A big blow to film production at Kodak and Fuji

[Steve Smith]

What will you do when there will be only digital guitars around ?

All of my instruments need digits to play them properly.


Steve.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Kodak and Fuji will both reach a point where their film production becomes, for all practical purposes, unsustainable due to low volume. IDK when that will take place, but it will be related to cost, demand and number of trained workers. At that point, film from both companies will become uneconomical. I would think that it might take place in the next 10 years.

At that point, Kodak will have to decide on whether to use their existing small machines for production instead of trial coating. This may or may not work due to the amount of defects on the small prototyping machines.

In any event, there is a point at which all of the big companies cannot produce film. It requires high volume to yield good products. At that point we will be buying only B&W and probably Ilford will be at the top of the list. I hope that they can ramp up the production when this happens and if it happens.

So, there will come a point at which color film becomes a rare item and B&W will probably be our best and nearly only choice. Hand coating of film, plates and paper will become a viable option. Quality manufactured film and paper will not vanish but will become a luxury item or a boutique item. Hand coating may become popular again.

PE

So the current very high quality colour film products may be only hanging to viability by a thread?

Tom

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

So the current very high quality colour film products may be only hanging to viability by a thread?

Yes. Perception is reality, you know...

Ken

 

[CGW]

The scaffolding of this thread seems to be deteriorating, not that it was ever that robust.

There is the fact that this year wasn't exactly the greatest on record for the film industry: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703977004575393493956088352.html

Just curious if any posters to this thread know how many 3D film screenings are currently showing in their communities as a % of total screenings. How about the current count on digital projection and announced conversions?

Butts in seats--rather the lack of--seems to be the big issue. The inevitable shift to online access/distribution is likely to murder the theatre chains, regardless of how films are shown. PE's point seems moot in that version of the future.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Ken,

I should have explained I was asking a question about whether there was a tipping point in sales decline beyond which Kodak or Fuji might struggle to continue production. I'm fully aware that if we keep buying the product it should continue to be produced not withstanding any other factors.

Tom

 

[ntenny]

In any event, there is a point at which all of the big companies cannot produce film. It requires high volume to yield good products. At that point we will be buying only B&W and probably Ilford will be at the top of the list. I hope that they can ramp up the production when this happens and if it happens.

Is colour *that* hard to ramp up commercially, or do you think we'd see someone like Foma or Efke start to produce colour films (admittedly not to the QA standards of a Kodak or a Fuji, but probably better than most amateurs could do for themselves)?

-NT

 

[Photo Engineer]

Well then, there appears that two factors enter into this. The first is explained in the quote I posted by Mr. Perez of Kodak which verifies the existence of a problem with analog cine print film sales due to digital. The conversion to digital consists of 2 parts also, related to a desire for 3D compatibility and to a desire for "modern" technology. The second appears to be the low attendance in movie theaters which in itself may be divided into two parts, first the economy and second the poor films being produced.

Whatever the reason, there is a dip, a very large dip, and if this slide continues, layoffs and decreases in R&D will continue and will result in a much lower capacity and no new products. Then, at some point, there will be too few people to maintain the production system. At that point, the lights will go out and someone else will take over.

Now, who am I talking about? Well, the only ones with huge capacity and a partial dependence on cine films are Kodak and Fuji. These are the only ones that must coat a relatively huge quantity every time they turn the machines on. And, turning them on and off is not really that good anyhow.

PE

 

[Photo Engineer]

Is colour *that* hard to ramp up commercially, or do you think we'd see someone like Foma or Efke start to produce colour films (admittedly not to the QA standards of a Kodak or a Fuji, but probably better than most amateurs could do for themselves)?

-NT

All chemicals used in color systems are custom synthesized by Kodak or Fuji in their own labs. Some companies may contract out synthesis, such as Ferrania. Agfa made their own or bought some from IG Farben. They are expensive and hard to make. Coating them is not easy either as it takes equipment far more sophisticated than at least Efke has at present. Even Ilford tried and then exited the market years ago.

So color will not be a "cottage" industry if it ever vanishes.

I believe that a form of dye bleach or a 3 color system may exist in the future, but I really cannot say as these chemicals are also so hard to get.

PE

 

[CGW]

Sorry, PE, but why do you keep skirting the looming probability of online distribution models as the threat? 3D and digital projection are highly unlikely to reverse plummeting attendance, or are the exhibitors collectively dumber than we--or the stockholders--think?

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Even Ilford tried and then exited the market years ago.

- This is interesting as I had been under the impression that ILFORD colour film products were contracted out.

I believe that a form of dye bleach or a 3 color system may exist in the future, but I really cannot say as these chemicals are also so hard to get.

PE

- due to cost and availability?

Tom

 

[Photo Engineer]

Well, firstoff I assume an on line distribution model will prevail. Hollywood wants it so they get it!

Secondly, in the face of such declining attendance and declining quality, investors are giving theaters money to convert over to digital or theaters are investing themselves. In either case, someone is dumber than you seem to think. I would not be making an investment like this in this economy! But, it is being done.

BTW, you asked me for my source earlier, or my "proof". I hope you read the quote from Perez!

PE

 

[Photo Engineer]

- This is interesting as I had been under the impression that ILFORD colour film products were contracted out.



- due to cost and availability?

Tom

It may have been. They could coat it but may not have. But, they exited the market! That is the key issue. And, if they contracted it out today, who would be a reliable source in this economy?

As for couplers or dyes for future color, even I cannot get many of them due to government restrictions. Most chemical supplies are just not sold to individuals, only to established companies. Then too, I cannot afford chemicals that cost $100 / gram. I know what I need, but I just cannot buy it or cannot afford it. I would assume that to be true for any "cottage" industry that tries to set up.

PE

 

[MattKing]

I don't know that the poor quality of films can be blamed for falling attendance. As I understand it, robust attendance figures tend to depend heavily on large numbers of teen and near teen customers seeing movies over and over and ...

There are some movies that are both good movies, and movies that absolutely require the "big screen" experience to appreciate them properly. Most of the other good movies that I have seen in the last few years transfer well on to DVD, and look very good on my moderately large (40") home TV (with good surround sound).

That being said, there are a couple of theatres in this area that have spent money on enhancing the viewing experience (good projectors and screens, good sound, good sight lines and comfortable seats, along with better quality snacks and drinks) and paired that up with a variety of films, including some that are more interesting than standard fare, and seeing films there is a treat. They also seem to be doing well as well.

 

[Steve Smith]

That being said, there are a couple of theatres in this area that have spent money on enhancing the viewing experience

The cinema in my town re-opened a few years ago. I was pleased to see that it was exactly the same as I remembered it in the 1970s. I went to see a couple of films in their first weeks of opening: Some Like it Hot and A Night at The Opera.

Two films (amongst many) which could not be improved by surround sound, 3D, special effects or even colour!


Steve.

 

[nickrapak]

Something I just thought of...

Agfa-Gevaert still makes color negative film for surveillance purposes. This is what is being respooled by Rollei and sold as the "Digibase" films (there's that prefix again...). Anyway, since I don't think Agfa is that dependent on the motion industry or the still photographic industry (it's sold by them as surveillance film), might the last stand of color film be from a company thought dead long ago?

 

[Ektagraphic]

Not that I am a big fan of their products, but how much of Fuji's income is on the movie film in comparison to Kodak? How well would Fuji survive without their movie business?

 

[Sirius Glass]

Kodak and Fuji will both reach a point where their film production becomes, for all practical purposes, unsustainable due to low volume. IDK when that will take place, but it will be related to cost, demand and number of trained workers. At that point, film from both companies will become uneconomical. I would think that it might take place in the next 10 years.

At that point your book will be a best seller.

Steve

 

[fotch]

Without the movie industry, is there a price per roll for still film photographers, that would make it profitable to keep coating. For example, Fuji drops out, and only Kodak makes one film, Ektar. If it were priced at $12 per roll, would that be enough? Of course, maybe fewer would buy it but that is not part of my question.

How much per roll would be needed to make up for the loss of the movie industry?

 

[Ektagraphic]

I'm sure this has come up before but would it be a possibility for Kodak to shrink it's film devision down to something Ilford size? Is it not possible for them or would they not have enough interest to do that? Also....what about movies still being shot on film? Is use of camera films at the rate they are used now not nearly enough to keep Kodak going? That is what I would imagine but I'm not sure. Print film is the big seller and everything else is beneath?

 

[Photo Engineer]

I'm not hoping for a best seller book! I want all of the major companies to survive just from a matter of quality and diversity and for the sake of all of the workers and for our sake.

As for Fuji and Kodak here is a rough breakdown (my estimates from information I have at hand):

ECP, ECN, P&S Neg, Neg Color, Color Papers, Neg B&W, misc.... Kodak sales from highest to lowest.
Cine Print, Cine Neg, Pos Color, Neg Color, Color Papers, Neg B&W, misc... Fuji sales (estimate) from highest to lowest.

Kodak ECP production has been quoted to be 60% or more of their output. Fuji probably has about 40% of the market then based on that. Some additional details are in Bob Shanebrook's book. Fuji has a larger share of the E6 color market, but Kodak has a larger share of the C-41 color market.

PE

 

[Photo Engineer]

I'm sure this has come up before but would it be a possibility for Kodak to shrink it's film devision down to something Ilford size? Is it not possible for them or would they not have enough interest to do that? Also....what about movies still being shot on film? Is use of camera films at the rate they are used now not nearly enough to keep Kodak going? That is what I would imagine but I'm not sure. Print film is the big seller and everything else is beneath?

Cine Print Film (ECP) is the single biggest seller at Kodak and perhaps at Fuji. I have said this often enough!!!

Shrinking is possible to a point and below that point the production becomes unfeasible. It takes a certain number of people to run the equipment and given that the machine must make a certain minimum amount.

If sales are 1,000 rolls / year and production minimum is 35,000 rolls / run, you see the problem. This just happened with Kodachrome.

PE

 

[Ektagraphic]

So survival is not possible without ECP sales being very high?

 

[CGW]

"This just happened with Kodachrome."

What? Maybe it's time to close this thread and start yet another Kodachrome shrine.

 

[Sirius Glass]

"This just happened with Kodachrome."

What? Maybe it's time to close this thread and start yet another Kodachrome shrine.

No! Please, may God have mercy on our souls! :w00t:

 

[fotch]

Without the movie industry, is there a price per roll for still film photographers, that would make it profitable to keep coating. For example, Fuji drops out, and only Kodak makes one film, Ektar. If it were priced at $12 per roll, would that be enough? Of course, maybe fewer would buy it but that is not part of my question.

How much per roll would be needed to make up for the loss of the movie industry?

OK, the price per roll would be so high it cannot be considered.