again. Tons of pictures never looked at again because they are not right in front of you in print.
Film: Used to of course be the only way (I know...younger kids gasp when I say this). Well thought out shots. Posed. Nearly all are "keepers" and nearly always all printed and filed somewhere easy to get to to view again. (continuing on next post)
Peter K Burian
I wonder when we will see another headline?
"Acme Inc. to restart manufacturing of buggy whips" (Heaven knows, there are far too few buggy whip manufacturers.)
graybalanced
The real test, of course, is to see how many of the "I miss film, digital ruined photography" crowd actually buys enough product to keep ventures like this and The Impossible Project alive.
If you don't, then it doesn't matter what is posted on message boards, you chose digital through your actions regardless of your words.
nerd2
I remember the Lomography fad at the early stage of digital camera.... it may come and go again.
20 years later the lomography site is still selling film and cameras, and coming out with new cameras, so I'm not sure if it's a fad.
Superka
That's the best of the 2014 on DPR!
Forever Film!
RolliPoli
About 12 years ago I used their colour negative film ('Made in Italy') marketed under a couple of different brands. The dyes were very unstable and started to shift and fade with in a couple of years of dark and dry storage.
beckmarc
For a "dead" medium this post about a new film initiative sure gets a lot of comments. "The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about" The fact that so many photographers are inspired to write about film, for or anti, indicates film is still relevant.
Holger Drallmeyer
Why does this always have to turn into a Film vs. Digital debate?
I never see that going on with Acrylic painters vs. Ipad Doodlers ;)
b craw
Because many photographers, without the the comforts of territorial dogma, have little means of defining value in their practices. Rather than entertain the relative merits of both, they'd rather street fight with weapons made out of chic allegiance.
Well said b craw!
I agree. I use anything from LF to all types of medium format and 35mm film. Of course I also use digital. They are all very different in their outcome I I love each of my cameras for their strengths. Some of my cameras I love for their weaknesses. There is really no contest. They are all tools at my disposal and choosing. No digital camera can replace my film cameras. No film camera can replace my digital camera. I love to be able to choose.
Those who are happy with one brush, good for them. ;)
They should offer 120-sized 30m rolls so we could configure 220-films. Plus offering back-paper. Pls no moon(aka fantasy-)prices like ilfords B+W 70mm BW.
The Incredible Hoke
I love reading all of these comments about film. The positive and negative. The people cry assing about film are the funniest. Really bothers them for some reason to see people still using/buying film. They will say it doesn't bother them, but just look how many posts they make about it.
DesignDick
I thought full frame vs crop sensor debate was unnecessarily toxic(on both sides) but its funny that this sort of unusual and almost religious insecurity reaches even to film. My favorite comment so far is "I hope it fails"
The Davinator
I agree. We always get the same inane comments about being dinosaurs, etc.
riveredger
Observation: film guys really are full of themselves.
Observation....some digital users are really defensive...
MarkusDaaniel
I think film guys have a right to be full of themselves because film requires much more effort and skill to get it right.
Photography is not that hard (the technical side - composition and subject matter is another story!). I think that's what bothers a lot of the folks who learned on film. They had to work harder to get the same results that the masses can get now with digital. They had to spend hours upon hours trying to learn the technical side of using a camera and then developing film to see their results. Digital has made it much easier for folks to learn photography. For some reason, it appears to bother them that newbies now no longer have to endure some sort of rite of passage to learn the mystique of taking pictures.
Exactly. Most of the people these days will probably learn nothing beyond the rule-of-thirds.
Viva Abacus
I learned basic arithmetic operations on an abacus and always admired professional use of this amazing machine in the old market place. Gradually and through hard work I mastered all its movements, setups and more. Through the time this marvelous instrument has gone through several improvements, but the basics remained the same "carefully and manually setting up the device and with a few clicks, voila, beautiful results are in front of you, in a glorious analog way". The feel of each bead graciously gliding on the wires, along with the scent of cherry frame, clicks and clacks, it was like poetry.
part 2 below
Until the early version of electronic calculators showed up, big and ugly with no sense of feeling, and no manual skill and appreciation of art required to operate it. Constantly needing new batteries and ever-changing new models, requiring expensive upgrades and peripherals. Yes, it is true that current calculators can do amazing and complicated operations in no time, store results and show data/graphs in real time clearly on its high-res display, share it wirelessly. Yes, you can even get the most advanced version of it as free "App". But give my abacus, slide rule, a few number 2 pencils, good stash of erasers and few days, that I can match any modern calculator for numerical solution of the second order partial equation.
No matter how much innovation happens in this segment, I will never give up my abacus.
Fun fact: in some Asian countries, kids still learn to use abacus, mainly to improve the development of their motory and math skills.
At least it does not rely on a single-use chemical-based stuff like film camera. :D
photography is the art of capturing photons — and whether one shoots on chemical emulsions or digital sensors is simply their preference. some people prefer to machine gun their photos for instant publication, while others prefer to see them cook slowly while maturing into a pleasant surprise. others don't care either way as long as the IQ is "good enough" or "inexpensive enough".
i'll add that there's one thing I found inherent to film which other technologies have yet to successfully emulate, and that is the concept of a one-of-a-kind original. the scarcity of the negative makes it ideally suited to fine art initiatives. JMO.
Great point! This is exactly what I'm thinking. I shoot both digital and film, but on recent years I have gone back mainly to film for just that reason - the value of a single image. I know I have to put in a lot of more effort with film. And when I get things right I feel much bigger satisfaction with film. I'd say there is not much technical advantages of film over digital, but there is absolutely no doubt that shooting film is emotionally more satisfying.
RonTross
Digital photography is pretty sterile and ugly looking when compared to film. But that's just one mans opinion of course.
cpkuntz
To those claiming that film is "crap", I offer this modern working photographer as one of many possible rebuttals. I prefer digital for my hobby most of the time, but I like film, too.
http://canlasphotography.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-ektar-summer-on-my-rollei.html?m=1
I am old enough to actually grow up with film camera and just cannot understand why people are romantizing film that much. It was just magnitudes more bothersome, and even the (now pre-histroic) 2.6MP D1 was a gospel compared to film cameras.
Anyone can easily duplicate the film experience by duct taping all status LCD and most controls (ISO and WB), using 16MB SD card (I have one!), shoot only in JPEG and then directly giving the SD card to the lab. Now good luck.
Slide films have actually narrower DR than most digital sensors and only negative films had any latitude advantage over typical digital sensors, and that is now a history with newer, ~15 stop DR digital sensors and one-shot HDR. And negative films have their own issues.
And don't forget that sensor or film is just a MEDIUM to record the intensity of the light, and the whole system can be quantitative evaluated. There is NOTHING special with film at all. It may have some characteristic 'distortion', just like some vintage audio equipments, but that does not make them 'better'
Newer is not always better. Film may still have edge for some special uses (especially very large format) What I am saying is current digital technology is better than film counterpart, at least for 35mm format, in many measurable (and meaningful) ways.
And the actual *usage* of film camera (only 36 shot, no rewinding mid-roll (except for rarely used APS format), no instant preview, no way to change color temp / ISO mid-roll) is absolutely inferior to that of digital one.
I'd say the technical advantages of film are pretty much debatable. And you are right about film being more bothersome. But there is another side to it: more effort needed -> if good results = more satisfaction.
After moving back from digital to film I have found that I'm enjoying photography again because I need to put more effort into it. If I screw up, I'm more angry. If I can capture something on film just the way I imagined before in my minds eye, I'm more happy.
Digital has made everything pretty easy and greatly diminished the value of a single image.
@nerd2 That's a good analogy. Some people say vinyl records are 'better', but really what they mean is it takes the sound and adds a distortion or abstraction which they find aesthetically pleasing. So is the case with film. Some people prefer the aesthetic changes, some don't, either is fine.
audijam
All i want to say is I cherish every moment I press the shutter and hear the motor advances my film to the next I don't need to be reminded that film is DEAD (well it is not completely dead yet) and digital DSLR is much better blah blah blah. I use 5D3 for work and family and believe me I love it because it's perfect for what I need it to serve. HOWEVER, it doesn't eliminate or replace my love for film SLR.
I took my EOS 3 out last night just to look at it. It's so beautiful. Too bad I let go of my AE1 years ago to a teen who wants to learn photography. I hope he hasn't given up yet.
Sir Nick of High Point
Yes! Very well put. Film is fun and rewarding!
I love the results my Pro DSLR gives me, but often I find more satisfaction with film because I put more effort into it. Neither am I supported by hordes of faceless software writers. It's me, my film and my chemistry. It's all down to me. That is a thrill I don't get from digital.
Film is not dead, it is just surpassed in EVERY way possible by digital. And a new generation of hipsters will romantize it and somehow revive that at some point.
We use measurable quantities to compare between different systems. In that regard, modern cars are much safer, much more powerful while being magnitude cheaper than old ones (considering inflation).
You will be surprised to see that some of new Hyundai cars are actually as fast as mid-1990 Ferrari.
ManuelVilardeMacedo
nerd2, that will be right if you only look at the figures. However, as in most human activities, there's an ineffable quality that can only be named 'pleasure' and can make us prefer flawed (or 'obsolete') goods over brand new ones, even if the latter are loaded with the latest technology. That Ferrari will be much more thrilling to drive than the Hyundai. Of course you can be more pleased with your Hyundai, and you might even drive faster - but where's the thrill? You won't *feel* that speed.
The same with cameras. There are a few people who extract more pleasure out of a film camera than a full-fledged digital SLR. Why? Because it's fun. Or at least they think so.
And don't forget that the most pleasurable human activity has been there since the beginning of life on earth. One day they'll find a more technological way of making babies, possibly with the aid of a computer (or an app), but for now the antiquated technique will have to do.( As for me, the future can wait...)
There are safety standards for a reason. And modern cars are DESIGNED to crumble, so that the shock is absorbed rather than fully transferred to passengers.
What about another modern car, Tesla D? It does 0-60mph in 3.2 sec, which should be quite thrilling. Oh it takes 5 plus 2 people and has 95 eMPG too.
Well, the Tesla is another story altogether, but it is a sports car with the commodities of a luxury sedan in which the torque is delivered instantaneously. Previously you were mentioning one of the most anodyne, dull and insipid brands on the planet - Hyundai, of course -, not something as saucy as a Tesla S.
By the way, I'm glad you're not one of those opponents of electric cars... they're such *&&%$#"<!
@nerd2
My Olympus E1 (5mp) is sharper and out resolves my 35mm negs (Carl Zeiss T* lenses). My development process and v700 scanner MAY have something to do with that - but not much. I still use film.
Because film gives me a distinct feel and character digital can't. It's the way film responds to light and colour. I love my images dirty and love shooting half-frame as well as MF. Nothing quite has that look of Delta in Rodinal.
That's why I use film.
One of my friends loves his 1940's Lea Frances (a classic car). A modern car out performs it in every way except one. The most important one and that is the experience of driving it. The same with film and classic cameras, it's just not the results, it's the experience of using a classic camera, the film advance, the dark slide, the smell, the feel, the weight, no plastic, no electronics (if applicable).
It's the unique distinct character and experience of the whole package. Its something you appreciate or don't, and that's OK.
I enjoy getting a new "sensor" every time I advance the film. I found the experience of buying an expensive new digital camera and being stuck with the same sensor for every shot to be rather stressful. But I guess that's why we come to websites like these. To make sure we get stuck with the sensor that is best for us ;)
please do NOT put hunydai or huyndai or whatever dai next to a Ferrari. i don't care how fast it could go and do not give crap if a Ferrari doesn't have AC or radio.
do you think Los Angeles Philharmonic will play for nicki minaj? F no! why? different CLASS!
Yeah, class. There is a reason why most of *italian* bicycles are actually made in china and just painted in italy nowadays. It's the class.
theblock
"You will be surprised to see that some of new Hyundai cars are actually as fast as mid-1990 Ferrari."
That's not true - 3.8L Genesis Coupe is slower (vmax, acceleration) than F355, even slower than old 348. Get your facts straight.
justinwonnacott
Films made specifically for scanning would make sense and probably find a lot of buyers.
The end use of the film they make - if it gets made at all - will usually involve a scanner . Very few people project slides today, colour enlarging has passed into history and the use of BW darkroom tools has become severely crippled by the diminished availability of chemistry and papers. Scanning BW film produces excellent prints.
Films designed to take advantage of the dynamic range of scanners and that are optimized for the colour receptors of the scanner would make a lot of sense. I believe Agfa once made a BW film with this in mind.
You should have a go with Kodak Portra 400, the dynamic range (as well as its organic colour) is amazing. All you need is a reasonable scanner. Portra was re-engineered a few years ago with scanning negs in mind.
Paul Guba
Just delaying the inevitable.
The inevitable what?
Aren't we all?
JohnEwing
Woo hooooo!!!! I must get in a sack of brown coal to power my Weston Hyper IV.
But seriously though, while a hard core will keep at it I think that for most nostalgics initial delight will pall after the first couple of shots, when the pictures fail to appear on the LCD the camera doesn't have. Retro look is great, retro tech maybe not so attractive.
I love retro tech.
My favourite is a pre-war Leica IIIc. The smell, the feel of the hand machined metal knobs, the whole experience is a tonic. Next on the list is my 1950's Busch Pressman Model D 5x4, pretty rare. In beautiful condition, there's something about the hand crafted American aluminium. A wonderful camera. Both of course pre-date me, its nothing to do with nostalgia but the use of beautifully hand crafted machines. Then there's my Russian collection, that's a laugh, but the Kiev IV is actually pretty good. Have a go!
Oh, I like the tech too: I have a couple of IIIs as well, a Nikon F, a couple of Oly OM1s and a bunch of others - my avatar is the taking lens of my Mamiya C220. They are lovely items of equipment and some of them gave excellent service for decades. But for power and flexibility, and above all post-processing, digital kit is hard to beat. I'll probably try Ferrania when/if it finally appears, but I don't expect I'll give up digital because of it.
Mind you, there is a certain Zen side to using film: you need to sink into the picture-taking process until what emerges from the camera is perfect. With digital you can just bang away (within limits) and bank on correcting the boobs in PS.
That's the beauty of it. You have to imagine the results first with both film characteristics and camera settings in mind. Then you have the image in your minds eye until you get the film developed. If it turns out as you imagined then it's a great feeling (much much more satisfying than looking at LCD and then shooting another 100 images just in case). If you failed to set the technicalities right then the image probably will fail too, and you will be quite angry. But you also have learned a valuable lesson.
I can see a war between film and digital drawing here, but it needn't be that way. Film is not threatening digital. On the other hand, refusing to see the advantages of digital - there are some, you know... - is a bit narrow-minded.
The revival of film is in no way a step back into the past. Most of us who shoot film don't care about typewriters or rotary phones (or tall ships and steam locomotives, for all that matters). That's stupid clichés. Digitalists need to accept that some people actually love shooting film and some film shooters have to realize life has moved on, but a lot of us shoot both film and digital. They're not incompatible.
What I like about shooting film is the challenge: I need to know how to expose properly, calculate how development will affect the general look of the picture and think very carefully about the subjects I choose. I must be aware that every frame has a cost and must not waste it. It's a completely different experience from digital.
Eric Calabros
What part of digital camera forced you to be not careful?
Technology moves on, but should you slavishly move with it?
Technology moves on not because they are thinking of you, not because it is a charitable institution! No, but it wants to sell you their latest "thing".
Technology moves on to make money from you.
Technology moves on because it wants your money.
...and you feed the beast.
I love my film cameras, I love my digital. I love shooting both. Each has its own character and I am delighted by the results from both. No conflict.
If your work flow is all of one and none of the other please don't waste your time slagging off the other system, one you don't even use. That is beyond stupidity! You wanna waste your life?
And don't worry my dear digital users, what you say about film today, photographers of your future will say about digital. Digital will go the same way as film. One day digital will be gone, old tech, retro. Will you be nostalgic about your D850/1Ds/5D?
Well, saying I love film is different from sayin I use film because of this and that! You can love your dog without any reason. even it be disabled and fugly
OK Eric,
Sorry to confuse you.
I use film.
@Joseph Black,
Instant gratification is for impatient lazy people.
That camera does it all because the user can't.
You no longer have to think or pre-visualise the result.
Those who criticise film and rushed to digital are either sloppy workers or just poor photographers. There is no element of "getting it right first time" because you can take hundreds and one of them has to be good doesn't it?
In my film days when I went on a two weeks holiday I took with me four or five rolls of film (144 to 180 frames) max. It was enough.
Nowadays I come back with 600 odd digital and 24 film.
People want good pictures with minimal effort and that's because they are lazy.
Didn't some old dead dude say "your first 10,000 pictures are your worst" I think with digital that is your first 100,000 (that's 1,000,000,000 for me!)
To become a great photographer takes time and skill and not gear and money.
I subscribe every word Wye Photography wrote. As for the thinking part, what is there to think about when you can take a picture and then, if you're not satisfied with what you see, make another one immediately? Photographing by trial and error doesn't make anyone shoot better! It's like having a gun and shooting senselessly until you hit the mark. Film, on the other hand, obliges you to get it right first time. You have to master everything. There must be a reason for art students who take Photography courses to have to use a film camera. (At least that's what happens here in my hometown; don't know about the rest of the world.)
And the rewards of getting a good picture with film are much greater. With digital, results are predictable. There's no challenge. Of course you have to master exposure if you're serious about photography and shoot digital, but you never get that razor's edge feeling you get with film. (But then again maybe you don't want that feeling, which is OK too.)
Film era: Take pics. Wait a week for lab processing (who fixes exposure error during printing). Gets a handful of acceptable pics without actually remembering how each pics were taken at all.
Digital era: Use live view to check the exposure, focus and DOF. Use LCD to check the initial results. Delete bad one and retry with different approach. Repeat.
Guess which photographer will learn faster?
Joseph: talk for yourself. I'm not trying to kid anyone. Not even myself. I got correct exposures in all but one pictures with my first film roll. You might be surprised to know, however, that I had learnt exposure with a digital camera. Even so, that knowledge was something I got because I wanted to, not because I needed to. (As you say, it's hard to make a digital shooter want to learn.) Manual exposure is an option if you shoot digital; you can take decent pictures even in auto mode with a digital camera, but you'll get nowhere with a manual film camera from the 70's or 80's if you don't know the basics of exposure.
Nerd: ever heard of 'SLR'? That 'Through-The-Lens' thing? You can actually preview depth of field with an SLR film camera. If what you care is making proper pictures, live view, the ability to delete failed pictures and LCD are mere gimmicks. You know, Leica does an LCD-less digital camera...
So you don't know the DOF preview actually DOES NOT show the correct DOF of the output image? You can try if you have a DSLR around.
nerd2, you express yourself as if all film cameras were rudimentary. They aren't. By the year 2000 film cameras had all the functions and modes you can think of - including DoF preview. Even my Olympus OM-2 has a DoF preview button (which I don't use because what I see through the viewfinder is quite accurate). It's not like film shooters wear leopard skins and use spears to hunt mammoths, you know...
DOF preview does not show the correct DOF of output image, especially if you are using bright lens wide open. If you don't believe me, please google it.
Vermeero
Nice... good news if you prefer film (like me).
I hope their product quality can compare with Kodak, Fuji, Ilford, Agfa and Foma.
Or else their films could be great for lomography if the price is right.
Would like to try a roll any time soon.
I shoot much more digital than film about a 10:1 ratio. I love shooting film and nothing quite compares to Delta 100 or FP4+ in Rodinal. Nothing is more satisfying than pulling your negatives from the developing tank. I shoot half-frame, 35mm, 645 and 66 in colour and BW and develop it myself.
I also love my digital camera and the results it gives me. For too long I spent a lot of time trying to simulate film on a digital camera when I realised it is a waste of time and money and both have their own distinct character. Don't get me started on those crappy film packs.
I would love to use Ferrania film, I love experimenting with film, it is actually fun. So I hope this project is realised. Welcome back Ferrania!
Foma film is pretty good also, and a £2.60 a roll, good value too.
hexxthalion
"Don't get me started on those crappy film packs." - something I've been saying for a long time. do you want film look? shoot on bloody film :D
Kelvin L
Scotch 1000 would be nice. Not so sure about the slower stuff
chrispicasso
Ferrania was always low budget, not sure what all the excitement is about. Most of the 35 film people people seem to be made up of hipsters. Try doing a big job on film, present the client with an enormous F&P bill see what they say. Where film /polaroid makes a difference is at the top end. Beautiful results from type 55 polaroid well done for the attempts to get that back.
kaktlak
Right. But I feel it would be nice to shot on 35mm Astia once more...
one thing though, film 'enlarges' better than digital, i guess it's thanks to randomness of grain
noirdude
great news indeed!
Anyone not capable of getting good shots from a film camera should not be calling themselves a photographer. Many people choose digital because it's easier and cheaper, and many choose digital because they're not competent enough to get good images if they don't have auto-everything and the chance to take 20 photos and choose the best. Most of these people will never improve. Some choose digital because it's the best tool for the photography they want to do, and they can produce good results from it. However, many have used digital and become bored with it's often flat, dull look and have now gone back to film.
I use both, but I enjoy film more. The Ferrania re-start is good news, especially once they get around to producing print films.
I don't know if it was intentional but that comes across as more than a little pompous...
Akpinxit
I would say : those who "have used digital and become bored with it's often flat, dull look and have now gone back to film" - " will never improve" . Moreover , keep in mind , that there is whole new generation born in to (or on edge) the digital photography era .
Come to think of it , what would say a wet plate photograph on film shooting .
@Jonathan Mac
Tell me, what is the definition of 'good shots'?
It's not only "easier", faster and cheaper to shoot digital, it's also more reliable. I stopped using film because more often then not, the lab would screw up. And not everyone has a photo lab nearby. For those that have their own lab, that's a different story of course. And the dynamic range of film is still not matched by digital as we know.
zettlers
Never in a million years will I reload, not my old Nikon F, nor any of my more modern film bodies, you have had your time, you did well but RIP!
It's actually worth doing for the nostalgia, but you'll be surprised how alien it all seems. But the slowness and need to make the most of every shot can make you a better photographer or at least remind you of the basics.
I'm glad I learned back in the day when even autofocus was considered impossible. Makes me appreciate my digi gear a lot more. I started with a Pentax and 55mm lens, now I've got lenses from 20mm to 450mm! And they are all superb, amazing achievement really.
We are truly spoiled.
Will be interesting to see how this develops.
Probably be C-41.
CameraLabTester
The F2AS, F3HP, EOS3 and F1N are getting restless in their cupboards...
misha marinsky4
Ferrania house label films were generally lower quality. They made the Walgreens house brand, IIRC.
I have been reading the comments with amusement. To paraphrase Zone Zero, 'A film camera is like a mortgage, with payments for life.'
With a digital camera, it costs zero to press the shutter release. With a film camera, it costs even if it's a dud. I can't delete the shot for another. I still have to pay for development and a contact sheet. A memory card is quite literally an unlimited supply of 35mm film.
Like the look of film? There's DXO Film Pack, for starters. There's Kentmere, an inexpensive Ilford line. There's Freestyle, which sells inexpensive silver halide products.
With the Pentax MF, bodies have dropped below $10K. It's still not cheap, but Moore's Law applies to them, too. Sometime in the future, MF will compete with 35mm FF. The Mamiya ZD used a Dalsa chip; it was only usable at ISO 100, and they're cheap on eBay.
No one can stop the relentless march of technology.
LukeDuciel
I cannot agree more.
I still own a Voigtlander 135 film body. I even have a roll of 400TX loaded in it. But for more than a year I have not touched it.
True that the feeling of manipulating a delicate machine doing the photo-chemical miracle is ultra satisfying. BUT, it is just too much fuss nowadays.
For the things I do, travel, portrait, occasion events, I always have easier and better digital tools.
It will surely keep its place for some of my special personal projects but it sleeps more than being awake.
jondh
Shooting digital is like eating McD, shooting film is like having 6 course French diner. It's all of to personal preference :)
TheChefs
Digital is free? Hardly, I just sold my Pentax K5. I purchased it new in Australia for $1600. I sold it yesterday for $350 with extra battery and 2 x 32GB cards. I call it hardly free...
I also shoot a film Hasselblad, Leica and Pentax SLR. Their cost of ownership is a lot less over 2 years, as the bodies and lenses don't depreciate any more.
One last thing, there's no such thing as FF MF digital sensor. There is no 6x7 or 6x9 or 6x12 digital sensors. All of them are APSC and m43 of real MF cameras.
well said jondh!
Well the person who bought your Pentax won't lose much on it.
AlanG, well, lets all buy 2nd hand cameras and let all the digital camera companies die in a year. Lets see how they resist that market change when everyone is happy with their cameras.
Hubertus Bigend
Everyone knows the technical and economical disadvantages of film compared to digital. Nevertheless, film can still be fun, because technical image quality and money isn't all there is to photography. Seeing that the Ferrania funding didn't even need half of the funding period to succeed does show that there are some people who still think so, too.
@ misha marinsky4
First let me say I shoot a lot of digital. But is isn't free.
So, misha it's free to press the shutter eh! Sure. What then?
Oh! you need a computer - cost money, or did you get yours free? How much did it cost?
After you have bought the computer, then there's the cost of the OS (if any) anti-virus and firewall and all that stuff. Free?
You need the internet don't you so you can post all your pix all over the place. Yours Free?
Then you need power to make all the things work. Yours Free?
Then, and here's the insidious bit, all the upgrades, OS upgrades (mainly free) an new computer to run all the upgraded software. Is it Free?
Since digital started, how many times have you "upgraded" your camera? How many digital cameras have you bought in comparison to the number of film cameras? (if you're old enough that is).
Add it all up now! Is it Free?
A digital camera needs a lot of support and money just to work. Now lets talk about the environmental impact...
@Wye Photography: You remind me of Dana Carvery on SNL:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbU4Cb4A4-o
"Now lets talk about the environmental impact..." Before the advent of digital, I went through miles of film and mountains of paper. What was the emulsion which suspended the silver halide crystals, and bonded them to the film and paper? Medical grade gelatin.
Developer was pH scale 14. Fixer is sulfuric acid. How's that for impact? There was the cost of electricity to run my enlarger, freeze my unused film and paper, and water to wash the film and paper. If a camera broke, there was the repair cost, and many times it wasn't done properly. If a digital camera breaks, I buy a new one; they aren't worth fixing. A digital camera is a computer with a lens.
I'd shoot 36 frames, and maybe got 2 keepers. Now I put the keepers on a RAID, and reuse the card.
How's that for impact?
Marcin 3M
The statement about costs is not true. The money I've lost on deprecated digital cameras over a few recent years could be enough for a lifetime film supply. My 3880 will last for 5 or 6 years, while my 10+ years old magnifiers are still in perfect working conditions.
@misha
Digital has opened up "photography" to the millions like never before. All that comes at a cost.
The cost of manufacturing plants that make millions of digital cameras and the hardware needed to support them dwarfs any environmental impact film ever had. Mainly by virtue of the sheer numbers involved. All this gear over which you croon does not have a very good environmental foot print. Not to mention terrible working conditions for many.
Not to mention the use of chemicals hazardous to health in PC components.
So, you buy a new one: what happens to the old? Recycled or landfill?
To this day I do better than 2 keepers out of 36 mainly because the economics forces me to make the exposures I REALLY want to make instead of shots that you know in your heart are just not good enough.
I think you should have chosen your repair shop better!
I use very dilute Rodinal an alkali fixer and a water stop is just fine. I shoot much more selectively than I do with digital.
"Digital has opened up "photography" to the millions like never before."
That's the way it should be; digital is democracy.
"Not to mention terrible working conditions for many."
I'm sure slaughterhouse or crop field conditions are worse. Have you given up meat, and grow your own fruits and vegetables?
"Not to mention the use of chemicals hazardous to health in PC components."
Benzene is added to gasoline to make it more explosive. Benzene is a known carcinogen. It's that sweet odor when you fill your tank. What happens to all that used motor oil? Auto repairs are the top consumer complaint. Auto manufacturing and oil extraction have the worst environmental impact of consumer goods. Then there's the munitions industry, and wars triggered by oil.
Nothing beats auto depreciation, and the cost of maintaining a motor vehicle.
I'll stick with my memory card, computer and desk with XPN.org playing. Good riddance to the darkroom.
I would like to recommend XPN.org...nothing like it.
FRANCISQUAN
For me, digital is about being able to snap away in an
often fruitless attempt to capture that ellusive picture
of granchildren as they try to remove/eat/feed my camera!
Being able to view them immediately is preferable to
taking a few pictures then finding out a week later
that they were poor with no chance of a reshoot!
I do have a sequence of eight photos (all shot singly)
showing my two grandchildren stealing each others dummies
where their antics and facial expressions are priceless.
As for taking the perfect film picture..........
When I was eight years old, I jumped up from behind to see
what was going on with my aunt's wedding group and to this
day that bridal photograph shows me right in the middle.
....digital camera would have saved my backside later!!
Each to his own..............
Samuel Dilworth
The money saved by going digital is why the photography industry experienced a massive boom over the last decade. Ahem.
Personally, I've spent far more per year since adopting digital. But the power of a Curves control makes it all seem worthwhile.
"A digital camera needs a lot of support and money just to work. Now lets talk about the environmental impact..."
http://www.boston.com/community/photos/raw/assets_c/2010/12/Kodachrome1-thumb-608x482-29514.jpg
Samuel: "The money saved by going digital is why the photography industry experienced a massive boom over the last decade."
Saved by who? Rather maoney spent on digital equipment, that evolved whole generation in 2 years.
Marcin: sorry, I was being sarcastic. In fact, digital photography ended up costing much more than film photography for most people – so much so that it funded a huge boom in the industry.
Of course a National Geographic photojournalist who used 200 rolls of Kodachrome per assignment did save money with digital, but most of us didn't do that.
I still shoot film, by the way. It's fun. But so is perfectly fine-tuning a noise-free digital image on the computer.
photoholiko
I'd be happy to see them succeed and I can understand film but super 8 & 16mm doesn't make sense, if I remember well it used to cost me around $20 for buying and processing 5 minutes worth of movie and you all know what digital is capable of and also how many of us still have the movie cameras?
The aroma of burning flesh as they re-introduce the Magicube Flash....
Am I on the right website? Wasn't this DIGITAL Photography Review? ;)
Jokes aside, last year I decided to buy a film camera after some years of digital photography. I chose an Olympus OM-2n because I had OM lenses that I used on my E-P1 via an adapter. To cut a long story short, I haven't used the E-P1 for months now.
Last June I decided to give the Ferrania Solaris 100 colour film a try. I was overwhelmed by the beauty of its colours. It's not perfect - I wouldn't advise to use it for long exposures -, but the sheer joy those colous convey make it worth it. Especially because it's so cheap. So I became quite enthusiastic about this project - especially after I learnt that those people were intending to resume production of these inexpensive, cheerful film rolls. And, as many have pointed out, you can't have too many options when it comes to film.
fortwodriver
Cheerful! I like that. That suits what these films did.
I always found Agfa and Ferrania colour film to be exactly that. The skin tones were a little more on the grey side though but what I'm really looking forward to is a very high-speed negative film. A kind of 'invincible' film, if you like. I'm looking forward to my four rolls of the new E-6 film to try though!
bmcdad
Its like saying AT&T will restart production of Rotary Phones... Art does not require a time machine. You can't reminisce evolution to a halt.
ravduc
There are people who enjoy using film just like there are people who enjoy riding Harley Dadidson's. Film offers us another means of expressing ourselves and Harley Davidson's have an historical appeal that many still enjoy. Your analogy with rotary phones makes no sense.
Rotary phones are incompatible with digital stations, hence their obsolescence. Film can be scanned and converted to digital files. There are no compatibility issues. Your analogy is rather unfortunate.
ManuelVilardeMacedo - So scanning film and converting to digital makes my analogy unfortunate or your reply contradicting?
ravduc - Riding a harley doesn't come with any shortcomings. It's a reliable bike and can perform at the level of any modern bike if not better. Riding a Harley Davidson is not a sacrifice on performance it's simply a stylistic choice. Film cannot compete with a capable digital sensor in a darkroom. That is not my personal analogy it's simply science.
ealvarez
Maybe not harley davidson.. more like people who want to go back to using a typewriter.. the old ones. I like my relatively fast ms word, though. I made errors when typing and dont like to spend money on white out
Ontario Gone
Actually, film is similar to a rotary phone. I mean yes one can buy a high end scanner to get all the potential of film, but how much are those? Several thousand even for a modest unit? Heck for the cost of a couple years of film, the camera, lenses, and the scanner, I could nearly buy a Pentax 645z and do everything in Adobe.
Alex Permit
Rotary phones work fine on FIOS. you can buy or make your own adapters for other services.
Not that I'd want to.
RPJG
I don't have a dog in this fight, but why would you shoot film, if you're just going to scan it for processing?
You could spend $1000s on a Pentax 645z and end up with a tiny crop sensor. Why? You can't even compare it to Pentax 67... Or even take Fuji 6x9 rangefinders.
The digital MF cameras are a bit of a joke, because of the tiny sensors. The sensor in 645z is only 43.8mm x 32.8mm, which is nowhere near the 56mm x 42mm area of the true 645 MF film format. That's 1.6 lens multiplier, It's puny! Compare it to 6x6 which is 56mm x 56mm, that's 2.2 multiplier. Or like comparing m43 to FF camera. 6x7 is 56mm x 67mm, that's 2.6 crop factor, I think it's that comparing FF to something like Nikon 1V or another P&S. I will not bring out 6x9 or 6x12, because than it becomes even more of a joke.
shoevarek
@RPJG You can use film because you may enjoy looking at 6x9, 6x17 or 4x5 transparencies on the light table. You can scan them as well. Film cameras also came down in price (even professional ones). For someone shooting moderate amount of photographs the cost may be comparable with the cost of ownership of digital 35mm camera, trading convenience for larger negative sizes and sometimes better/nicer experience. If it is just a hobby the choice of equipment does not have to be driven by efficiency and cost effectiveness.
@bmcdad: Why should my pictures compete with anything? I shoot for fun and pleasure, not for competition, and technical image quality is not the most important aspect of what makes a photo good and has never been.
"Film cannot compete with a capable digital sensor in a darkroom. That is not my personal analogy it's simply science."
Hehe... now you're clearly not talking about the quality and look of a well exposed photograph.
Not a video still, but a real photograph.
Thanks shoevarek, good point; I completely missed the ability to shoot large formats.
Stacey_K
"Riding a Harley Davidson is not a sacrifice on performance", Obviously you know nothing about motorcycles...
At least these films are not treated as a "service for rent"...
Adobe CC, I guess.
Ahh yes.
Meanwhile, unless you do your own processing...
Well, processed film is Yours forever.
Btw, no hdd problems with stored images.
Nothing lasts forever, but your choice of processing software doesn't affect the long-term viability of the files that come out of a digital camera (or the format to which you choose to archive).
Images stored on HDDs are far more compact than those stored on film, and have much more forgiving climate requirements. Each has its own advantages and disadvantages.
$250.000 is an extremely unrealistic amount of money to do this. Just moving a coating machine would probably cost far more than this. I do not believe it.
Tungsten Nordstein
I'll be very happy to use their Super 8 format film.
bart honhoff
Ferrania is always considered to be in quality behind the big four (or before Fuji became available outside Japan) the big three (Kodak, Agfa and Ilford)
That said, it is always an good thing to have competition.
For grainy shots a lesser quality film like Ferrania is great!
I still love the pictures I took with OrWo film in the seventies in low light.
So with ORWO you were in the same LowQuality-league like the Ferrania.
Different company but I'd love it if they did a revival of Kocachrome! Some of the last rolls I shot of Kodachrome were of the fall colors and they great. I actually like the wait during the picture taking and when you see the result. It lets you savor the moment a bit longer. Finally, by being less instantaneous you are more careful about how and what you shoot.
If you liked the saturated, vivid colours of Kodachrome, Ferrania will have the Solaris 100 film available for you. (Provided they succeed in continuing its production, that is.) With the added bonus of an insanely low price!
And you're so right: film photography obliges you to think more.
Solaris is nothing like Kodachrome, for that matter Ektar is more saturated than Solaris and it's nothing like Kodachrome.
Not even Velvia compares to contrast and saturation of Kodachrome.
I never shot Kodachrome, but I never did, some of my favourite photos ever made were shot Kodachrome.
Terry Breedlove
You said that not even Velvia compares in saturation and contrast to Kodachrome. I thought you were being crazy but then I read on and I see where you have never shot Kodachrome.
Check some photos of Alex Webb, Franco Fontana, Harry Gruyaert or many others. Kodachrome has much higher contrast ratio than any other film, especially when projected. I have not shot it, but I have seen slides.
BadScience
Having shot hundreds of rolls of both Velvia and Kodachrome, compared to TheChefs, who shot none; I can confirm that Velvia produced more - a LOT more - saturation and contrast than Kodachrome.
So much so, that many photographers, rated Velvia50 at nearer 25-35 ASA to get more "realistic" exposures.
Kodachrome produced much more subtle colours (especially greens).
Cameracist
Great news! There is never enough film makers, let's keep this wonderfull medium alive. I shoot digital daily for work, but I feel there is 'something' about film...
MACANK
The photography is not just about cost, it's much more than that ...
Actually I don't think it's ever not about cost. Yes there are other factors but cost is always there, which is why we all don't own every format and every camera released. I mean that's the best option if money were no object right? Buy every camera so we never have to make a choice, we use whatever we want. That's not possible for nearly everybody, so cost is a factor and for film, it's not a flattering one.
Damien Demolder
My own view is that Ferrania is an alternative to other film brands, and the film will offer a different look. Film is an alternative to shooting digitally, and again offers a different look. I feel differently when I shoot on film, which makes me shoot in a different way. And the things I learn when I shoot on film I can take into my digitally captured work, just as the things I've learnt shooting digitally inform the way I use film.
These are all alternatives, options and choices, and the more the merrier to my mind. We don't have to use any or either, and we can use one way or both. For me using both (although by no means in even measure) broadens my enjoyment.
Tal Shachar
film is an environmental disaster, go digital now!
Unfortunatley this is not a valid argument. Electronics devices are an environmental disaster too : silicon wafer manufacturing, rare earths, coltan war in Africa ( http://www.consoglobe.com/coltan-metal-sanglant-dans-telephones-cg ), and nearly zero recycling... with piles of digital junk growing endlessly in third-world countries...( http://future.arte.tv/fr/la-tragedie-electronique ). Sorry for the french links, I am french...
Moreover, you keep your films and prints during your entire life when you throw away and renew your digital devices too frequently, even those required to store your digital pictures...
hermanofarias
So not true. Do you have any idea how digital sensor are produced? There is the true disaster, specially the amount that is produced to make the price go down.
Sensors would have to be used for years to make up for it's initial impact, which mostly not the case. And in the end, it probably can't be recycled.
RichRMA
So what? Must everything be some greenie's idea of compatible with the Earth? Granola is an environmental disaster and bean sprouts are one of the biggest vectors of e-coli bacterial infections. Sorry to spoil your day.
The real environmental disaster is the socioeconomic group that has the time and money to be concerned about whether to shoot film SLRs or digital SLRs. :)
And you think that making digital cameras and chips is a clean industry? Do a bit of research before posting such nonsense
Lets stop doing anything and all move to an igloo
making a film camera also makes pollution. When you want to Photoshop a film picture you need to print it again and again till you get it right (waist lots of paper and chemicals), also do many clicks with the film camera and waste a whole roll of film to get 1 perfect picture.
To develop film (before printing pictures out of it) you need lots of chemicals.
1 digital camera and one hard drive and you do more then 100,000 clicks until camera fails.
Do you really think that 2,500 rolls of films and 1 ton of chemical and 1 ton of paper to process all this film and printing and a film camera is more pollution then 1 digital camera and 1 computer?
For me, and maybe some other commenters here, the point is not to continue an analog versus digital war, or to be "green" up to fanatism, but rather to point that some people do not seem to be knowledgeable about certain facts, the prerequisite to make wise choices when needed...
Richard Murdey
Sure, digital is not clean either, but there should be no argument that is it more environmentally sound than using color film development. Get a grip on reality people.
@Tal Shachar,
Do you really think that the "average" photographer of the film era shot 2,500 rolls of paper and used 1 ton of chemical and paper in his entire life ? You are not serious. I also know digital photographers that print many times the same picture until their process is calibrated, wasting paper and ink. Unless you are a pro photographer, you will certainly NEVER shoot 100,000 pictures with the same digital camera (if not with ALL your cameras) : the camera (or you) will die before for any other reason than the shutter death, or it will be replaced by a better one... So will be the disks, CDs, DVDs, or whatever support you recorded your pictures to. They will not last forever
for reliability reasons and uncompatibility with future hardware/software. So you will have to move your pictures from one support to another one more than once in your life.
Keep in mind my intent is not to defend films...
Umm, E-coli killing off people will actually be a good thing as far as earth is concerned. Less people using less resources and producing less pollution. In fact, if humans all died today the earth would be better off than it has been in hundreds of years. All hail the Bean Sprout !!!!!!!!
@Ontario Gone: You might just get your wish if things don't improve over in west Africa!
Here is what is required for film.
Chemicals must be mined, refined and shipped to manufacturer. Making film uses large facilities and energy. The same with the manufacturing of processing chemicals and processing equipment. Film must be packaged and stored.
It must be shipped to a retailer. The film is either picked up by me or shipped by the retailer to me.
When I shot 20 rolls of film and 6 packs of Polaroid in a day there was a lot of trash that had to be recycled or disposed of..
Film needs to be delivered to a lab. The lab uses space, equipment, chemicals, water, electricity and heat.
I need to pick up the film and then either scan it or deliver it to my client.
Trips cause pollution, inefficiency, and wear on the vehicle. Workers have to get to the jobs above. I have not bought a memory card or new pro camera body in several years. I do digital delivery of images. My Rollei 120 film cameras had electronics. I had computers before I owned digital cameras.
@AlanG. Seems to me we all exaggerate or take numbers from the ceiling to support our own agendas as none of us have any idea on the total energy/materials used to produce and deliver neither film nor digital cameras and accessories. I am amazed though at quantities of film used that you mentioned. It must have been full scale commercial operation. I went on 3 weeks vacation during which I used probably 12 rolls of 120 film. I have never found myself saving film, I shoot whenever I wanted. Casual photographer won't have enough opportunities or time to use that amount of film in a quarter of the year.
20 rolls of 120 film and six packs of Polaroid per day was by no means atypical of what a commercial photographer would shoot. At 8 6x9 cm frames per roll, that is only 160 exposures. I bracketed exposures and for a long time had to shoot everything on E6 as well as on b/w. I did architectural interiors and exteriors and would over shoot and hold back some film in case the lab messed up. Prior to that, I shot 4x5. Advertising photographers who shoot people would often shoot a lot more.
In any case there are a lot more steps that use energy and are wasteful when shooting film than most people think of. For instance the silver must be recovered from the lab's chemicals.
I also had to carry a lot of film that often ended up never being used. For instance I would bring faster type B transparency film but maybe would not use it and it would expire. I bought 300 rolls of one emulsion batch and had to test it.
bossnas
To all of the people that claim digital photography is so cheap, did your computer, software and hard-drives for backing up all come free with the camera? If they did, tell me where I too can get them. Thanks.
- My $80 1TB backup drives each holds over 50,000 photos, so less than 1c per image even when I keep two copies on separate drives, internal and external.
- I have a computer anyway for many other purposes, so photography at most requires $50-$100 worth of extra disk space, counted above.
- A great many photographers use free software, like the stuff that comes with every camera or the stuff bundled with many computers. Even those of who buy software pay far less for that than for films and processing: my photographic software expenses have been about $200 over the last few years, comparable to the film and processing costs of about a few hundred photos, but I have instead taken thousands in that time.
So the costs for most digital photographers are far, far less than with film.
My computer would be here no matter what. Your logic is as flawed as those who claim phone sales reflect tiny sensor love. People would buy phones even if they didn't have cameras, and I would buy computers even if I didn't have a camera. So no, the cost of my computer has nothing to do with the cost of photography.
That sounds great. 50,000 photos on a 1TB drive that will last a lifetime. Fantastic value. I'm sure my grandkids will have fun trawling through that lot 50 years from now when they're still using the same digital camera I use today. You're right, digital photography really is cheap so that must mean it's the best way to make images. Cheaper = better? Thanks for explaining it so well.
A niche film production encompassing various formats beyond 35mm still film has a successful kickstarter campaign, and some people are rushing to their defense about their choice of digital still cameras?
"I bet you cant do X,Y,andZ with film!"
"film is economically illogical! Its backwards progress!"
Its wonderful that people who are inclined to do so, has potential access to niche products that are otherwise impossible to acquire today. This doesn't mean a choice of a different medium(in this case, digital) was incorrect or illogical. Take comfort in that various formats and mediums can coexist, and it does not threaten the validity of your choice in any format, medium, lens mount, make and model etc.
I'm trying to understand the economics and business plan.
With only $250K they plan to rescue this equipment, modify it to run smaller batches, presumably move it somewhere, lease space, hire the technicians and chemists to make all of this work, fund the materials and chemicals they need and do the testing, packaging and marketing? Thisfilm will
To complete my thought. This film will then have to compete with Fuji's E6 film.
I have my doubts, too, whether the $250k will be enough to get everything going again, but my understanding is that they will reactivate the equipment on location, and that with the funding secured the buildings which are still needed won't be demolished after all.
The reason they only need to raise $250,000 is because they have support from the regional government of Liguria for most of the expense. I've been following this Ferrania revival since day one and I know said government is supporting the project heavily. It's just that they ran into an unexpectedly bad condition of some of the machinery, which now needs restoring.
Regardless who is following this since day one, I hope it fails. IMO film is a step back in technology, it's like people fighting advancement and saying "this is good enough". That is not how we push forward with technology. I hope this endeavor fails quickly and people realize digital is the better medium, adding to the digital cashflow.
Felix E Klee
Will the local supporters (read: tax payers) also receive gifts and see their names mentioned on the Founder's Wall?
@Ontario Gone
You're not the sharpest pencil in the box, aren't ya?
I saw used original 8mp digital Rebel DSLRs selling for $50 with chargers and batteries the other day. You can buy used 4-7mp point and shoots for $20 or less. Film is his-to-ry unless you have a specific need for the particular look it provides.
tinternaut
OTOH, if you want to shoot medium format, and don't have the spare cash (or desire for a second mortgage) to go digital, then your only option is film.
Yes, MF and larger is the obvious prime territory for film. But what does this former maker of cheap store-brand films offer that Fujifilm, the remnants of Kodak, and Ilford do not?
There are no options for 8mm and 16mm. For stills it's true for now. Fuji is the only brand that still produces it's positive films. So it's good to have options and competition.
Also, there is so many film users out there. And they they use all kinds of brands, and emulsions. It's actually a big plus of film. You only need one camera, for so many different outcomes.
Medium format film is a niche within a niche. I doubt it's large enough to keep manufacturers happy. These second-rate makers (Farania, The Impossible Project), by most accounts produce inferior products. Why go back to that? The only reason I can think of is to use them in crude Lomo-type cameras.
Isn't Kodak still making moving picture film in 8mm and 16mm format (having sold its _still_ film business) It is according to its website http://motion.kodak.com/motion/Products/Production/index.htm
unless that is out of date.
@tinternaut
"if you want to shoot medium format"
Been there done that. It was a huge fuss, and very expensive on a cost-per-shot basis. You have to scan your own negatives of course - good luck finding a commercial outfit that will do it for you - and unless you invest in a very expensive scanner the end result is only so-so.
Sony: 'Our company has a vision which is more important than profit alone'
Sony Kumamoto sensor factory earthquake: first public footage
Official statement: Nikon 'currently developing' new mirrorless cameras
Are the NLE wars beginning to heat up?
DPReview TV: Entry-level DSLR challenge (with Canon EOS SL3/250D)