Rocket Blower, I Love You

Seems that photography is a topic the moves me to write at the ‘geek. So let me get in a quick post about a simple little device that has blown me away, pun intended.

I’ve been shooting, developing and scanning my own black and white film for about two years now. And one of the biggest problems with the DIY method is dust on my negatives. I’ve tried all sorts of methods to keep it at bay. The one that worked the best was canned air, but it’s not particularly environmentally friendly.

Then I heard that a number of DIY photographers swear by Giotto’s Rocket Blower, which is a completely analog solution, if you will. Really, it’s just a big hand-operated bulb blower shaped like a rocket so you can easily set it down.

I’ve had this roll of film that I did a horrible job of developing and drying. I was in a rush and wasn’t careful and just botched it badly. When I first went to scan it the negative was so dirty and messed up that I got too frustrated only got about half-way through. Finally, today I decided to give the rest of the roll another shot wiping it down with an anti-static cloth and blowing off dust with the Rocket Blower.

Holy crap! This neg turned out as clean as anything I’ve ever scanned myself. I had to clone out only a few specs of dust in Photoshop. Pre-Rocket Blower I would have to spend several minutes hunting down specs and tiny hair-like dust particles.

It’s also great for cleaning keyboards or anything where you need to blow some dust out easily, but careful. In that way it’s better than canned air because you have much more control and are less likely to blow dust into something delicate when cleaning electronics. It’s nice to discover that sometimes the simple things work best.

Six Months with my Sanyo Xacti VPC-CG10 Pocket Camcorder

One of the biggest problems with most electronics product reviews is that the reviewer has a very limited amount of time to use and get to know a particular item. That’s why so many digital camera and camcorder reviews rest on technical specifications and relatively easy to measure qualities like resolution, image noise and sharpness. No doubt these are important aspects of any cam’s performance, but you can design a camera that has great tech specs but is also a pain to use.

That’s why I’m taking this opportunity to write about my Sanyo Xacti VPC-CG10 pocket camcorder, which I bought back in July. Although I had a positive opinion about the cam when I first wrote about it, I’d only had it for three weeks. Six months of regular use really makes the difference between an interesting toy and a useful tool. If a camcorder or other gadget proves to be too difficult, fiddly or simply un-user-friendly it’s likely to find a home at the bottom of a drawer or closet by the end of the year.

As one might guess from the very fact that I’m writing this update, I’m quite happy with this little camcorder after a half-year of use. Having a full 720p HD camcorder that fits into a small bag or large pocket is still really amazing. One of the features that moved me to choose the CG10 over one of the Flip or Kodak HD cams is its true 5x zoom lens. Though it’s hard to maintain a steady hand when zoomed all the way out, having the extra reach has really made the camera much more useful for me.

As a result, I think I’ve shot more video in my free time this year than I have in years. I’ve owned two miniDV camcorders over the last decade. While each got used, their relative bulk and reliance on tape meant that they still only were trotted out when I was absolutely planning on shooting video. By contrast, I’ve taken to carrying around the CG10 in my bag and shooting a little video whenever the moment strikes. Being able to easily import it to my computer as a file rather than capturing miniDV tape in real time means that I’ve been much more likely to actually edit and share my videos, too.

I’ve really come to like the CG10’s pistol-grip form-factor, finding it much easier to hold steady, especially with two hands, than the Flip-style camcorders. Yet, operating the zoom control is fiddly, making it nearly impossible to zoom smoothly. That’s one area where you can really notice the operational difference between an inexpensive pocket camcorder and a bigger, more sophisticated model.

Across the icy lake and lagoon from Paul Riismandel on Vimeo.

Like I mentioned, I do really like having a 5x zoom lens at my disposal, with a focal range equivalent of 38 to 190mm on a 35mm camera. The quality of the lens seems about par for an inexpensive point-and-shoot camera. That is, it’s plenty sharp in the center of the image, but gets soft on the edges. It also shows some barrel distortion at its widest setting, causing horizontal lines to bow down at the edges. With video I find this less of a problem than with still pictures. But these flaws really aren’t bad for such an inexpensive camcorder.

Another feature that drew me to the CG10 was the availability of manual focus, exposure, white balance and sensitivity/ISO. In practice I use the manual exposure, white balance and ISO quite a bit. Especially with video it’s nice to be able to set these at the start and then not worry about the video suddenly getting darker or lighter due to small ambient light changes. The manual controls themselves are buried in menus, but you can set up the camera’s little joystick control to shortcut to four different manual controls. I have mine set so that pushing left adjusts ISO, pushing right adjusts focus, pushing down adjusts exposure compensation and pushing up turns the flash on and off. While I like this ability to customize controls, the joystick itself is kind of tiny and easy to accidentally trigger. The camera mostly doesn’t let you change these settings while recording. On the one hand this doesn’t let you adjust settings as conditions change. But on the other you also can’t accidentally change exposure in the middle of a shot, either.

Much more so than a Flip or Kodak pocket cam, the Sanyo rewards an experienced shooter because of the relative flexibility of its manual controls. Even a lot of more expensive tape, hard drive and memory-card based camcorders from bigger brands don’t let you adjust exposure manually. It does take some time and fooling around to set up the camera the way you want it to function. But once it’s done, it’s done.

Prior to buying the CG10 I had been wary of hard drive and memory-card based camcorders, especially HD cams, because of the challenges presented by working with their highly compressed files. Therefore I was happy to find that the .mp4 files from the Xacti played in Quicktime without any processing. They also import right into iMovie ‘08 without a problem, letting you get right to editing immediately. The big drawback with iMovie ‘08 is that you can’t export a full 720p (1280×720) video. It only gives you a 960×540, which is kind of “near-HD.” I don’t have access to the most recent iMovie ‘09, so I don’t know if the situation improves with the newer version.

Still, iMovie ‘08 is one of the worst versions of iMovie, and so I find it useful only for short cuts-only projects. For more complex editing I use Final Cut Express (FCE). Unfortunately FCE doesn’t not like to let you start editing the CG10’s .mp4 files right away, forcing you to render once you do any editing at all, adding lots of waiting to any project.

Luckily I found a very simple workaround that lets me use the CG10’s footage in FCE much more quickly. Using the free video transcoding program MPEG Streamclip I’m able to convert the Xacti’s .mp4 files into Quicktime .mov files in the Apple Intermediate Codec (AIC) very quickly. On my two-year-old MacBook Pro the conversion runs at about 10x real-time, which is significantly faster than FCE’s rendering time. While the AIC files are bigger than the .mp4 files, the AIC codec is native to FCE, so there’s no long rendering waits.

Since I’m primarily a Mac guy, I haven’t tried the Xacti’s footage with Windows. I’m interested to hear from any readers who have Windows experience to share.

After six months of using this little camcorder I can say I’m quite satisfied. It’s one main deficit is that it doesn’t have a microphone input. At the same time I haven’t yet had a project where that presented the problem. The built-in stereo mics are actually quite impressive, and you can hear in this video I shot of Chicago’s Environmental Encroachment marching band:

Environmental Encroachment live on the Mediageek Radioshow from Paul Riismandel on Vimeo.

I’m not sure that the CG10 is the best camcorder for the newbie or someone who isn’t at all interested in manual controls. Out of the box the camcorder is set up to be pretty annoying, with a dumbed-down menu and lots of unnecessary beeping. But, then again, I think most digital cameras come that way. So, perhaps it’s less of an issue than I’ve supposed. I’m pretty sure it’s still the only under-$200 pocket camcorder with a real optical zoom lens, which is its other big selling point.

It’s completely unreasonable to expect a $200 pocket camcorder to perform like a $1000 model. Yet I’m very impressed with the CG10 overall. As an experienced videophile I’ve learned to work around its limitations, while appreciating the convenience of having a video camera with me much more often. And with such a low price-point, I’m more willing to carry it around to events and other places where I might hesitate to bring a more expensive camera.

I must admit I’m quite curious to see where these little pocket HD cams are going next.

mediageek called the cassette revival way before anyone

I’m not generally one for tooting my own horn, but here at the end of 2009 it looks like I was a good two years ahead of the curve when I predicted the cassette revival waayyyy back in February of 20022007. I must admit that my prediction was a bit tongue-in-cheek, not so much because I didn’t think it was possible or reasonable, but because my cynical side can’t help but be a little…er, cynical, about resurgences of technology recently considered passé or obsolete.

Earlier this year I noted the appearance of more cassette-based indie rock labels, mostly dealing in very limited-edition runs of EPs and albums. My own recent travels to record stores like Aquarius in San Francisco and Reckless in Chicago turned up small cassette sections in both store where just a couple of years ago there had been none.

But the real cherry on top was stumbling across recent posts all about cassettes at Stereophile magazine, the home of super high-end audiophiles, where CD players can cost $17,000 and speakers require a second mortgage. Stereophile’s Stephen Mejias was himself spurred to think on the subject of tapes by a recent article by Calum Marsh in PopMatters, “Reconsidering the Revival of Cassette Tape Culture.” Critical as Marsh may be about this ferric oxide return, his very tackling of the subject admits one simple fact: a cassette revival indeed has occurred.

And who was there first? Uh huh, that would be the mediageek.

Aside from the fact of my first arrival, however, I’m rather ambivalent on the whole debate on whether or not the cassette revival is just crass indie-marketing sheathed in manufactured street-cred. For those with still serviceable cassette decks I guess it’s kind of nice to be able to get some new tunes that you didn’t have record yourself. At the same time, the reason I have working cassette decks is because I still have music on cassette not duplicated in another medium, and I still find albums on cassette that are expensive or nearly impossible to find in another medium. I guess these special cassette-only releases qualify, in a way, though by design, not happenstance.

It’s not like cassette-only labels are anything new. Labels like ROIR were cassette-only back in the 1980s, and many cassette-only labels have survived in the interim due to economics and ease of one-off duplication and distribution, if for no other reason. The only reason we can call it a trend now is that bands that otherwise have seen relative indie success distributing their music on CDs are turning to cassette labels for limited editions. If it was still mostly the domain of bedroom noise and industrial bands, we probably wouldn’t be reading about this trend in as mainstream a pub as Stereophile.

Now that indie rock collectors and other hip elites can snarf up limited tunes on cassette I’m wondering if we’ll start seeing more plastic fantastic decks show up in Target, and if the used market will inflate. If you’d taken my advice two years ago then you’d probably be sitting pretty on a nice deck that sold for hundreds in the 80s but that would’ve cost you $15. You’ll be spending more on a super-exclusive new tape by a bunch of bearded guys from Portland.

Now I’ll sit back and see if this hot new trend makes it all the way through 2010 and outlives being a trend, like the vinyl resurgence has. Meanwhile, I’ll remind you that my hipster trend-spotting consultancy is still in business, but my rates are going up fast.

Making the HD Camcorder Leap with Sanyo’s Xacti VPC-CG10

Over the last three years I have not been shy about airing criticism of the newest wave of low-cost flash memory camcorders shooting alleged high-definition video. My critique has largely rested upon video quality being lower than established tape-based HDV camcorders and the difficulty of editing footage shot in the highly compressed AVCHD format.

The last time I posted on the topic was about a year ago when I took on Kodak’s entry into the field with the first HD camcorder priced under $200 the Zi6. I started to warm to the concept based upon the low price which then also makes higher quality videography more widely accessible. I never had a chance to get my hands on a Zi6 until very recently when I was in a store to check out a different model of inexpensive HD camcorder, which I’ll get to in a moment. The Zi6 takes on the Flip camcorder style form factor. That is, it’s shaped like a bar-style cellphone, with a lens on one side and a screen on the other. The controls are largely limited to record, stop and play with the intent to keep operation simple and easy.

Finally this year I began seriously to consider taking the plunge with one of these small HD camcorders. There were two motivations. First, I realized that I barely used my miniDV camcorder any more, bogged down by its relatively large size and the hassle of having to capture tapes in real-time. Second, I tried to make some videos using my digital camera. While the camera’s specs say it shoots video in a resolution equivalent to full standard definition DV (640×480) I found the resulting footage to be really lacking in quality. On top of that, the video files were recorded in a relatively inefficient and obsolete format.

Although the simplicity of the Flip-style camcorders hold some appeal for me, I’m really not sure I can be satisfied with their lack of manual adjustments, zoom and other basic camcorder settings. I recognize how the average user probably doesn’t care and doesn’t miss them, and that the Flip brand camcorders have succeeded because they deliver good video with absolute operational simplicity. But I’m a bit more of a power user than that.

Then I got wind of Sanyo’s newest and least expensive camcorder in their Xacti line, the VPC-CG10. I was enticed by both the price, under $200, and the fact that it has a real optical 5x zoom. Sanyo advertises the model as a “Dual Camera” because it is both a 10 megapixel still camera in addition to shooting 720p HD video. I learned that the Radio Shack near work had the Xacti and a few other low-cost HD cams in stock and stopped in on my way home to check them out.
Read more »

LoC Digitizing and Preserving the Nation’s Motion Picture Legacy

Who knew the Library of Congress has a robotic system for the automated digitization of VHS and 3/4″ Umatic videocassettes? I sure didn’t, but I’m glad I took a last-minute opportunity yesterday to learn about the LoC’s film and video digitization and preservation facilities and efforts as part of an event on the Northwestern campus (where I work) called Screen Cultures: A Symposium on Moving Image Collections and Historiography.

I was only able to attend one panel featuring NYU historian Dan Streible, organizer of the Orphan Film Symposium, and the LoC’s head of the Moving Image Section of the Motion Picture, Broadcasting, and Recorded Sound Division, Mike Mashon. Streible discussed how preserved and digitized film materials helped him research his book Fight Pictures: A History of Boxing and Early Cinema. He emphasized how having access to higher-quality and resolution copies reveals details that help construct a more accurate history. Streible also noted that the existence of multiple copies in different formats tells stories about the intended purpose and audience for a film. For instance a 16mm copy of what was originally 35mm film may indicate that it was distributed for small-venue or even home screenings.

I was reminded about the existence of paper prints of early motion pictures that were made prior to 1912 when copyright law didn’t cover movies. In effect, creating these prints was a way for early studios to hack the copyright system, since only works that could be fixed on paper could be copyrighted. Thus, studios submitted these huge rolls of paper contact prints of their films to the Library of Congress so they would enjoy copyright protection.

In his presentation Mike Mashon showed off the digitizing and preservation resources housed at the new Packard Campus of the National Audio-Visual Conservation Center in Culpepper, VA. There they have a specialized Kinetta Scanner (PDF: “Preserving Early Motion Picture History with the Kinetta Archival Scanner“) that digitizes the paper prints at a rate of 4 frames per second. Before this device was available, preservation and duplication had to be done by hand, photographing the prints frame-by-frame. Amazingly, the digitized paper prints can then be output back to optical film.

The LoC is digitizing all of their video and film assets using a lossless version of the Motion JPEG2000 codec. Unlike common video codecs like DV, AVCHD, H.264 and DVCProHD, the one the LoC is using throws away no image data, with only a moderate amount of lossless compression in order to shrink the data size. This means the LoC is retaining as much video quality as their digitizing equipment can capture, but it also means they’re storing a massive quantity of data. According to Mashon their data center is able to archive 8 petabytes on tape, with a copy on spinning discs for regular access.

In addition to the full quality MJPEG2000 files, the LoC is creating so-called “access” files for use by the public in MPEG2 (the same codec in DVDs). They’re moving to creating MPEG-4 files, which are more bandwidth efficient.

It was reassuring to learn that despite all this digitization the LoC plans on retaining and preserving original films, even ones on volatile nitrate stock, as long as they remain usable. However, when asked about retaining videotapes, Mashon acknowledged that space will become an issue and holding onto magnetic tape will be a lesser priority. One very practical reason for this is that videotape degrades more quickly than film or paper, often becoming unplayable in as little as twenty years.

The LoC makes digitized materials available for viewing in its reading room on Capitol Hill. I learned that members of the public can request materials to be digitized for viewing. If the material is in the public domain or licensed for distribution you can even take a copy home, provided you bring media suitable for copying it.

I can only imagine the cost of this enormous preservation effort, but I’m very glad that such investment is being made in retaining these valuable documents of our historical and cultural legacy.

Obsoletion Watch: Portable TVs

Analog full-power TV got a bit of a stay of execution this month, with Congress voting to delay the digital TV transition until June 12. The passage of the stimulus bill should loosen up some more money to fund DTV converter boxes to help more households avoid the loss of TV service. However, Bohus of RetroThing points out that there’s a class of sets that probably still will be left behind: portable TVs.

As Bohus points out in the video below, converter boxes are often much larger than the portable TVs themselves, and aren’t battery powered. Those are just a couple of reasons why portable TV watchers will be left will little more than home shopping networks and evangelical Christian low-power TV stations come June 12. Watch Bohus give a fun overview of the soon-to-be-obsolete sets:

On Tonight’s Radio Show: The Value of Retro & Vintage Technology

On tonight’s radioshow my guest with be Bohus Blahut, one of the bloggers behind the popular Retro Thing blog which tracks vintage gadgets and technology. It’s a site I’ve been reading for a couple of years not just because I have my own love for vintage tech, but because I think there’s value in holding on to, preserving and finding continual usefulness in the tools and gadgets which the mainstream consumer products industry would have us believe need to be tossed out and replaced.

Bohus lives in Chicago, so he’ll be live in the studio which gives us an opportunity to take some calls in the second half of the show. If you’re in the Chicago area, listen live at 9 PM CST on WNUR 89.3 FM, or tune in online (live stream). The studio line is 847-866-WNUR (9687). If you miss the live airing, catch it online at the radioshow website, or any of the show’s affiliate stations like WRFA, Jamestown, NY and WTND, Macomb, IL.

I Think I Must Admit that Laserdisc Is Dead

I have the sinking feeling that I might be forced to define my terms….

My pal Aj alerted me to this boingboing post about the news that Pioneer is ending production of laserdisc players. The funny thing is, I honestly didn’t think Pioneer was still making laserdisc players.

That’s not a joke. Although I’ve been a fan of the format, and new players are still available, I was under the impression that whatever you can buy are just backstock from the early 2000s.

I’ve had a laserdisc player since 1993, and currently have a collection of around 100 discs. Similarly to my vinyl collection, I cleaned up buying used discs around ‘97-’98 when DVD hit the market and the early adopter videophiles dumped their LD collections for the next big thing. In that crucial transition period there was quite a bit of debate amongst hardcore videophiles and home theater enthusiasts–a tiny population compared to today–about the comparative benefits and deficits of DVDs versus laserdisc.

Perhaps the most infamous salvo in that particular battle came from indie filmmaker Kevin Smith in the original commentary track to the Criterion laserdisc release of his second film, “Chasing Amy.” (Yes, commentary tracks first debuted on laserdiscs taking advantage of their discrete analog and digital audio tracks, and Criterion got it’s start on laserdisc.) Smith begins his commentary–recorded around 1997–with, “Fuck DVD.” Words I’m sure he had to live down in just a few year.

Of course we now know that DVD soundly trounced laserdisc, which never grew past being a small cult format to begin with. While a lot of the late 90s debate sounded a lot like the analog vs. digital debate of the LP vs. CD argument, I think it’s safe to say that the relative charms of analog video in the form of laserdisc were not as alluring nor palpable as with vinyl records. I could go into a long dissertation on how that relates to the differences between audio and video recording (which is different than analog motion picture film), but I’ll spare you.

Unlike VHS, cassettes, LPs and photographic film, I think laserdisc is really dead. While the machines that record and play those other formats may be less widely available than in their heyday, you can still buy blank media and new player/recorders. With laserdisc it’s been a good eight years or so since a new laserdisc release has been commercially available. Furthermore, it was never a consumer-recordable format, so no recording your own discs. Without a commercially available program on laserdisc, the player isn’t much use.

Now, there were thousand of movies and other programs released on laserdisc during the format’s 20+ year run, and there are still some films on laserdisc that have yet to see the light on DVD (though the number is dwindling). So if you have a decent laserdisc collection and a player, the format’s not dead to you.

But in the broader view, laserdisc must be declared a dead format . We won’t be seeing any new laserdisc releases, and I’d be surprised if there were any pressing plants still left in operation. Now there will be no more new players, when even enthusiasts like me thought they weren’t being made anyway.
Read more »

mediatwit

I realize not everyone reads the blog from the webpage itself — some read by RSS readers. So you might have missed my Twitter feed over on the right sidebar. I started using the micro-blogging Twitter app about eight months ago, and integrated it into the site some time in the fall. I like Twitter because it’s an easy way to publish quick thoughts or links–tweets are limited to 140 characters–without having to go through the full WordPress blog interface. On top of that, there’s a critical mass of users making it good way to network and pick up some good info.

But this post isn’t just about my Twitter usage (which would make for a lame post), but rather two interesting mediageek-like uses I’ve seen.

Ragnar is the producer of the Pirates’ Week podcast, covering pirate radio–primarily shortwave–for more than three years (listen to an interview with Ragnar on the radioshow). An avid shortwave listener, Ragnar has now been posting his reception reports of pirate stations to his Twitter feed. This is a perfect use of Twitter because Ragnar posts while the station is broadcasting, along with its frequency. Pirate shortwave stations are all hit-and-run affairs. They don’t broadcast 24/7, but rather for a half-hour or hour at a time, especially when shortwave propagation conditions are good (they change with the seasons, time of day and atmospheric conditions). So listening to pirate shortwave stations is always a bit of hunt. While the chase is part of the fun, it’s still nice to have someone give you hand by letting you know when he’s found a station.

To some extent Twitter is even more up-to-the-minute than blogs, since the tweets are short and easy to post quickly, making it an ideal platform to broadcast breaking info. You can also configure Twitter to text message your phone with tweets–you can choose whose tweets do that. If you’re a hardcore pirate listener, then this might be a way to stay on top of things without being on the computer.

Boulder Free Radio is an unlicensed FM radio station that recently returned to the air in that Colorado city with a new crew, resurrecting the name and spirit of a former station that called it quits in 2005. The KBFR crew is also using Twitter to post programming info, events, and other stuff of interest to listeners.

My understanding is that the station is broadcasting nightly, with longer broadcasts on the weekends. To the best of my knowledge the station doesn’t currently maintain a website. So using a Twitter feed is a good way to keep listeners informed of when broadcasts and other events may be happening. Of course, publicity is always a risk for a pirate station, since you also possibly publicize to the FCC. But the more instantaneous nature of Twitter means that you don’t have to give much advance notice. This is an advantage when dealing with the FCC, which isn’t necessarily well suited to running out to bust pirate broadcasters like cops answering a 911 call.

Announcing broadcasts via Twitter would be especially useful for hit-and-run stations that attempt to minimize detection by the authorities by maintaining a less predictable schedule.

Twitter is also designed for two-way communication. Anyone with a free Twitter account can send public or private messages to another Twitter user as easily as posting a tweet. This could be a good way to take requests, reception reports and listener feedback without using the phone or email.

If any readers know of some interesting or innovative use of Twitter by other indy media makers — pirate or otherwise — I’d be curious to hear about them.

Film’s not dead, either

Oh, no. I’m not ready to give up on the anti-planned-obsolescence rant just yet…

The world of photography has been much less chaotic than the worlds of audio and video over the last century. There’s really only been one significant technological disruption–from film to digital. Yes, there have been multiple formats of film over the century, but they mostly boil down to differences in size. But it is nevertheless the case that you can still buy new film for the vast majority of film cameras made since 1909.

Digital, of course, was supposed to be the death knell of film, but things didn’t quite work out that way. Instead, digital photography sparked new public interested in photography as an art and hobby, which ended up leading a lot of folks back to film. Like the vinyl LP vs. CD debate, there are plenty of passionate photographers ready to argue that one or the other is inherently superior. As one of those people who never took a strong interest in photography until getting my first digital camera, my perspective is that is has less to do with better than different–qualitatively different.

Still, the film business isn’t at all like it was a decade ago, when digital cameras were $1000+ investments yielding the kind of resolution you now get from a $10 keychain digicam from the drugstore. But there still is a film business.

The Rochester, NY Democrat and Chronicle recently published a story about a local business you might have heard of, that’s still hanging on to the film business: Kodak. The article quotes Kodak’s marketing manager for professional film, Scott R. DiSabato:

“We call it the ‘and’ world,” DiSabato said. “We know the professional use will be significant enough the next couple years, we’ll get the investment (into those film lines) back.”

In fact, Kodak introduced a new color film formulation this past year, a time when film still makes up a third of the company’s gross revenue.

Again, I’m not arguing against technological innovation. I have nothing against digital cameras, and I own several. I also own a pile of film cameras (that I picked up for next to nothing). I’m just pointing out again that obsolescence is a business process and a social process. That is, there’s nothing inherent in film that should make it obsolete, so much as that the combination of the need to find new products to sell, the fact that some of these new products actually do offer new and significant benefits and a social shift to embrace that new technology.

The social element is important–Kodak is still making and selling film because people are buying it and using it. They’re finding value in it, whether it’s due to nostalgia, the belief that it is superior to digital, an affinity for film’s aesthetics, or simply because using disposable film cameras when you need them makes more sense than dumping several hundred bucks into a digital cam.

If people choose not to accept the supposed inevitability of obsolescence in significant numbers, then we can interfere with that process. Moreso than with VHS videotape, film has a certain unavoidable market dynamic — someone has to manufacture the film stock and developing chemicals if the medium is to stay alive. I’m certain that the medium can survive even with smaller “boutique” manufacturing, but film’s not something the vast majority of people are going to be able to make at home. So a certain critical mass of buyers and users has to be maintained to keep film viable as a non-obsolete, if niche, technology.

Videotape, on the other hand, is reuseable. Certainly if all manufacture were to stop today eventually the tapes in use now would eventually wear out. But the true death of the medium would come more slowly than if film were to be no longer manufactured.

As (electronic and chemical) media makers we are still dependent on a consumer economy, but that doesn’t mean we are utterly subject to its whims, nor without feedback mechanism. We do not have to buy up every new so-called innovation because it’s supposed to be better, nor do we have to abandon a technique, method, medium or tool just because the industry, press or blogosphere now declares it dead. In fact, fantastic personal innovation, ingenuity and creativity can be sparked in the continued embrace, or reembrace of a reportedly obsolete technology. Whether it’s audiocassette, VHS, film, vinyl LP, laserdisc, minidsc, 8-track or daguerreotype, it’s not dead for you until you don’t want to use it any longer.

Thanks to Ken Rockwell, the most entertaining photography writer on the internet, for pointing me to the Kodak article. For more about practical, technological and qualitative strengths of film, read Ken’s essay, “Why We Love Film.”