Interesting news from Fujifilm

xo-whiplock · Aug 16, 2015

Sales of film not even up to 10% of what they were in 2000. Using this logic, sales of digital cameras is doing really well. When will everyone just stop using numbers to say that film is making a comeback, just as everyone knew it would when the fascination with digital faded. 15 years is about right for digital to lose interest with a new generation. Non-instant films will sell more and more in time. Currently the idea to use a monobath developer for color film is under works to get out to new consumers that want to use color film and B&W film but don't want to worry about the technical aspects of home processing, but want the experience. Many will continue to shoot film and home process their films. A portion that don't want to bother with processing at home, will send out to a lab. Either way, film is being used more and more by an increasing number of new generation shooters. Colleges and Universities are also re-thinking having dismissed film from their photography courses and several have brought it back into their curriculum. Kodak is thinking of offering their cine films without the remjet backing to customers, as cine films are industry and not subject to the whims of the general consumers. Most of films troubles were not digital, but consumers that are made to believe anything and buy anything. Those that know film, stuck with film. Once outcasts from the mob, now niche artists that everyone wants to be like them. Interesting how times change but remain the same.

AgX · Aug 17, 2015

Henning Serger said:
But if you take the time 1987 - 1990 (also considered as the "golden time of film") as a reference with about 2 billion units p.a. (there was a big boom in film demand during the nineties), and put that in relation to the current demand, then the current level is about 7.5% of the demand 25 years ago.

In case that 7.5% of sales is referring to consumer film sale, it is far, far off my own calculation.

But to be fair, getting precise figures today is hard without having access to hard figures from the manufacturers. And then still there is the chance that we are comparing apples to oranges.

Anyway, the figures given by Fuji saved my day. (I'm not always doomsdaying...)

Being reasonable again: The analogue-capture market has segregated extremely over the last 2 decades. With a few peaks remaining in the misery. Future will tell whether those peaks can be sufficient for a general supply of materials, or whether small scale, autark manufactures really can do it.

Henning Serger · Aug 17, 2015

AgX said:
In case that 7.5% of sales is referring to consumer film sale, it is far, far off my own calculation.

No, it is referring to both consumer and professional film. And based on published numbers at that time.

Regards,
Henning

redstarjedi · Aug 17, 2015

xo-whiplock said:
Kodak is thinking of offering their cine films without the remjet backing to customers, as cine films are industry and not subject to the whims of the general consumers. wants to be like them. Interesting how times change but remain the same.

Where did you here this?

AgX · Aug 17, 2015

Why would someone want a cine film with the remjet layer ommitted? I only can think of special uses.

xo-whiplock · Aug 17, 2015

See CineStill Film as a case study. Oh, and as with all rumors, it's anyone's guess where it started, but someone leaked it. Looking forward to being able to buy 100' rolls of cine film that I can use my bulk loader and roll up color film for my cameras. I'll be mixing my own Color Film Monobath developer... but here's the recipe if interested:
Color Film Monobath (test):

Sodium sulfite 4.0g
Phenidone (1-phenyl-3-pyrazolidone) 0.010g*
CD-2 3.0g
Sodium Carbonate 18.0g
Potassium Bromide 2.0g
Sodium thiosulfate 7.0g
Sodium sulfate 65.0g
Water to 1000.0 ml
pH 10.6 (verify and adjust accordingly to get 10.6pH).
*Super additive.

Processing:
32C/90F for 5 min.
(New55 R3 monobath for B&W works in 6 min @ 80F with no agitations).
Agitations: (my guess) first 30 sec, then 5 sec every 30 sec.
Increase agitations if more contrast is desired.

Inventors:
Miller; Harris R. (New York, NY)
Appl. No.:
05/919,217
Filed:
June 26, 1978

Also, sorry if off topic for thread. I guess to put on track would be to say, Fuji stopped making cine film, which is good for Kodak Alaris. Also, Ferrania may well sell bulk 100' rolls as well by next year.

Xmas · Aug 17, 2015

AgX said:
Why would someone want a cine film with the remjet layer ommitted? I only can think of special uses.

They will be coating neopan 400 again soon again?
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rcjpags7JT8

AgX · Aug 18, 2015

xo-whiplock said:
...Fuji stopped making cine film, which is good for Kodak Alaris. Also, Ferrania may well sell bulk 100' rolls as well by next year.

Not quite true, Fuji still is offering b&w cine film for archiving colour seperations.

Also Kodak Alaris is not involved in cine-film, but Kodak.

Xmas · Aug 18, 2015

AgX said:
Not quite true, Fuji still is offering b&w cine film for archiving colour seperations.

Also Kodak Alaris is not involved in cine-film, but Kodak.

In more detail

Kodak Alaris only sell still film made by Eastman Kodak
Eastman Kodak make cine and stills film but only sell cine.
One might say Alaris also market stills but maybe not.

The market for 100 foot of cine would be small unless the small camera cine people wanted it.
Ferranni might only do 24 or 36 in cassettes.
100 foot of 16mm and super 8 maybe.

Fuji stopped trying to sell bulk colour aeons ago no one was buying.

They may be able to eat with 100 and 650 E6 ISO in 35mm and 120.

AgX · Aug 18, 2015

Film Ferrania was started to supply cine-film.

Xmas · Aug 18, 2015

AgX said:
Film Ferrania was started to supply cine-film.

Correct but for the 16mm direct to positive market, which may still exist and be a meaning volume to finish in.

if they finish in 100 foot reels 35mm B&H for the small 35mm cameras would there be a market?

Eg when was direct positive colour in that format last marketed by anyone?

The youngest best before date I have for c41 stills bulk 30.5m is 2006, that was 'finished' a decade ago?

Henning Serger · Aug 18, 2015

@ xo-whiplock and Xmas:
Please start your own thread about cine film and color-monobath development etc.
You are completely off topic here.

Thanks and best regards,
Henning

Xmas · Aug 18, 2015

Henning Serger said:
@ xo-whiplock and Xmas:
Please start your own thread about cine film and color-monobath development etc.
You are completely off topic here.

Thanks and best regards,
Henning

I beg to differ cine has always been much larger than stills film in terms of coating area, and it may still be large today. To keep a coater going there is large fixed overhead, it is only economic if the coater is busy.

If Eastman stops coating cine then they will also stop coating still? Unless they move to a smaller lower overhead machine, which they used to have but may have scrapped.

if Fuji have a large area of instant to coat then they can still coat stills and mono separation to reduce the effective overhead costs.

But Fuji have stopped neopan 400 a super film comparable with HP5+.

That means they could not sell it to their resellers. Which means that not enough of us were buying it.

Maybe you have a different economic model.

I get too depressed reading Eastmanns Inc accounts which are audited independently...

Lastly I shoot a lot of 5222 cine in stills cameras, so I'd not notice if all the still films dissappeared, but the converse seems more likely, with knock on consequences.

RattyMouse · Aug 18, 2015

Xmas said:
I beg to differ cine has always been much larger than stills film in terms of coating area, and it may still be large today. To keep a coater going there is large fixed overhead, it is only economic if the coater is busy.

If Eastman stops coating cine then they will also stop coating still? Unless they move to a smaller lower overhead machine, which they used to have but may have scrapped.

if Fuji have a large area of instant to coat then they can still coat stills and mono separation to reduce the effective overhead costs.

But Fuji have stopped neopan 400 a super film comparable with HP5+.

That means they could not sell it to their resellers. Which means that not enough of us were buying it.

Maybe you have a different economic model.

I get too depressed reading Eastmanns Inc accounts which are audited independently...

Lastly I shoot a lot of 5222 cine in stills cameras, so I'd not notice if all the still films dissappeared, but the converse seems more likely, with knock on consequences.

The thread topic is Fujifilm, which has zero cine film businesses.

Kodak's just published quarterly report indicates that their film revenue is down by 24% year on year. Film sales, particularly cine film is down hard.

Henning Serger · Aug 18, 2015

Xmas said:
I beg to differ cine has always been much larger than stills film in terms of coating area, and it may still be large today. To keep a coater going there is large fixed overhead, it is only economic if the coater is busy.

The past is irrelevant. The presence and future are relevant for film production. A lot has changed in film production in the last years. The manufacturers have restructured. And in lots of ways much more successfully than the "experts" have thought. Especially than most of all the "experts" here on apug (honestly, lots of them are only "Dampfplauderer").
Cine film production is today almost irrelevant for photo film production. Because the vast majority of film manufacturers simply is not in this business (any more). It is not needed to keep photo film production going in general. Maybe with one exception, see below.

Xmas said:
If Eastman stops coating cine then they will also stop coating still? Unless they move to a smaller lower overhead machine, which they used to have but may have scrapped.

Eastman Kodak is the only one which, at least as of their own comment last autumn, needs the cine film volume to keep the coating line running.
That seems to be the current situation.
But will it be the same in 2,3,4 years?
What if the photo film revival get stronger in the next years?
Will that be enough to keep Kodaks line running even if the cine film demand continue to decrease? Who knows.

Fact is:
Eastman Kodak has so far much more successfully restructured their production than all the self-proclaimed "experts" here on apug have thought. All these "doom and gloom" sayers and even former Kodak employees said in the last years that it will be impossible for Kodak to run their line on a smaller scale with a relative small team of employees.
But they are doing exactly that now: Running Building 38 with only 300 engineers and technicians. That is almost "the Ilford scale".
They have proven their critics wrong.

I had a very interesting talk at last Photokina with Kodak Alaris. And got some background information which let me be relative optimistic that Kodak photo film production can be continued even without cine film production. At least if we see a sustainable demand for photo film (which is also in our own hands: stop wasting your time with "doom and gloom", go out shooting instead).

But I said it once, I say it twice: Please stay on topic.
Cine film is completely irrelevant for the topic of this thread! This thread is about the current strategy in silver-halide products of Fujifilm.
Fujifilm has stopped cine film production (only with the exception of archival films) already in 2013.
They don't need cine film production to continue photo film production.
They have proven all the "doom and gloom" sayers here on apug wrong who said that would not be possible.

Xmas, just forget this "cine film is needed for photo film production" apug talk.
It is a thing of the past, not relevant any more (well in some parts of the industry it has never been relevant, not even in the past).
This talk is now for the "bullshit talk" area. Just a waste of time. Like most from the doom and gloom talkers.

Go out, shoot film, have fun.
Get other photographers interested in shooting film.
Stop this permanent nonsense doom and gloom talk: You're discouraging people who are thinking about getting into film and reading here on apug. Which is absolutely counterproductive!!!
Please look at your friend Ricardo: He is doing it much much better than you. He is encouraging people to use film.
That is what we all here on apug should do.

Best regards,
Henning

AgX · Aug 18, 2015

Henning, do not overlook that among those "experts" are not only people who have life long experience in the photochemical industry, past time knowledge as you seem to consider, but also who stand for creating jobs and actual, current millions of film-revenue. Apug has a wide scope of members.

You made an interesting remark about Kodak Alaris. But then I miss any film promotion on their side.

RattyMouse · Aug 18, 2015

Henning,

Look at the price of Fuji's 400H compared to Portra 400. This massive difference in price is probably related to the fact that Fuji has no cine film. Their color film prices are going up very fast with another increase coming next month. How long can the market sustain these price increases?

Ken Nadvornick · Aug 18, 2015

Henning Serger said:
Xmas, just forget this "cine film is needed for photo film production" apug talk. It is a thing of the past, not relevant any more (well in some parts of the industry it has never been relevant, not even in the past). This talk is now for the "bullshit talk" area. Just a waste of time. Like most from the doom and gloom talkers.

Very good post. I am however compelled to make a quick observation regarding the above.

The "cine film is needed by Kodak to continue..." and the "Kodak will never be able to downsize and survive..." mindsets on APUG are largely a direct result of sustained input from several ex-employees of Kodak who have been active here. Those on the outside of Kodak understandably had no way of knowing what was happening, and so have merely listened to and repeated what those who are/were on the inside have continually insisted is/was the truth.

Any attempts to see the Kodak glass as half-full were always pretty severely dismissed with exhortations that the film market unexpectedly and totally disappeared overnight and thus nothing more could be done. It was as if unless every last person on the planet is using/consuming film, then Kodak film is irretrievably dead. And if Kodak film dies, then by definition all film dies.

It's been an unfortunate, and given this particular venue, an often perplexing point of view. I gave up on Kodak products largely based on those (and the previous Kodak CEO's) negative observations regarding Kodak's future desire to continue them.

So what am I doing myself to help the situation today?

Well, in three days my first ever home-processing Fuji-Hunt E-6 kit ships. And unlike previous years this summer has thus far been exclusively an E-6 transparency season for me. Within the last month I have purchased 50 rolls of Provia 100F/400X. (Doing a little stocking-up on the 400X to give Ferrania a little more breathing room to get going and maybe eventually offer their own.)

I also keep every one of my antique cameras in pristine condition precisely to attract attention when I am out using them. Then when that attention comes I always stop and respond to it in depth, talking up the beauty of the film version of photography and pointing those interested in the direction of used camera equipment and current film supplies.

I still believe that photographic film has a good chance to survive over the long term, ironically in spite of what I have read here over the years.

Ken

AgX · Aug 18, 2015

Henning Serger said:
This talk is now for the "bullshit talk" area. Just a waste of time. Like most from the doom and gloom talkers.

Go out, shoot film, have fun.
Get other photographers interested in shooting film.
Stop this permanent nonsense doom and gloom talk: You're discouraging people who are thinking about getting into film and reading here on apug. Which is absolutely counterproductive!!!

Apug is a forum for users to discuss things relevant to them. This includes the future of the own medium, its supplies, the manufacturers. This should be especially true in a industry subforum.

I do not see Apug as medium intended to promote film use, and thus exclude any remark that may deter someone interested in starting film photography. There are other forums for that.

cmacd123 · Aug 18, 2015

Direct reversal E-6 Cine film is a fairly new market.

Back Back Back in the 1960s 16mm Ektachrome VNF was used for TV news. It got a repreve as the medium to film Crash Tests of Auto-mobiles with High speed cameras. When that application was forcibly moved by the regulators to Digital, VNF was discontinued.

The folks who do Music Videos how ever were using VNF to shoot scenes either as reversal or often Cross procesed to get "weird" colours.

To fill these need Kodak converted some E6 ekatachome in both 16 and 35mm to cine format. First T64 and when that disapered 100D. Once the 100D slide film went away, the movie film disappeared a few months later.

Ferrania was originally aiming for that niche market, (16mm E6 film for producers of Music Videos) and expanded their plans after relaizing the still market might also be interesting.

I will say that this is getting rather Far off topic by this point...

AgX · Aug 18, 2015

cmacd123 said:
Direct reversal E-6 Cine film is a fairly new market.

What about Super-8 ?

(And I would not use the term "direct reversal E-6".)

xo-whiplock · Aug 18, 2015

I really don't know the market or the past history, but I do know Fuji has made it clear they don't intend on staying in the film business. There are many out there getting ready to step in and provide the film we want to shoot. Scale is the issue. If I made a bakery to supply the world, and then every country builds their own bakery, my factory is now way over sized and cost too much just to turn the lights on. But, if the new bakeries in other countries build a factory that's sized right for the current market, and with the ability to scale up production as needed, but also to scale back production as needed, then costs are managed while at the same time meeting the need of baked goods to their customers at a reasonable price regardless of fluctuations in demand. Fuji simply raises prices regardless, and cuts products not because of lack of demand, but because they want to cut products and raise prices until they don't have to make film anymore. Like I said, this is okay with me, simply because there are those building their own bakeries or have local bakeries they can call upon to make bread when they need it. The big two Kodak and Fuji are gone, just not completely gone yet. This does not mean film is gone. It means a new start. Kodak Alaris is that new start for Kodak, which is handling still film marketing. Film Ferrania will be there to fill the gap left by both Kodak and Fuji as they trim themselves out of the market, I only see Fuji totally disappearing. I see Kodak taking a break, and building a new smaller factory in the future, once they get the coating going for other things than photographic film at their current site.

P.S. it is possible Fuji will decide to keep the instant film operations going, but not for long in the current location, which means the decision to either build a new factory or not just for instant films.

AgX · Aug 18, 2015

A film manufacturer is not a bakery. That is the problem. You can scale down the machinery, but from some point even this yields substantial Problems.
But you also need supplies. And most important, you need man. You cannot scale down a person or his knowledge.
And even the manufacture of already known material likely needs development due to changing supplies.

And all this already is the problem of current low scale productions.

Xmas · Aug 18, 2015

Henning Serger said:
The past is irrelevant. The presence and future are relevant for film production. A lot has changed in film production in the last years. The manufacturers have restructured. And in lots of ways much more successfully than the "experts" have thought. Especially than most of all the "experts" here on apug (honestly, lots of them are only "Dampfplauderer").
Cine film production is today almost irrelevant for photo film production. Because the vast majority of film manufacturers simply is not in this business (any more). It is not needed to keep photo film production going in general. Maybe with one exception, see below.

Eastman Kodak is the only one which, at least as of their own comment last autumn, needs the cine film volume to keep the coating line running.
That seems to be the current situation.
But will it be the same in 2,3,4 years?
What if the photo film revival get stronger in the next years?
Will that be enough to keep Kodaks line running even if the cine film demand continue to decrease? Who knows.

Fact is:
Eastman Kodak has so far much more successfully restructured their production than all the self-proclaimed "experts" here on apug have thought. All these "doom and gloom" sayers and even former Kodak employees said in the last years that it will be impossible for Kodak to run their line on a smaller scale with a relative small team of employees.
But they are doing exactly that now: Running Building 38 with only 300 engineers and technicians. That is almost "the Ilford scale".
They have proven their critics wrong.

I had a very interesting talk at last Photokina with Kodak Alaris. And got some background information which let me be relative optimistic that Kodak photo film production can be continued even without cine film production. At least if we see a sustainable demand for photo film (which is also in our own hands: stop wasting your time with "doom and gloom", go out shooting instead).

But I said it once, I say it twice: Please stay on topic.
Cine film is completely irrelevant for the topic of this thread! This thread is about the current strategy in silver-halide products of Fujifilm.
Fujifilm has stopped cine film production (only with the exception of archival films) already in 2013.
They don't need cine film production to continue photo film production.
They have proven all the "doom and gloom" sayers here on apug wrong who said that would not be possible.

Xmas, just forget this "cine film is needed for photo film production" apug talk.
It is a thing of the past, not relevant any more (well in some parts of the industry it has never been relevant, not even in the past).
This talk is now for the "bullshit talk" area. Just a waste of time. Like most from the doom and gloom talkers.

Go out, shoot film, have fun.
Get other photographers interested in shooting film.
Stop this permanent nonsense doom and gloom talk: You're discouraging people who are thinking about getting into film and reading here on apug. Which is absolutely counterproductive!!!
Please look at your friend Ricardo: He is doing it much much better than you. He is encouraging people to use film.
That is what we all here on apug should do.

Best regards,
Henning

On topic I've only shot 900 foot of Fuji this decade 2010 and on. This was rebadged neopan 400, I've 100 foot left in fridge.
I've got about 2000 foot of c41 Fuji bulk in fridge.
I now shoot very little Fuji cause they don't do a fast mono any more.

I'm confused why they stopped 400 but continue with 100 mono.

The economics of running a coater are indeed partly down to staff and volume.

If Kodak are indeed using 300 staff for their Rochester coater that is disappointing cause their older machine at Kodak Harrow UK made about 400 people redundant in 2004 when the film line was closed.

Ilford used to do cine but stopped it and still survived, they used to do colour as well. I'm still using up Ilford HP5+ cine apart from the B&H and edge printing it was the same film.

The Agfa vista in our cheap small shops seems to be rebadged Fuji and is being 'dumped'. I've only met one person who is still using Kodak c41.

I suggest the power level of your reality distortion helmet is set so high it is upsetting my nostalgia syndrome at range.

xo-whiplock · Aug 19, 2015

AgX said:
A film manufacturer is not a bakery. That is the problem. You can scale down the machinery, but from some point even this yields substantial Problems. But you also need supplies. And most important, you need man. You cannot scale down a person or his knowledge. And even the manufacture of already known material likely needs development due to changing supplies. And all this already is the problem of current low scale productions.

So what's needed is manpower that is scalable? Maybe not. Staffing should retain core people at all times. Extra help would be those called in to assist and train.
Supplies need to be developed due to changes in grade? Then the industry must focus on setting up standards worldwide for quality of supplies to all coaters. And, these certified supplies as "ready to use." This would also mean all factories adhering to standards that match suppliers standards.
Scaling machinery? More like having a known amount of film to make ahead of time, like a year ahead, and making it the most cost effect way on the lager scale machinery. Then shut it down, and use small line to do short batch production throughout the year, either consignment, or special offerings. Seasonal operation of the main line, and year-round for small line. If no main large line, then order from a place that can produce year supply, and just run your line as a small line year round.

It's going to take some co-operation among manufactures to all work together and support each-other and their own markets and the markets of other manufactures. If film can be looked at like a recipe, and coater like bakeries, they can all bake and make anyone's recipe when needed, and help to make sure nobody in the world goes without bread, I mean film.

Interesting news from Fujifilm

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency