Acquisition of Film Material Producers InovisCoat and FilmoTec

[Craig75]

There is no hint whatsever that Orwo or Inoviscoat will turn to consumer film (aside of the ongoing tollproductions and the Polaroid project).

Moreover they stated recently that their intention was in a third direction, that of non-cine institutional films, and they meanwhile released a respective product.
Thus there already is some contradiction in their statements.


This is the typical case of some press statement appearing and people jumping to it and making assessments based on just what they wish to happen.

Orwo ised to do double perf 16mm. I emailed asking if they had any left. Theyd sold out and were not planning on doing another run but from memory if i wantes to pay for a whole run i could have a whole run. (Tgey are really nice friendly people)
Its a factory. If youve got the cash you can order.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Hmm this remind me of the fact that de production facility not really belongs to Inoviscoat but is shared with "Inovisproject" or so? A seperate company that works for Polaroid. Anyhow interesting what will happen. Will both companies join?

Anyhow, apperently they can make colour / RA4 paper but not film?

On this page http://www.inoviscoat.de/maerkte/photographie/

• Schwarzweißpapiere auf Baryt-Papierträger (Fine Art Kontaktpapiere, Multigradationspapier)
• Schwarzweißpapiere auf PE-Papierträger (Multigradationspapier)
• Colournegativpapier auf PE-Papierträger (Prozess KODAK RA-4 oder Agfa AP94 kompatibel)

Inoviscoat manufacture several of Lomography's more eccentric colour materials - all of which can also be seen as stepping stones to making more conventional colour materials while being able to sell each experimental step. Add interlayer scavengers etc to Lomography's Metropolis and you'll have a conventional colour neg film.

Something else to note: Filmotec have no coating facilities, but do have slitting/ packaging ability; Inoviscoat have emulsion making/ coating plant, but not slitting/ packaging etc.

 

[Arcadia4]

The bringing of the two companies together under one management does create a vertically integrated company particularly for production of B&W cine films particularly and is the first consolidation in the industry for a while.

There probably isn't any immediate prospect of conventional colour negative production as you already have two major volume producers in that market and probably no actual lack of ability to coat more product at marginal cost compared to the costs faced by a new entrant - Henning I think identified that its still quite a leap to go from say Metropolis to a full colour product. However they may be the best hope if one of those companies fails or stops production.

One issue is that both companies are business- business predominantly, and for retail non-bulk films their commercial customers (bergger/lomography etc) rely on co-operation with a third party (e.g. Harman or Foma) to do the conversion/packaging step - although I am not sure who packages the Lomo offerings.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Filmotec have no coating facilities, but do have slitting/ packaging ability

Lachlan,

Do you know what packaging facility Filmotec have, i.e can they confection 135 cassettes etc?

Tom

 

[Lachlan Young]

Do you know what packaging facility Filmotec have, i.e can they confection 135 cassettes etc?

No idea - they can slit, perf (BH or KS) and package into cinema standard quantities - whether that extends to them having machinery for 135/ 120/ sheet film confectioning, I'm doubtful.

 

[Kino]

As I understand it, they do not have the confectioning abilities for anything other than long roll cinema film.

 

[pentaxuser]

Based on his previous participation I am surprised that on this announcement and several other threads of a similar ilk we have heard nothing from Henning.

pentaxuser

 

[AgX]

As I understand it, they do not have the confectioning abilities for anything other than long roll cinema film.

They sell sheet film. But I have not seen the cutter nor did they report on it. Which of course does not tell much. Moreover I would actully be surprised if they have not such simple device at their plant.

 

[Ernst-Jan]

If convection is so simple, why is it then the bottleneck at Kodak and Fujifilm? I mean both have difficulties with supplying enough C200 cq. Gold 200/Kodacolor 200?

Also Adox already has trouble with restoring their 120 cutter for years.

Yeah if you have unlimited money it might be a bit easier, bit still...

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Also Adox already has trouble with restoring their 120 cutter for years.

I can't speak for Adox personally, but there are big potential issues with backing paper interaction for one, which both ILFORD and Kodak have had to deal with in recent years.

 

[DeletedAcct1]

Based on his previous participation I am surprised that on this announcement and several other threads of a similar ilk we have heard nothing from Henning.

pentaxuser

who?

 

[Deleted member 88956]

who?

@Henning Serger

 

[DeletedAcct1]

@Henning Serger

Don't know him.
I rely only on official statement, not third part "they say"...

 

[Nodda Duma]

Don't know him.
I rely only on official statement, not third part "they say"...

then you’re missing out. Henning knows the film industry as good or better than the companies themselves.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Henning is one of the most consistent and reliable voices I've seen here.

 

[DeletedAcct1]

then you’re missing out. Henning knows the film industry as good or better than the companies themselves.

however by definition he's "third part"

 

[MattKing]

And most importantly, Henning has more breadth of knowledge than many of the individual participants.

 

[MattKing]

however by definition he's "third part"

Which gives him contextual knowledge, particularly in light of who he has done work with.

 

[DeletedAcct1]

And most importantly, Henning has more breadth of knowledge than many of the individual participants.

To me it has no meaning. I trust only official sources, official data, genuine datasheets, what the manufacturer says about their products etc...

 

[Deleted member 88956]

however by definition he's "third part"

Think of "third" especially in this case, as an advantage. And before going further, look him up here and see what he has to say. He is actually well respected by film producers, so not just anther forum member nor just another who spends some off time to look into what's happening with film. You can certainly think of him as an "official & trusted" data miner.

 

[MattKing]

The photographic industry has always had a tendency toward secrecy.
Information about things like sales numbers has always been closely guarded and compartmentalized - dealt with as confidential trade/business information.
My father worked as the customer service manager at the Western Canadian Kodak processing laboratory between 1961 and 1983. He had responsibilities for the various systems used to receive customer film for processing and return the processed results to those customers.
Millions of films received - through the mail, from customers walking in the door, film from an extensive pickup and delivery system that provided courier pickup and return of film to an extensive collection of Kodak dealers spread throughout Western Canada.
With all that responsibility, he was never privy to information about the total volume of film processed at the lab. That information was compartmentalized, and closely held as a business secret.
Third parties who are trusted by various players in the industry are in a special position - they are in a much better position to understand industry trends than individual players often are.

 

[Nodda Duma]

To me it has no meaning. I trust only official sources, official data, genuine datasheets, what the manufacturer says about their products etc...

Which is fine...but you simply miss out on a big piece of the picture.

 

[MattKing]

Don't get me wrong - I value official sources and manufacturer's data - datasheets and the like - and I will almost invariably choose that over other sources for the matters dealt with.
But official sources only deal with the information they deal with, and frequently don't deal with many subjects that involve the inter-relationships between products from different sources.
A perfect example would be printing Kodak colour negative film on to Fuji colour print paper. If neither Kodak nor Fuji deal with using the two products together, you may need to rely on third parties.

 

[DeletedAcct1]

The photographic industry has always had a tendency toward secrecy.
Information about things like sales numbers has always been closely guarded and compartmentalized - dealt with as confidential trade/business information.
My father worked as the customer service manager at the Western Canadian Kodak processing laboratory between 1961 and 1983. He had responsibilities for the various systems used to receive customer film for processing and return the processed results to those customers.
Millions of films received - through the mail, from customers walking in the door, film from an extensive pickup and delivery system that provided courier pickup and return of film to an extensive collection of Kodak dealers spread throughout Western Canada.
With all that responsibility, he was never privy to information about the total volume of film processed at the lab. That information was compartmentalized, and closely held as a business secret.
Third parties who are trusted by various players in the industry are in a special position - they are in a much better position to understand industry trends than individual players often are.

Think about it: it's a contradictio in terminis.
If manufacturers held secrects so much jealously (and for a reason), there are also NDAs, how come a guy knows all these "news"?

 

[Deleted member 88956]

Think about it: it's a contradictio in terminis.
If manufacturers held secrects so much jealously (and for a reason), there are also NDAs, how come a guy knows all these "news"?

Just so we're clear, Henning does a lot of own film testing and follows industry very closely as independent consultant (that's my understanding). No, I have not verified everything he says, nor do I agree with him on a number of issues. But I won't argue his ability to test and share intricate details of his results with everyone who wants to see them. Far more reliable than most web based self-claimed testing houses that know it all and can't even spell it right.