We have many professional and high-quality labs in the area, some with international reputations and others known and respected throughout the US. I'm on good terms with many of the people who work in and run some of these labs. A few days ago I was talking with a woman at the lab that does some of my film processing. She was saying that, at least in her lab and a couple of others in the area with which she's most conversant, many photographers, both pros and advanced amateurs, are migrating back to film from digital.
It's also interesting to note that the number of labs specializing in conventional B&W has not diminished in the last few years, and some are doing even more business (in B&W) than before digital became such a strong force in the market place. What does this mean in the overall scheme of things? Probably not much, but, OTOH, it does at least show that, in this market, film is not dead, nor does it seem to be dying. Here's a quick figure from the kast issue of a local photo lab directory that I have - dated 2004: within an hour drive of my house there are 77 pro-quality labs, 27 of which handle custom B&W processing and a few of which specialize in custom B&W processing. In some areas there are more labs working with film than there are with digital. I'm not talking about the one hour mini labs - I'm mean full tilt pro labs that can handle the full gamut of a photographer's needs and requirements. Shel > [Original Message] > From: Steve Desjardins > We teach several courses at my college based on traditional film > photography. They are inevitably overfilled with long wait-lists. The > funny part is that the camera of choice is (still) the K-1000. (I have > let student borrow lenses and even gave my old Tak 135 2.5 to I student > I knew.) I think we are seeing digital becoming the main stream method > of choice and film becoming an artistic alternative. Since many > amateurs treat photography as an art from, film should continue to do > well.
