Hopeful Tone for Analog from Kodak

ajuk · Jan 5, 2009

"When I dreamt of being a photographer as a child ... it was to be a photographer, not a digital technician," she said. Photographers now "spend countless hours on the computer making the images look like they were shot on film," Go to Flickriver and look at todays most interesting pics and you will almost always see a digi image photoshoped to look like film in the most interesting that day, and of course often photos taken on film. (yeap I looked and I found 2 in the top 10)

wogster · Jan 5, 2009

nsouto said:
Actually, they said "year over year" and then mentioned the first half of a specific year, which you reckon might be their 2009 financial year. I'm not that otpimistic. It can't be year-over-year and first half of year, to put it very simply. I'm familiar with skewed financial years, but I never saw one start more than 9 months the year before. Like I said: makes no sense whatsoever.

Okay comparing the first 6 months of FISCAL 2008 to the first 6 months of FISCAL 2009 they had a specific amount of reduced sales. Now for all we know the 2009 reference could actually be a typo, as I also don't know of many fiscal years that start that far in advance. I also don't know any more then you do about Japanese accounting principals, so this could be common in Japan, while being uncommon other places.

One thing that most such number references do NOT include in media stories is what is included in the numbers, to know that you would need Fuji's detailed financial sales statements which go product by product. Does it include motion picture film, does it include processing and printing, does it include motion picture print film. Is it just amateur films, professional films, colour films, black and white films, does it include film coated under subcontract? Often they see 10 different numbers and the media outlet will pick the worst one to quote, and forget to reference it, or will not reference it properly, because they are looking to prove the facts they want, not the facts as they are.

Andrew O'Neill · Jan 5, 2009

"Kodak switched a year ago from churning out large batches of film at a time to doing almost daily runs of small batches that are tied to consumer demand. The advantage is that the company carries far less inventory on hand, said operations manager Sue Sweet."

Then why couldn't they at least do an annual run of infra-red film? I miss that film, and I'm sure of lot of others out there do, too.

tim_walls · Jan 5, 2009

wogster said:
Okay comparing the first 6 months of FISCAL 2008 to the first 6 months of FISCAL 2009 they had a specific amount of reduced sales. Now for all we know the 2009 reference could actually be a typo, as I also don't know of many fiscal years that start that far in advance. I also don't know any more then you do about Japanese accounting principals, so this could be common in Japan, while being uncommon other places.

It certainly could be. As a datapoint, the UK tax year (which is what we would more commonly understand by 'fiscal year' - a company's is normally referred to as the 'financial year') runs April to April (April 6th 'til April 5th for personal taxation, April 1st 'til March 31st for corporation tax,) so we're nearly into the last quarter of FY09.

Of course, a company can choose any financial year it likes for its own convenience, but aligning it with the tax year makes sense if you have no other overriding reason not to - so I'd imagine quite a few UK companies are currently towards the end of their financial year 08/09.

All of which is of course completely irrelevant to a Japanese company, but just goes to show that it's far from an impossibility.

Of course, it's just occurred to me there's an easier way to check - the US Securities and Exchange Commission website has a searchable database of all filings called Edgar/IDEA. I've used it to check up on US based suppliers before now. As parent company of the US subsidiary Fuji need to make SEC filings.

A quick check of IDEA tells us that... FUJI PHOTO FILM CO LTD has a fiscal year end of (drum roll...) 31st March.

reverend jay · Jan 5, 2009

JBrunner said:
Here's a note:

Every time we get an influx of new members we have a spate of film vs digi debates, and dire predictions, lamentations, etc. about film. While he have lost products and will probably lose a few more, we also sometimes gain products. While the business has certainly changed, the desire for strong images remains, and the expression of those images in the artifact of a print is the most tactile and present expression possible. Persons who find that film and darkroom printing is their best method of creation will be able to practice their craft long into the future. Most of the materials used by hardcore analogists went out of vogue long ago, which shows that as long as the craft is practiced certain products will be sustainable.

I believe we are nearing the point where most the abandoned gear has been dumped and once that reaches a certain penetration the market for enlargers etc. will be small but sustainable.

I think there needs to be more emphasis on printmaking as a craft, instead of just image making. The world is awash with images. Prints are a different matter. If I show someone something on a computer they look. If I give them a print, they feel.

Hey Jason Very well said.........big fan of your videos by the way too.
Anyway I would hope at the very least film will one day become even more of a form of art where you could walk into a Michael's craft store and purchase supplies to make awesome prints with like purchasing oil paints to paint a picture. I consider myself somewhat of a fine artist and digital just does not fall into that description..........sorry for the overuse of the "D" word.
Ok people...............as you were

Photo Engineer · Jan 5, 2009

Andrew O'Neill said:
Then why couldn't they at least do an annual run of infra-red film? I miss that film, and I'm sure of lot of others out there do, too.

Andrew, I have answered this over and over.

It would cost about $50,000 to make 1 batch of the IR dye. Of that, only about 1% of it would be used, and the dye will only last about a year. Once coated, the film will only last about 1 year as well.

So there you are. You butcher the fatted calf for about $300,000 and you get a few dozen people to the meal and the rest spoils!

No profit in that. Sorry.

PE

SamWeiss · Jan 5, 2009

wogster said:
One thing that most such number references do NOT include in media stories is what is included in the numbers, to know that you would need Fuji's detailed financial sales statements which go product by product. Does it include motion picture film, does it include processing and printing, does it include motion picture print film. Is it just amateur films, professional films, colour films, black and white films, does it include film coated under subcontract?

I posted (there was a url link here which no longer exists) some numbers from the latest Fujifilm Holdings report. You can follow the link given to find out more detail, but Fujifilm did break out film from paper and equipment.

wogster · Jan 5, 2009

JBrunner said:
Here's a note:

Every time we get an influx of new members we have a spate of film vs digi debates, and dire predictions, lamentations, etc. about film. While he have lost products and will probably lose a few more, we also sometimes gain products. While the business has certainly changed, the desire for strong images remains, and the expression of those images in the artifact of a print is the most tactile and present expression possible. Persons who find that film and darkroom printing is their best method of creation will be able to practice their craft long into the future. Most of the materials used by hardcore analogists went out of vogue long ago, which shows that as long as the craft is practiced certain products will be sustainable.

I believe we are nearing the point where most the abandoned gear has been dumped and once that reaches a certain penetration the market for enlargers etc. will be small but sustainable.

I think there needs to be more emphasis on printmaking as a craft, instead of just image making. The world is awash with images. Prints are a different matter. If I show someone something on a computer they look. If I give them a print, they feel.

I think your right, not only with gear, but I think we are reaching the "bottom" as far as film goes, and that in the period 2010 to 2015 we will see sales of films, papers and equipment fluctuate, until it settles into it's niche. I went completely digital a couple of years ago, and then when we were doing some cleaning up found some old prints I made 30 years ago, the black and whites have an almost 3 dimensional look and the tonality just jumps out at you. A Cibachrome, that well, it was a sunset, and the oranges and yellows just jump out at you like they are from another world. I have an old colour negative print I did, never got the colour balance right, but the subtleness is still there, and it hasn't faded as much as the poor negative has..... Then I look at recent inkjet prints, and they are so blah in comparison, and the online stuff and it looks so blah and flat, makes me want to dig out the enlarger again.....

nsouto · Jan 6, 2009

SamWeiss said:
I posted (there was a url link here which no longer exists) some numbers from the latest Fujifilm Holdings report. You can follow the link given to find out more detail, but Fujifilm did break out film from paper and equipment.

Thanks for that, Sam. What can be clearly seen from that report is that film indeed dropped in sales by 34%, AND digital imaging dropped by 22%.

In other words: there is an overall BIG drop, everywhere. To claim that it is only in film and that it is symptomatic of film's demise is in my opinion a dis-service to photography.

Fotogeorge · Jan 6, 2009

EKTAR Observations

I just shot and scanned a roll of Ektar. I love the great colors and fine grain.
The negatives are noticably thinner and lighter in color than a roll of Reala I shot at the same location with the same camera and lens. The Ektar scans quicker on my Epson 4990 with Digital Ice. Digital Ice doesn't clean as well on the Ektar negatives. DI leaves faint marks and remnants of the dust on the images, that needs to be removed with the spot healing tool. I don't mind the extra work of scanning my own negatives.

I still plan on buying more Ektar. I bought it at B&H for $4.50 a roll. I can only find Ektar at one small camera shop for $6.85/roll. Walmart still develops film, but the last few times Walmart did a sloppy job; they scratched the negatives and left grainy residue on the negatives. I pay twice as much for developing at the only remaining pro lab in San Berardino County, Sudden Photo Imaging, and they do a fantastic job. I have to drive 20+ miles to Sudden Photo. It's getting more difficult and expensive to keep shooting film.

Dennis S · Jan 15, 2009

Info on Kodak

Just a bit of information I ran across in my travels
Dead Link Removed

David A. Goldfarb · Jan 15, 2009

And yet another thread about this same article merged...

Poisson Du Jour · Jan 17, 2009

nsouto said:
Thanks for that, Sam. What can be clearly seen from that report is that film indeed dropped in sales by 34%, AND digital imaging dropped by 22%.

In other words: there is an overall BIG drop, everywhere. To claim that it is only in film and that it is symptomatic of film's demise is in my opinion a dis-service to photography.

A big drop everywhere is absolutely right.
Last financial year, sales of cars in Oz when into freefall while sales of bicycles went astronomically high I can't recall the figures but it definitely disastrously less millions of cars vs millions more of bicycles ... historically, the first time ever bicycle sales outstripped car sales! The drop in film sales and digital sales might be attributed to the slowdown in the economy with people being more prudent with discretionary spending ... or maybe they've just bought the latest and greatest plasma and lost interest in doing something seminal with their minds... :rolleyes:

wogster · Jan 17, 2009

Poisson Du Jour said:
A big drop everywhere is absolutely right.
Last financial year, sales of cars in Oz when into freefall while sales of bicycles went astronomically high I can't recall the figures but it definitely disastrously less millions of cars vs millions more of bicycles ... historically, the first time ever bicycle sales outstripped car sales! The drop in film sales and digital sales might be attributed to the slowdown in the economy with people being more prudent with discretionary spending ... or maybe they've just bought the latest and greatest plasma and lost interest in doing something seminal with their minds... :rolleyes:

Car sales is affected by other things though, back in July when gas sold for $1.40/L you couldn''t find a bicycle or scooter in shops anywhere, because they had sold out, there were long waiting lists for small, fuel efficient cars, and they couldn't give away big gas guzzling SUVS. Traffic was way down and transit use was up, now gas is 80¢/L and everyone is driving the SUV everywhere again.....

tbm · Jan 17, 2009

The two uppermost postings on my Flickr page show a very recent article about Kodak reporting an increase in film sales, especially a surge in black and white film. Here is the link:

http://flickr.com/photos/21652620@N08/

Poisson Du Jour · Jan 17, 2009

wogster said:
Car sales is affected by other things though, back in July when gas sold for $1.40/L you couldn''t find a bicycle or scooter in shops anywhere, because they had sold out, there were long waiting lists for small, fuel efficient cars, and they couldn't give away big gas guzzling SUVS. Traffic was way down and transit use was up, now gas is 80¢/L and everyone is driving the SUV everywhere again.....

There was a struggle to keep up with bike sales here too I understand. Gas (petrol to us ) was $1.78 in Australia last July and it really did cripple the transport industry, pensioners, airlines and travel. Petrol is now $1.08 and inexplicably rising again. During this rotten time, people saw the benefits of cycling and public transport and the surge was quite unbelievable and it is still going. As a travelling photographer, I carry my cameras while cycling, something I've done since 1980, but I'm much more cautious on public transport, usually only carrying the small digi and inconspicuously so.

clayne · Jan 18, 2009

wogster said:
Car sales is affected by other things though, back in July when gas sold for $1.40/L you couldn''t find a bicycle or scooter in shops anywhere, because they had sold out, there were long waiting lists for small, fuel efficient cars, and they couldn't give away big gas guzzling SUVS. Traffic was way down and transit use was up, now gas is 80¢/L and everyone is driving the SUV everywhere again.....

How quick they forget, eh? That's part of the problem in itself.

wogster · Jan 18, 2009

Poisson Du Jour said:
There was a struggle to keep up with bike sales here too I understand. Gas (petrol to us ) was $1.78 in Australia last July and it really did cripple the transport industry, pensioners, airlines and travel. Petrol is now $1.08 and inexplicably rising again. During this rotten time, people saw the benefits of cycling and public transport and the surge was quite unbelievable and it is still going. As a travelling photographer, I carry my cameras while cycling, something I've done since 1980, but I'm much more cautious on public transport, usually only carrying the small digi and inconspicuously so.

Cameras and Bicycles, they work so well together.... The difficult thing is protecting the camera while your on the bike, in the case of an unplanned sudden dismount....

Hopeful Tone for Analog from Kodak

ajuk

wogster

Andrew O'Neill

Moderator

tim_walls

reverend jay

Photo Engineer

SamWeiss

wogster

nsouto

Fotogeorge

Dennis S

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator

Poisson Du Jour

wogster

tbm

Poisson Du Jour

clayne

wogster

Hopeful Tone for Analog from Kodak

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency