A big blow to film production at Kodak and Fuji

[Ektagraphic]

A good decline? Explain how a decline can be good first before I post.

PE

I'm not trying to me a jerk PE, but Merrium Webster just told me that:

Good- d (1) : of a noticeably large size or quantity : considerable

That's where I was coming from.

 

[michaelbsc]

A good decline? Explain how a decline can be good first before I post.

PE

I'm not trying to me a jerk PE, but Merrium Webster just told me that:

Good- d (1) : of a noticeably large size or quantity : considerable

That's where I was coming from.

I think his question was tongue in cheek. Notice the smiley.

 

[Photo Engineer]

I'm not trying to me a jerk PE, but Merrium Webster just told me that:

Good- d (1) : of a noticeably large size or quantity : considerable

That's where I was coming from.

Well, no offense was intended. I was thinking in terms of the decline in analog sales as being bad for all of us. Sorry.

The decline in all photo products was catastrophic in about 2005 when Agfa and Ilford failed and Kodak exited B&W paper manufacturing. At that time the decline in analog product consumption was 35% in one quarter, and this was 4x the amount predicted by most industry models. Fuji was also taken aback by this sudden drop.

Since then, the decline has been steady for all products but Neg-Pos products declined slightly less than E6 products causing E6 to now be quite a bit lower on the scale. This year, there was a very sudden decline in ECP demand which brought down the house so to speak. Production of a major product went down catastrophically causing a big cutback in the production area.

I hope that gives you a feel for what is going on.

PE

 

[Photo Engineer]

Thanks for the clarification. It was an honest question---I didn't mean to sound like I presumed the answer was one way or another.



I'm not sure I understand this part. There isn't a huge warehouse full of E-6 that's been produced but not consumed, is there? Or are the slide products done in a large run that then goes out to market in a slow trickle (and what happens in between runs---is the machinery idled, or is it partly the same machinery that does C-41)?

-NT

See my most recent post above for more explanation.

I have to clarify some points for you all though as my comment was vague.

E6 has declined, but is still viable, as it can be produced and sold in a timely manner. Kodachrome by comparison could not be sold in a timely manner. A master roll might sit here in the freezer for a year, being cut on demand as customers placed orders. E6 OTOH, can be made and cut at once and sold, as sales are high enough. It is just that E6 is coated on a less regular schedule than C41 or cine products by comparison.

For example, on a good week, cine products may run for a full day for several days, C41 takes up a day or two, and E6 products may run every other week. On that same scale, Kodachrome ran once a year! The difference is that the E6 product then sells to customers right away.

So, my comment was quite misleading. Sorry. I hope that this clarifies things.

PE

 

[Photo Engineer]

I just turned 20 today, and since I was about 17 or 18 I have been a film photographer and seriously interested in the quantum physics and organic chemistry (technical understanding is just as important as the creative concept of an image!). I have studied very old texts from my university for the past year or so regarding photographic theory, coating and making emulsion, emulsion types and processes, as well as many other parts of photographic chemistry and sensitometry. If hand coating anything is what it takes for me to be able to shoot and print, then I will gladly become the 6th or 7th member of that group of 5 or 6. I may be young, but this is my passion, and I wont let a paradigm shift decide what makes me happy.

Happy Birthday!

Keep reading and if you have questions, e-mail me or send a PM. I will try to help out. Make posts in the emulsion making forum and we can mull over and discuss things there too.

Just keep working on analog and don't let any quantum uncertainty creep in!

Quantum entanglement would be better in this so we can all move ahead and keep analog alive.

PE

 

[B&Wpositive]

Was this Fuji's response to the decline?

I'm still trying to understand how Fuji's recent discontinuation of many pro color negative (C-41) films fits into this situation. It has to be related somehow, right?

 

[Photo Engineer]

Yes, this fits. Compare that with Kodak's discontinuing of some E6 products. They are mutually acknowledging dominance in sales of certain items. As I indicated in an earlier post, Fuji is ahead of Kodak in E6 product sales by a slight margin and Kodak is ahead of Fuji in C41 product sales. So, they are conceding the markets to each other in a small way by discontinuing the less profitable items.

PE

 

[dwross]

Exactly as I have been thinking to myself silently, which is why I've been latching on to every piece of info I can find about color separation, bromoil, dye transfer printing, and home-made coatings I can find.

Kind of a bummer that as soon as I get the kid out of college and have a few spare bucks for myself the hobby I treasured as a kid begins to fall apart.

So, if I have to make glass plates, then I'll make glass plates. If I have to hand coat paper, then I'll hand coat paper. If I have to boil plant stems or grind rocks to get my own color dyes, then I'll boil plant stems and grind rocks. But I've been waiting 25 years to get back into this, and no mere lack of commercial materials will stop me, regardless of what compromise must be made in the product.

I applaud your determination! You're going to have a blast. And, I think you'll have more company than you suspect. PE counts 5 people making emulsions on APUG. I can think of more than that, and I'm pretty sure the number is growing at an increasing rate -- along with the quality of the initial efforts. I'm particularly optimistic for the younger crowd. They seem to have shed the idea that we have to compete with modern technology (at least to get started!) Preconceived notions can be the real killer of creativity and invention. Good luck, Nikanon!

PE, the fact that practicing emulsionmakers are a small crowd right now shouldn't be seen as a deterrent to your excellent technical posts. Information landing and taking root in just one individual is as valid as a bestseller. And, again, and if the emails that I get are any indication, a lot of people are interested in emulsionmaking. They just need encouragement and information. They might not become cooks overnight. Sometimes things have to come together over time, but come together they do if there's fire in the belly.

d
www.thelightfarm.com

 

[Photo Engineer]

Denise;

Thanks for an excellent post.

You have seen what is out there, but I am going by the APUG member reaction so I don't dispute what you have said from your real experiences. As for E-mail, I seem to attract the cranks. About half of my email is great and comes from enthusiastic people, but the other half can be divided into those convinced that digital is the only way out, disputing my efforts (and yours sometimes), and the other part are outright cranks, some claiming that my images are fakes. Well, in the face of your excellent results, I point them to your web site! That should cure them!

Keep up the good work!

PE

 

[michaelbsc]

I applaud your determination! You're going to have a blast. And, I think you'll have more company than you suspect. PE counts 5 people making emulsions on APUG. I can think of more than that, and I'm pretty sure the number is growing at an increasing rate -- along with the quality of the initial efforts. I'm particularly optimistic for the younger crowd. They seem to have shed the idea that we have to compete with modern technology (at least to get started!) Preconceived notions can be the real killer of creativity and invention. Good luck, Nikanon!

Thanks for the encouragement. It'[s heartening to know that there are others. And the digital age makes sharing ten thousand times easier than our fore-bearers had it in the 19th century.

PE, the fact that practicing emulsionmakers are a small crowd right now shouldn't be seen as a deterrent to your excellent technical posts. Information landing and taking root in just one individual is as valid as a bestseller. And, again, and if the emails that I get are any indication, a lot of people are interested in emulsionmaking. They just need encouragement and information. They might not become cooks overnight. Sometimes things have to come together over time, but come together they do if there's fire in the belly.

This kind of what I would love to see as well PE. While my experience is mostly from manufacturing, much like Steve's comment earlier, I'm not the kind of guy who developed the process. I upscale and mechanize processes that research guys have developed. I do believe that I could build a working coating line if I won the lottery, but I don't know how to coat!

If we collaborate, so that the ones who know the chemistry share that, then those of us who are good at implementation can work developing the work flow.

I dare say that in time we could come up with a "cook-book" with scores of recipes that any determined hobbyist could replicate with effort. We would need both the ingredients and the methodology, plus explanations how to organize the kitchen.

 

[lxdude]

I find the discussion of emulsion making highly interesting. I never considered it something that anyone would be doing. I think it's cool that right nearby where I live there's a guy called wildbillbugman doing this interesting stuff. Even though I'm not into it at this time, who knows about the future. It's all part of the spectrum of interests represented here.

 

[lxdude]

I'm not trying to me a jerk PE, but Merrium Webster just told me that:

Good- d (1) : of a noticeably large size or quantity : considerable

That's where I was coming from.

I was going to tease you about it but PE beat me to it.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Well, for lab scale and for larger scale, you need a good method of coating that is inexpensive and reliable. Jim Browning's method is slow but reliable and usable. It is not inexpensive. It will make good film sheets up to 30x40 inches on film or paper. I have done it personally at Jim's under his tutelage.

For lab scale and larger, you need a good method to make emulsions and to do that you need a good mixer (not a good stirrer - unless you are working at very small scale) and you need reliable temperature control from about 40 - 80 degrees C. In addition, you need a lab full of chemicals suited to your destination emulsion and you need a refrigerator to keep your emulsions cold. You need a good washing method for the emulsion, including noodle wash, ISO wash and UF wash. These are all in posts here with pictures.

And, you need good support such as glass plates, subbed film, and a suitable paper. I have been using Strathmore papers, hot press at 100# or higher or baryta paper. The baryta is no longer available from the Formulary and IDK what the plans are for the future.

That summarizes things for starters. All of these are described in long threads here on APUG.

PE

 

[dwross]

If we collaborate, so that the ones who know the chemistry share that, then those of us who are good at implementation can work developing the work flow.

I dare say that in time we could come up with a "cook-book" with scores of recipes that any determined hobbyist could replicate with effort. We would need both the ingredients and the methodology, plus explanations how to organize the kitchen.

That is the mission statement of The Light Farm. We've been up and at it for two and a half years now. Here's some info on our contributors to date:

http://thelightfarm.com/Map/ContributingEditors/ContributorsPart1.htm.

Jim Browning has a link to his own juicy-with-information website, and Kevin Klein and Mark Osterman (of George Eastman House) have their own sections for their recipes. Bill Winkler (aka 'wildbillbugman') has written the definitive article on glass cleaning. If TLF were a book, it would be hundreds of pages by now.

The beauty of web publishing is that there is no limit to how many pages we can have, so if you make an emulsion, and would like to be part of a collaboration that is trying to 'rescue' handcrafted silver gelatin emulsions, I enthusiastically invite you to become a Light Farm contributor, either directly (I'll give you your own section!) or with a link to your own site.

One last, very important note: Antique artisan emulsions can be exceedingly simple affairs requiring the bare minimum of equipment and only a few chemicals. Remember, the first emulsions were made before electricity and George Eastman started Kodak with dry plates he made in his mother's kitchen

Cheers!

 

[Steve Smith]

While my experience is mostly from manufacturing, much like Steve's comment earlier, I'm not the kind of guy who developed the process. I upscale and mechanize processes that research guys have developed. I do believe that I could build a working coating line if I won the lottery, but I don't know how to coat!

If we collaborate, so that the ones who know the chemistry share that, then those of us who are good at implementation can work developing the work flow.

That's exactly what is needed as one person will probably not have the knowledge to do all of it. I'm certain that I could build a web (roll to roll) emulsion coating machine although I certainly could not afford to do so.

Whilst I also think I could probably get to the stage of making emulsion, I don't think I ever will. I probably don't have the patience for it.


Steve.

 

[Ektagraphic]

For example, on a good week, cine products may run for a full day for several days, C41 takes up a day or two, and E6 products may run every other week. On that same scale, Kodachrome ran once a year! The difference is that the E6 product then sells to customers right away.

Very interesting. I wouldn't have even thought that C-41 and E-6 would run this often but I guess there are quite a few people in the world.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Those are just my own guesstimates and not real figures! They are only to be used as very rough examples.

PE

 

[CGW]

Fewer trees, more forest:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/12/movies/12scott.html?ref=movies

 

[Steve Smith]

Fewer trees.

(end of English lesson!).



Steve.

 

[holmburgers]

Look, you guys talk a lot but have little real interest or there would be more people willing and able to make hand coatings and some would be interested in system engineering. I can count on one hand, people REALLY interested in this. Most others vanish when the going gets tough. The proof of this is that out of the entire membership of APUG only about 5 people are actually making coatings on their own!

My thoughts on this are, a revolution isn't created overnight! Give it time and it will grow. I've been into this darkroom stuff for about a year or so, and frankly I haven't built up enough experience/time/resources to start making emulsions. HOWEVER, it's all part of the master plan as I see it. Someday, when that's imperative, people will start doing it.

Despite the simple enjoyment I get from learning all this stuff, in the back of my head is always the idea that someday film will be gone and I and whoever else is on board must be responsible for doing it ourselves. I think I'm not the only one.

Rest assured, if your work isn't celebrated now, it will be in the future. Don't you know, NO ONE is appreciated during their life!

Seriously, a quiet revolution is brewing... I'm only 25 and there are many others around my age that have the same maniacal attraction to analog photography. Give us that information and we've got at least another 50 years to put it to use.

 

[CGW]

Fewer trees.

(end of English lesson!).





Steve.

Thanks so much. Too bad you missed the point, mate.

 

[Alan Johnson]

From tonights London Evening Standard newspaper:
"3D films lead the way as cinema ticket sales go through the roof"
"Cinema tcket sales have soared this year on the back of hit films in digital 3D.....Box office takings up eight percent on the same period last year......ticket prices higher for 3D to reflect higher cost of making them...London now..with almost half its cinemas having at least one [digital screen].

 

[winger]

An article on the upcoming Harry Potter movie only coming out in 2D at first has lots of comments saying that 3D is overused and not worth it. The article is on Yahoo and you can click on thumbs up or down on the comments. The anti-3D comments have lots of thumbs ups.

 

[AMBYSTOMA]

digital projectors not needed for 3D

if Photo Engineer had the good luck of visiting Photokina this year he would have seen tucked away in a far corner of the massive Fuji display a glass enclosed case exhibiting the range of Fuji color negative motion picture films and a new and patented lens which can be used on a 35mm film projector to create 3D. I hope in fact that this arrangement can substitute for the expensive purchase of a digital projector for 3D and if so it should allay his fears of a great reduction in the production of 35mm release prints.

 

[clayne]

3D is the Quadraphonic of 2010.

Total f'ing joke of a technology.

Want more consumers coming to your films? Increase the quality of your content. Gimmicks only go so far - and trust me, 3D is a *gimmick* and a half - thoroughly unneeded for the majority of cinema content.