- Joined
- Aug 31, 2006
- Messages
- 2,188
- Format
- Multi Format
If the Fujifilm people were clever (sadly currently they are not) they would use their success with Instax to promote also their standard photo film portfolio:
Their Instax marketing is very good and very successful.
They have contact to millions of Instax film shooters.
From a marketing perspective that is a dream situation, a "goldilocks" scenario, which could be easily used (with very low costs) to significantly improve the sales situation of their standard film portfolio, too.
Hello friends,
just short, but interesting news from Fujifilm:
http://photoscala.de/Artikel/Neue-Q...ient-viel-Geld-mit-analogen-Sofortbildkameras
Short summary in English:
The photographic part of Fujifilm, "Imaging Solutions", has published the economic data of the last quarter.
- Sales of digital compact cameras are significantly decreasing.
- Turnover of optical devices for smartphones are decreasing.
- Sales of X-Series cameras are robust.
- Sales and income from Instax instant cameras and film remain in a very strong boom: Fujifilm is selling more Instax instant cameras than digital cameras. They are expecting sales of 5 million (!) Instax cameras in 2015 (3,87 million last year).
- Increasing sales of photobooks.
The positive turnover of the "Imaging Solutions" has been mainly due to the very strong and continuing boom of the Instax system.
Probably even more interesting: The mid-term strategy of the Imaging Solutions (text in English):
http://www.fujifilmholdings.com/en/pdf/investors/other/ff_presentation_20150520_001.pdf
And still no Instax B&W film ...
If you read their presentation, they are leveraging the "young women" demographic, with a distinct emphasis on "fashion" with things like "Hello Kitty" and or PINK camera bodies.
From the presentation, I expect that they have already given up on conventional film.
The graph on slide 13 shows film getting ever smaller. Slide 7 shows very little flattening of the demand curve.
- Instant film has a color negative film base, which is produced on the same machines as conventional film
While I agree that a 95% drop in sales is quite unpleasant for any vendor, the remaining 5% are still a sizable market, especially in light of the fact that little to no new product development needs to be paid for.
I would wonder how current film sales split into "too old to switch to digital amateur" and "pro, semipro, serious amateur" film sales, and how stable/unstable both segments are.
I only am aware of three pros still using digital...
Only one chum is exclusively film...
Well, you certainly mean film ;-). Fact is, there are thousands of them worldwide. In some segments like portrait- and wedding photography the number is even slightly increasing in some countries.
And some other examples:
http://istillshootfilm.org/post/110901745797/10-professional-photographers-who-still-shoot-film
http://istillshootfilm.org/post/114406745745/10-more-professional-photographers-who-still-shoot
http://istillshootfilm.org/post/125176724780/even-more-professional-photographers-who-still
I know lots of (semi)professional photographers in Germany shooting film (including myself ;-) ).
Best regards,
Henning
It is very rare to see any pros using film either stills or cine.
That was exactly my point: we keep hearing this "absolutely nobody uses film anymore" mantra, yet film still has 5% of its original sales volume. It looks like that those, who shoot film, shoot lots of it, and that the demographic group comprising today's smart phone happy snappers never shot much film even in its heyday.
I only am aware of three pros still using digital
Bruce Guilden
If "most" means 95%, then yes, that's what Fuji's numbers tell. But based on Fuji's numbers at least we shouldn't assume 99% or 99.9% or whatever number is frequently thrown around.Now, most of that is gone.
If "most" means 95%, then yes, that's what Fuji's numbers tell. But based on Fuji's numbers at least we shouldn't assume 99% or 99.9% or whatever number is frequently thrown around.
In that 10-15 years, with the advent of one-hour mini lab processing on every corner and penetration of high quality point and shoot cameras, film use did explode.
I wonder how a more historic view of film sales over the decades before, when a typical family might use only two or three rolls a year might compare to today's demand?
Certainly motion picture demand was tremendously higher back then. How to count that out for a still photo comparison?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?