Film from Italy -- Ferrania starting production 2014

[Xmas]

this reminds me of the sort of discussions that happen when new cameras are announced or even just rumoured ... amazing speculation and projection about what is assumed the impact will be and how it will perform and what it will cost ... based on nothing more than willed belief.

We've gone from an announcement that a small startup in Italy will make some small runs of film on a test facility (but would like some money to make bigger runs in a bigger facility) to the same small startup totally dominating world film production ... all with hardly a breath taken ...

I feel as well disposed towards FF's efforts as anyone, but for goodness' sake let's get some perspective here!

Forty hail Mary's

 

[Dr Croubie]

this reminds me of the sort of discussions that happen when new cameras are announced or even just rumoured ... amazing speculation and projection about what is assumed the impact will be and how it will perform and what it will cost ... based on nothing more than willed belief.

We've gone from an announcement that a small startup in Italy will make some small runs of film on a test facility (but would like some money to make bigger runs in a bigger facility) to the same small startup totally dominating world film production ... all with hardly a breath taken ...

I feel as well disposed towards FF's efforts as anyone, but for goodness' sake let's get some perspective here!

Sound familiar?

 

[Nzoomed]

this reminds me of the sort of discussions that happen when new cameras are announced or even just rumoured ... amazing speculation and projection about what is assumed the impact will be and how it will perform and what it will cost ... based on nothing more than willed belief.

We've gone from an announcement that a small startup in Italy will make some small runs of film on a test facility (but would like some money to make bigger runs in a bigger facility) to the same small startup totally dominating world film production ... all with hardly a breath taken ...

I feel as well disposed towards FF's efforts as anyone, but for goodness' sake let's get some perspective here!

Well TBH, I really did wonder if their test coater would have been economical to make large enough runs for todays market.
And, yet ive read posts here that suggested this coater in the research facility was actually used for production of some consumer films, i dont know how they got that information, or how accurate that was(perhaps they worked for Ferrania? IDK) but at the end of the day i expect that while this coating facility is probably suitable enough for production, they can now see the bigger picture that there is more demand than anticipated and they probably want to make more than one type of film simultaneously. And thats understandable, they can keep the coater running from the parts of Big Boy and use the LRF to produce or test new upcoming emulsions.

 

[Lachlan Young]

Lachlan, sorry I missed that one.

Yes, the coaters are (were) totally different, but more due to tradition IMHO and according to several others as well. Film was coated on a vertical web and paper was coated on a horizontal web. R&D machines could do either. Also, paper machines were designed with different tensioning due to the fragility of paper and different filtration due to paper dust.

Why are you interested? Are you going to build one or the other? Or are you coming out to the barn to check my work so far?

PE

My interest was driven by the fact that the visual evidence from Harman and Innoviscoat suggested that they were using different styles of machine (Harman's is a horizontal and Innoviscoat's a vertical I think) to coat both film and paper, while there seemed to be some 'received wisdom' that you could only coat film or paper on a particular machine.

Regarding the dust from coating paper, I'd guess that modern clean-room air filtration has helped control dust levels and make changeovers much faster.

Cheers,

Lachlan

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

And thats understandable, they can keep the coater running from the parts of Big Boy and use the LRF to produce or test new upcoming emulsions.

Nope, I think you got it wrong. As far as I can see, and according to the interviews from Dave and what Marco said, they want to take parts of the big coater and "beef up" the small coater at the LRF. That is only one machine.
The thing is the small coater as it stands now can only produce 400,000 rolls a year at a high cost. They want to produce more at a lower cost. Obviously not the 329 million rolls of 35mm that Big Boy can do a year.

Lets remind that the people now working at Ferrania are a small group of only 6 or 7 people. They are engineers, lab technicians, photographers and directors. They aren't accountants and there isn't a CEO or a Board of Directors. But they do have something that only a few companies in the film business have: passion for film.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

this reminds me of the sort of discussions that happen when new cameras are announced or even just rumoured ... amazing speculation and projection about what is assumed the impact will be and how it will perform and what it will cost ... based on nothing more than willed belief.

We've gone from an announcement that a small startup in Italy will make some small runs of film on a test facility (but would like some money to make bigger runs in a bigger facility) to the same small startup totally dominating world film production ... all with hardly a breath taken ...

I feel as well disposed towards FF's efforts as anyone, but for goodness' sake let's get some perspective here!

What is actually going on here is new-world film marketing. Nothing more, nothing less. Dave Bias is right now at this very moment doing the Honey Bee Dance in whatever coffee shop he is sitting in over these sorts of online discussions and threads. The other customers at their tables are staring at him while smiling and giggling. And he couldn't care less.

Does this remind you at all of a new yet-to-be-released Apple iPhone upgrade? Or perhaps a new Lomography plastic camera? Or even some rumored new film that is supposed to be compatible with old Polaroid instant cameras?

It should. This is how film gets sold these days. This is, after all, post 882 on the subject...



Ken

 

[pentaxuser]

I'll take it from this short set of posts since mine that no-one so far has seen any economic argument for the E-6 launch.

It would seem that Ferrania is ambitious or maybe aspirational is the better word in its projected range of future products and equally doesn't have to prepare the kind of case that companies have to when it seeks fresh funds from the hard-headed financial markets

However I'd be more convinced of its viability if there were just a few more economic facts. I'll just have to watch developments, I suppose.

In all cases like this where a new company is launching new products for which other manufacturers apparently see a much gloomier future, we all have to hope that we are not simply being told what the launch company wants us to hear and that we are not filling the "empty spaces" left by the lack of good business arguments with our own "faith that will keep the diesels humming" to borrow from the "People Get Ready" song


pentaxuser

 

[Nzoomed]

Nope, I think you got it wrong. As far as I can see, and according to the interviews from Dave and what Marco said, they want to take parts of the big coater and "beef up" the small coater at the LRF. That is only one machine.
The thing is the small coater as it stands now can only produce 400,000 rolls a year at a high cost. They want to produce more at a lower cost. Obviously not the 329 million rolls of 35mm that Big Boy can do a year.

Lets remind that the people now working at Ferrania are a small group of only 6 or 7 people. They are engineers, lab technicians, photographers and directors. They aren't accountants and there isn't a CEO or a Board of Directors. But they do have something that only a few companies in the film business have: passion for film.

I havnt had time to watch all the interviews, there is at least 2 videos out there of interviews with the people at Film Ferrania, im a bit lost as what to believe, because they have stated earlier that they plan on building a new factory, and the video on the kickstarter page suggests this also. No doubt they will want to beef up the production line in the LRF though, especially since this is their only production facility currently operational.

Its still unclear about the buildings for the cellulose acetate lab and the chemical lab, are these set for demolition, or can they simply just take over the buildings and use them as is? Doesnt make much economic sense to demolish the buildings and build new ones, when they have the infrastructure already in place.

 

[AgX]

What is actually going on here is new-world film marketing.

As I said before:

But then there will be people like me.
Who always complain about lacking marketing efforts and when something of this kind is done are complaining about storytelling.

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

I'll take it from this short set of posts since mine that no-one so far has seen any economic argument for the E-6 launch.

As I said above, they aren't accountants nor do they are restricted by pure commercial reasons. If you want an economical reason for E6, here is one: there aren't any Super8 reversal film apart the cuts from Agfa. There is none ISO 400 E6 films. And there is only one ISO 100 film C41.
More, there is a serious risk that the other colour capable factories to shut down permanently. China Lucky was the last one to shut down colour film coating.
Do you want more reasons to back Ferrania?
I use 80%+ colour films in my photography. And no "D" devices for me.

 

[Ricardo Miranda]

building a new factory

That is what is called in Literature a figure of speech. It isn't literally a "new" factory building, but a new concept.

Its still unclear about the buildings for the cellulose acetate lab and the chemical lab, are these set for demolition, or can they simply just take over the buildings and use them as is? Doesnt make much economic sense to demolish the buildings and build new ones, when they have the infrastructure already in place.

Yes, I agree that it is a bit unclear.

 

[Photo Engineer]

How does the sprocket holes affect price? All film has them, 35mm has even larger ones.
I thought the price would be affected by the total area of the film itself? As i said, the square area of a roll of super8 film is almost that of two 36 exposure rolls of film (almost 45 feet) and a roll of super8 is 50 feet.
So if my calculations are correct, the price of a 100 foot roll of 16mm film should cost 4 times the price of a 50 foot roll of super 8, (not taking into consideration the price of the spool or cartridge)

Geez you really don't get it.

Sprocket holes are waste and as the format size goes down, the percentage (area) of film that is sprocket hole goes up! Therefore waste goes up as format size goes down. This increases cost!

And if anyone answered this after this post, sorry, but I just went ahead and nearly popped a gasket!

PE

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

As I said before...

The only absolutely crucial marketing outcome AgX is that you remain engaged. That's what they need above all else.

I saw news photos of people camped out in front of retail stores two days in advance of the public release of that latest iPhone. Six months from now when that one is deemed obsolete those same people will be back at the same store in the same tents with the same trembling hands waiting to purchase an even newer version.

And not a single one of them will have learned about that newer version from a magazine or newspaper advertisement.

Ken

 

[Nzoomed]

Geez you really don't get it.

Sprocket holes are waste and as the format size goes down, the percentage (area) of film that is sprocket hole goes up! Therefore waste goes up as format size goes down. This increases cost!

And if anyone answered this after this post, sorry, but I just went ahead and nearly popped a gasket!

PE

Yes I can understand that from that aspect, your right, the sprocket holes do take more percentage of film space away with the narrower the width, but im talking about what a price of film should cost as far as square area goes, and this should not affect sale price if film is sold by the square area.

Although it should be noted that its actually alot cheaper to use super8 film over 16mm or 35mm, because the amount of film per minute of footage drops significantly with each gauge of film, as each frame is alot smaller, in this case the payoff is with image quality, and this is where your coming from with the perforations, since super8 has smaller ones, you get a slightly bigger frame over regular 8mm.

 

[Roger Cole]

I'll take it from this short set of posts since mine that no-one so far has seen any economic argument for the E-6 launch.

It would seem that Ferrania is ambitious or maybe aspirational is the better word in its projected range of future products and equally doesn't have to prepare the kind of case that companies have to when it seeks fresh funds from the hard-headed financial markets

However I'd be more convinced of its viability if there were just a few more economic facts. I'll just have to watch developments, I suppose.

In all cases like this where a new company is launching new products for which other manufacturers apparently see a much gloomier future, we all have to hope that we are not simply being told what the launch company wants us to hear and that we are not filling the "empty spaces" left by the lack of good business arguments with our own "faith that will keep the diesels humming" to borrow from the "People Get Ready" song


pentaxuser

I hear you, and this worries me.

When the discontinuation of E100G was announced I went to the Freestyle web page to order some and go the "low inventory, call for availability" message, so I called. The guy I spoke with checked and they had plenty for my modest 10 roll order, but he went on to say they sold about 10 rolls of it a MONTH so their stock would probably last a while. Ten rolls a MONTH for what is probably one of the biggest, maybe second biggest, Internet film sellers in North America.

Now granted, Provia and, especially, Velvia probably outsold it then and would now. But once Astia was gone E100G became the preferred film for those of us looking for more natural levels of color and contrast. And yet one of the biggest sellers in North America was selling ten rolls of it a MONTH. Heck, I'd shoot a couple of rolls a month April - October. That would be 14 rolls or 1.4 months worth of their sales, if I bought it all from them!

I've read here that E6 is more popular in Europe, especially in Germany. I hope the global market is there, I really do. I'd LOVE to have another viable decent 400 speed slide film available as I continue to shoot up my frozen stock of Provia 400X. It's clear they at FF know what they're doing in engineering terms; I just hope they do in marketing terms as well.

 

[Truzi]

A wonderful thing about the internet is that anyone can post an uninformed opinion... here is mine

I wonder if E6 as the first offering may have something to do with the original idea relating to cinefilm. Perhaps everything beyond that was just taking advantage of an opportunity.

Of course, there might be practical factors I'm unaware of, such as which formula they have is the most recent technology (thus more competitive than other options), or something to do with materials at hand, or perhaps (as mentioned by someone else) that if they can do E6, the rest may be easier. Maybe because, despite its waning, E6 may also be the most under-served market and have the best chance for establishing a foot-hold.

While we would all like Kodak to be able to downsize to continue film production, it will not be easy, especially when they have other reasons to struggle. If they can't, there will be a large market, and it's better to be ready to step in rather than waiting to start - though this is an huge gamble.

Conversely, Ferrania was basically a derelict factory. Surely it is a big investment, but there are no other products or side-projects to be affected. Creating a "right-sized" company may be less risky than "right-sizing" an existing company.

 

[ME Super]

It worries me too. I try to remain hopeful, however, because Ferrania is attempting to right size their equipment for the market, which Kodak claimed they were unable to do. Fuji, however, remains relatively silent, except that their actions seem to indicate they are unable to right size either, as they keep discontinuing E6 emulsions.

On the flip side, Dwayne's continues to offer some of the least expensive duplicate 35mm slides (50 cents each) and slides from negatives/CD ($1.10 each). The small chain of 10 camera stores that I use for my film development, Creve Coeur Camera, sends their film to the same lab, who turns around E6, C41, and B&W in one business day. They appear to be running E6, C41, and B&W five days a week, even though film pickup/dropoff from the Springfield store only happens on Monday, Wednesday, and Friday.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Yes I can understand that from that aspect, your right, the sprocket holes do take more percentage of film space away with the narrower the width, but im talking about what a price of film should cost as far as square area goes, and this should not affect sale price if film is sold by the square area.

Although it should be noted that its actually alot cheaper to use super8 film over 16mm or 35mm, because the amount of film per minute of footage drops significantly with each gauge of film, as each frame is alot smaller, in this case the payoff is with image quality, and this is where your coming from with the perforations, since super8 has smaller ones, you get a slightly bigger frame over regular 8mm.

Square area though is costed out minus waste which in this case are the sprocket holes. I might add that they are also costed out with the waste produced by the thin strip of film between each strip of 8mm or whatever being produced. This fraction is also included in the cost and since it is a constant width, the cost of this additional waste causes the film price to go up.

To explain more fully, a web of film is |selvedge|tiny waste area|product|tiny wast area|product.......etc. As width goes down, tiny waste area is more or less constant and thus waste goes up.

PE

 

[Nzoomed]

A wonderful thing about the internet is that anyone can post an uninformed opinion... here is mine

I wonder if E6 as the first offering may have something to do with the original idea relating to cinefilm. Perhaps everything beyond that was just taking advantage of an opportunity.

Of course, there might be practical factors I'm unaware of, such as which formula they have is the most recent technology (thus more competitive than other options), or something to do with materials at hand, or perhaps (as mentioned by someone else) that if they can do E6, the rest may be easier. Maybe because, despite its waning, E6 may also be the most under-served market and have the best chance for establishing a foot-hold.

While we would all like Kodak to be able to downsize to continue film production, it will not be easy, especially when they have other reasons to struggle. If they can't, there will be a large market, and it's better to be ready to step in rather than waiting to start - though this is an huge gamble.

Conversely, Ferrania was basically a derelict factory. Surely it is a big investment, but there are no other products or side-projects to be affected. Creating a "right-sized" company may be less risky than "right-sizing" an existing company.

Personally, I was so happy to hear their news last year that they planned to introduce an E6 film, E6 is all im interested in shooting and i thank the fall of Kodachrome to make me get off my butt and start shooting E6 before it is too late!

After reading all the negative stuff about E6 not being up to the mark of Kodachrome, ive got over that now and im just so happy that ive got a stockpile of e100g, i love E6 and i want to try some of the fuji films before its too late. Im after the real vintage look and thats what i will really miss from kodachrome, in saying that, i feel that the modern K64 was not alot different than E100g going by sample shots ive seen.

I also expect that Film Ferrania have done extensive market research, i dont think they are stupid, they would not release a film thats not popular.
I expect they want to do cine film and this is their main reason.

So i say good in them, i want E6 and they obviously think there is a strong market, i just wish more people shot the stuff, i dont see what it wrong with it.

Square area though is costed out minus waste which in this case are the sprocket holes. I might add that they are also costed out with the waste produced by the thin strip of film between each strip of 8mm or whatever being produced. This fraction is also included in the cost and since it is a constant width, the cost of this additional waste causes the film price to go up.

To explain more fully, a web of film is |selvedge|tiny waste area|product|tiny wast area|product.......etc. As width goes down, tiny waste area is more or less constant and thus waste goes up.

PE

OK, i didnt realise that there was that much film wasted between each strip of film when slitted down. I didnt think that they would take the sprocket holes into consideration with the costing either. I guess it adds up to a fair bit of waste disposal too.

 

[TheToadMen]

Nah, I need Dr. Who! Oh, and a shipload of sympathetic Daleks.

How about inviting some friendly Klingons singing a lovely song to make an impression?
Klingons are very good in realigning people too ...

 

[pdeeh]

Sound familiar?

I hadn't read that but my (and his) thought is hardly original.

Of course the next stage with FF is when they miss a deadline (or say that they won't make a Kodachrome clone in 828, or ... ) whereupon they will suddenly become the most craven idiots in the history of Christendom who never had a clue in the first place.

 

[kuparikettu]

I believe Ferrania has one big thing that other businesses do not have and that is going to boost their E-6 sales as well: promise of commitment to film and the kind of "from film user to film user". Even if their chrome isn't as good as Fuji's many are going to buy from them. The movement to build a film factory "for the next 100 years" might even bring some new people to shoot color reversal. After all, now it's a "new thing" and for many people it really could be that they haven't shot slide film.

Not to mention that for color reversal motion picture film users there are no real options left. As for the number of those people, it has been interesting to note that there are people who say that they haven't ever shot super-8 or 16mm but now might try it.

It's almost like a revival sort of thing, brought about by new hope and enthusiasm.

 

[analoguey]

That's why I always believed that Kodak was in the industrial films and coatings business, not the "imaging" business. That's where they made their mistake.

They could have done wondrous things if they stuck with coatings. Like PV solar cells, new batteries from rolled films. Even auto coatings that wrapped on and set with heat-shrink or uv light and could even change color with weather, darkness or even a user adjusted controller. Do things no one else could do or even think about doing.

The Fuji 'looking forward' document that @Nuff shared discussed that Fuji saw profits from those very same industries and further applications there. (solar, micro-coating etc)


Re ferrania and E-6. If the response to their kickstarter is anything to go by, E-6 does have a decent enough market (for the right sized manufacturer)


Sent from Tap-a-talk

 

[Photo Engineer]

How about inviting some friendly Klingons singing a lovely song to make an impression?
Klingons are very good in realigning people too ...

I had gakh and blood pudding for breakfast. It was just to get me in the mood for the day.

Thanks.

 

[rwhb12]

Well what a lot of posts!

1 - an Apug meeting next year sounds good!
2 - on the Harman factory tour we were told that one machine does both paper and film. They purchase acetate from Germany. We still make acetate in the UK, so why do they not just concentrate on film production. Acetate can come later.
3 - more to the point, do they have access to the emulsion recipes? Then they have to manufacture that emulsion long before they coat it! Then to cut fold and package the film, you know Harman must have 30 people just doing this! Then there is packaging, labels, printing and boxes, for all those hundreds of meters of film, chopped cut etc.

Basically, has this been thought through? I hope so as I have donated!

Russ