A Hard Economic Lesson

[wiltw]

I'm less sure that the 21st Century market economics are as simple as they are sometimes described, although I tend to broadly agree that product will cease to be made if too few people buy it.

Only slightly tangentially, where is all the TSF and Xray film being coated? If in the same plants as the mainstream photographic films, then to some minor extent that may also support photo film (in the sense that it will contribute to volume production that makes the plants viable; the flaw in this argument is rather obvious, of course, but there might be a grain of truth)

Since dental x-rays are now largely replaced by digital, and since diagnostic medical imaging is now mostly digital, asking about where X-ray film is coated is largely a moot question.

I lament the loss of many of the emulsions that I loved. I really lament the loss of Cibachrome process prints. the reasons to own a high end 4x5 color enlarger and processor are so greatly diminished, that I don't even have much inclination for making a darkroom area in my home.

 

[pdeeh]

I do apologise for so lacking insight as to have raised the issue

 

[MDR]

I think much of this has to do with the "Walmartization" of society these days. Instead of buying something of quality that is more expensive initially, most people would rather buy several cheap quality knockoffs because it makes them feel like they are saving money. It's difficult to place blame but I believe part of it has to do with the influx of products in our market. Many manufacturers have moved overseas and quality has suffered in some cases. Now do not get me wrong, I believe there are some VERY high quality products that come from places like China.

Another example I can throw into the mix is with aftermarket car products. In the Japanese car scene, many people go with "knockoff" products such as wheels instead of supporting the big names like Work, RAYS Engineering, Weddsport, Enkei, etc. Many claim they are doing it because they are on a budget, but imo they are ruining the scene because the big name companies actually carry out R&D on their products and are ISO9000/9001 certified. In many cases people have had knockoff wheels crack and come apart but continue buying new sets because they are "cheap."

A companies size is rarely related to innovation quite the contrary.
Large companies rarely innovate these days they buy small innovative companies and destroy all innovation. To say one should support the big companies because they innovate far from reality and Iso 9000/9001 certification means nothing I believe Foma one of the cheapies has one as well. Innovative companies can't survive on their own best example Cirrus in the aviation world they sell more than anyone else but even they had not the money to go further and were bought (investors) by the chinese. Diamond Aircraft same thing money comes from the Emirates. Teledyne Continental has been promising Jet-A/Diesel Pistons for quite some time, never happened now they bought Thielert an innovative company that had a cash flow problem innovation from Continental since the 1980's zero. Innovation requires huge amount of money something truly innovative companies rarely have. Kodak had to buy Wratten and Wainwright to be back in the innovation business. Google, Microsoft and Apple steal and buy small innovative companies in order to appear innovative.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Everyone who bemoans the loss of a favorite product should read John Galsworthy's short story Quality. I read it in high school and it made a lasting impression on me. Whenever you use a cheap substitute you are helping to kill off the quality product. There are many examples; x-ray film instead of LF film, cheap surveillance film instead of regular film, etc. In today's market you may not only be killing off the quality product but all products of that particular type.

When I can't afford Tri-X in 8x10, I don't take pictures with that camera. In that case, I am not supporting Kodak, but I am not undercutting them either.
And it's pretty rare that I can't afford that film, when you look at it in the context of, say, one sheet = one visit to Starbucks (where I never ever go) saying I can't afford film is kind of ludicrous. It's like managing time, it ain't how much you got, but how you use it.

And thank you for reminding me of this story!

 

[Tom1956]

Truth is I'm just not that "artistic" of a photographer. I'm not sure any picture I take is wort $5-10 on a sheet of film. X-Ray film is 30 cents a sheet, and my pictures probably are not even worthy of that.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Truth is I'm just not that "artistic" of a photographer. I'm not sure any picture I take is wort $5-10 on a sheet of film. X-Ray film is 30 cents a sheet, and my pictures probably are not even worthy of that.

I don't consider my pictures "art". I don't even consider myself a "photographer"; although some others seem to have differing opinions.
What I do strive for is craftmanship. In the big picture, when I look at the pleasure and sense of accomplishment I derive from it the amount of money I spend per annum is utterly insignificant. I'll point out that I use 35mm, 6x6/6x7cm, 4x5 and 8x10 formats - frequency in that order; B&W, E-6, and C-41 in 35 and 6x6/6x7, B&W in the larger sizes - T-Max 100 in 4x5, Tri-X in 8x10. It's all a matter of prioritising what I spend on.

When someone tells me "I can't afford ...." I suggest that they keep a log of every dollar and cent they spend over one month, then look at the log, multiply by twelve, and actually see where their money goes - everyone - without exception - who does this is shocked at the amount of cash that dribbles away.

 

[Roger Cole]

No, not that rare at all.

Yeah, I don't think it's rare. I buy both 4x5 TMY-2 and Arista re-branded Foma 4x5. I often shoot at least one sheet of each of the same subject. The Arista is cheap enough I can afford to shoot it in addition to the Kodak.

 

[zsas]

I have to do things like X-ray film. I never recovered from the 2008 crash. Still struggle desperately to keep my head above water. I agree totally, but gotta do something.

Keep yer head up Tom, you've found a way to continue your art through all the unfortunate circumstances only you could understand....don't let the backhandedness of this thread get ya down! You know what you need to do, keep yourself happy, healthy and continuing to make/share (art, ideas, whatever you've to offer)....

If X-ray is what you can afford, you've my admiration for buying a box or two an keep going for the love of art

 

[Tom1956]

Thanks and regards. I don't take umbrage. Not with these guys. Besides they're basically right, truth be known. Someday I'll get out of this trap.

 

[zsas]

Tom - Don't sweat it whatever you decide I could afford nice-fresh-n-perfect-Tri-X-bulk-rolls @$70 each, but I prefer to buy $30-a-bulk-roll-Ultrafine-film....though I also agree in principal w ya re quality-ruling-the-roost; it's just that there little room for situations like you mentioned above or the fact that I'm teaching my kids photography and figure bulk rolls at $30-a-piece is much better to use than the $70 Tri-X; and save the extra $40 for their college fund

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

We all do what we can to support the industry and continue to do what we love. I have bought inexpensive film, often expired stuff, just so I could continue shooting.

But...

Gerald's original post was not meant to speak on an individual level. It was meant to point out that in a market as a whole, the total buying power is what dictates what gets produced and not. It comes back to supply and demand, really. We as individuals participate as a microscopic contributor to the market, of course, but it's how we collectively spend our money that matters.

At what price point is there enough profit for the company to continue producing, and at what price point can the market not afford to purchase the product anymore? Kodak may have decided that they want to make huge profit margin with each box of film, and that's fine, as long as they realize the risk of pricing themselves out of the market by reducing demand. Follow the money.

It's completely logical, and not meant to showcase the purchasing habits of any one individual.

It can be argued that Kodak made these pricing decisions in order to make as much money as they could to develop their alternative businesses. (OK, they did). Film and photofinishing products were a cash cow for the rest of the operations, and that may have skewed how they reasoned with respect to supply and demand.

 

[benjiboy]

How many of you buy Japanese cameras and lenses ?, because I'm old enough to remember a time when all the same sort of thing people are now saying about Chinese manufactured goods were been said about Japanese products when in fact they could make them better,cheaper, more reliable, and they swept the World with them. The great irony is the biggest communist country in the World is out- capitalisting the capitalists, patriotism is one thing but you can't ignore the facts.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

How many of you buy Japanese cameras and lenses ?, because I'm old enough to remember a time when all the same sort of thing people are now saying about Chinese manufactured goods were been said about Japanese products when in fact they could make them better,cheaper, more reliable, and they swept the World with them. The great irony is the biggest communist country in the World is out- capitalisting the capitalists, patriotism is one thing but you can't ignore the facts.

So true. And it should be pointed out that the Chinese can and do make world-class products, when they want to. It comes down to what the buyer wants, specify crap and that's what they'll deliver.

 

[zsas]

Quality as a discipline began in Asia (Japan) post WWII (ie Juran/Demming)

 

[ntenny]

So true. And it should be pointed out that the Chinese can and do make world-class products, when they want to. It comes down to what the buyer wants, specify crap and that's what they'll deliver.

Yeah, I don't remember anyone here having these "made in China" fits about Shen Hao, for instance. I remember the 1970s and I think the analogy to Japan is apt.

They haven't been Communist, in any real economic sense, for some time, even though that's still the brand name on the Party.

-NT

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Quality as a discipline began in Asia (Japan) post WWII (ie Juran/Demming)

Actually the Japanese have a very long tradition of craftsmanship, their carpentry was done to a mind-bogglingly high standard centuries ago.
But you're correct in the context of "western flavored" goods, and don't forget they were making cameras and lenses in the 20s and 30s.

 

[benjiboy]

So true. And it should be pointed out that the Chinese can and do make world-class products, when they want to. It comes down to what the buyer wants, specify crap and that's what they'll deliver.

As the Japanese did in the past the Chinese are only getting their foot in the door at the moment in the cheap end of the market, but they aren't going to be satisfied with that for long they will soon be after the quality and luxury end of the market.

 

[Peter de Groot]

Although I understand what Gerald is saying I do not agree completely. I have bought 18x24 cm x-ray film because I cannot afford to buy Kodak 8x10. I do buy Foma which is also a manufacturer of x-ray film. To my knowledge they are not owned by Kodak or Fuji. People buying x-ray film of those are actually helping to support the photographic film division of Foma. As far as i understand photographic film is not the core business of Foma. 35 mm film I buy mainly Kodak t-max. I like that film and I buy it. Paper I buy from Ilford and Foma. I like both. i believe that by supporting smaller factories which don't have the standards as Kodak, Fuji or Ilford you give them a change to improve their products. Smaller companies can cope better with smaller production runs than the bigger companies. So I believe yes quality products may disappear buy buying cheaper products. But bigger cashflow to the smaller companies will give them opportunities to improve the quality of their products. And I don't believe for a second that us as a group buying cheaper stuff is a really big part of losing quality products. I think it is one off the many reasons big companies decide to cancel a product line.

 

[Gerald C Koch]

People buying x-ray film of those are actually helping to support the photographic film division of Foma.

I am not familiar with Foma's corporate structure. But I am familiar with the structures of other large companies. For other companies x-ray film is manufactured by a separate division or company. In these cases buying x-ray film does nothing to profit the division making ordinary photographic film. Large companies do not usually comingle the profits of their separate entities. So believing that buying x-ray film somehow benefits the production and sale of regular film is a bit naive.

 

[blansky]

I think the global economy and the Wal-Marting of everything brought about the demise of the care about quality.

That along with corporatization, mass marketing, the throw away economy and the hype of the need to have every toy on the market, made people care about quantity over quality.

Almost nobody believes ANYTHING should last more than 5 years any more. OR even care if it does because they have such a short attention span they become bored with it.

I think it's a pervasive mindset that has permeated every part of modern life.

 

[rdg]

A few simple questions then

Do you buy all of your film, camera equipment, and assorted other things from local suppliers or do you look for cheaper alternatives, such as the large mail order stores? Do you have your film processed locally and prints made locally?

By looking for better deals from mail stores and not supporting your local photography distributor you may be buying the high quality products from manufacturers but you are gutting the supply chain and denying local jobs, jobs for people that may be able to support your photography, or to at least support the local economy.

Developing your own film means that there is less film to be developed locally and so those places will shut down. It does not matter that you enjoy developing your own film or that you feel that you have a better process. And because the local photography labs are not printing your photographs they are also closing down, regardless of the pleasure that you experience processing and printing your own photographs.

I do not have any issues with people finding alternatives. I for one, as with most people, have limited budgets for hobbies and I have several expensive hobbies I want to play in. For a professional photographer, and I have done that in the past the client usually also has a limited budget and if your prices are going to greatly exceed that budget then the project will not happen.

Saying that we need to support film based photography by buying high priced commercial products from companies that are too big to reduce their product lines to an economically sustainable level is uncalled for. Why are we happy to just save the film industry and why not go back to demanding that those same companies resurrect old and outdated technologies like dry plate photography as well. And lets also demand that they provide the supplies necessary for us to make our own wet plates. Progress happens. Within a fairly short time frame film based photography will indeed be a real niche area where very few venture. It will be filled with artists and those wanting to do radically different things with a tangible object at the end of the process.

I regret the demise of so many films, but that has been going on to some degree even before digital photography happened. There has always been films discontinued while new films appeared. Although I am again starting to play with 4X5 I do not expect that everyone should be shooting large format nor do I deplore that people have gone to smaller formats and so destroying the rich heritage of large format films. Nor will I move to 5X7 or larger because I get what I want from 4X5 and do not want the weight and bulk of a larger format.

Richard

 

[pdeeh]

my nearest "local photographic distributor" is about 100 miles away; There are a only a large handful of "real" shops left from which to buy film or other photo materials in the UK, and I expect most of those are doing most of their business online.

The chain is "gutted" already.

 

[Radek Brzozowski]

yep - the question is who makes Adox films? Would that be Ilford too?

 

[benjiboy]

In my own job I stress the the difference between this product being American made and costing a little more and that same specification product being Chinese produced and costing less. I am happy to remark that many will buy the American made product when it is promoted to support American jobs, and many of those buying it are people who have fought in our war's from Vietnam to present day. Those who buy the Chinese made product are generally those not born in the U.S. or where there is no onshore American made product.

What about if the Chinese product is better more reliable and half the price what would the public do then ?, because I have never seen a Chinese product in recent years that I can say in all honesty that at an equivalent price to a Western made one that it was inferior. The Chinese are doing what the Japanese did after WW11 to getting their foot in the door of Western markets by going for the cheap end of the market first, but they won't be satisfied with that for long, because they are capable of manufacturing high quality goods, and while people console themselves that their home grown products are superior, unfortunately the public are voting with their wallets.

 

[blansky]

The Chinese didn't really get into the "western" manufacturing business.

American companies went there for cheap labor and set up plants in conjunction with the Chinese.

Almost every product in the marketplace is now Asian made because American corporations moved offshore and wanted cheap labor costs.

If the quality sucks, its because American companies went the cheap route. Chinese can make as great a quality as the manufacturing specs specify.