Mini lab seeing increased volume

[AgX]

I'm just imagining getting tattooed being replaced by using film....

 

[Sal Santamaura]

...current labs are reporting increasing business. Here just some examples:
1. "The Darkroom Lab", USA. One of the biggest labs in the US developing several thousands rolls a day. They are reporting increasing business...

...A growing number of smaller labs can easily be explained by taking over the tiny resting commerce of the big ones closing...

In the case of "The Darkroom," reality is a slight variation on that theme. Both "The Darkroom" and "HARMAN LAB US" are marketing initiatives of Swan Photo Labs, which for decades has been less than two miles from where I live. It started out medium-size, and has survived as other labs, both large and small, closed. Just about any place along the west coast of the U.S. that offers film D&P drop off envelopes now sends them to Swan. Add in black and white on Multigrade IV RC using that converted/dedicated Frontier for HARMAN, as well as all kinds of work arriving in those envelopes, and you've got a decent business model for a lab in 2018. It is in no way reasonable to extrapolate from Swan's success to a conclusion that overall film use is increasing. The photographer in that video is Los Angeles-based. She didn't travel 65 miles down here to San Clemente to promote film because 'growth' in film use has motivated lab openings in her big city.

I'm just imagining getting tattooed being replaced by using film....

Unfortunately, that's about as likely as my winning a Powerball jackpot. And I don't buy tickets. Not that I'd be devastated if film disappeared. Digital has reached the point where I'm satisfied. But the end of ubiquitous self-defacement via tattoos, as practiced by so many today, would be most wonderful. There's enough ugliness in the world already; why intentionally create more?

 

[Film-Niko]

Another problem we have is that we only have indirect figures concerning film use.

You don't have any numbers. But all the dozens of companies in the industry (film manufacturers, photo chemistry manufacturers, photo paper mfgs, lab equipment producers (like Jobo), all the labs extending their services, the new labs film/repair/used gear shops and so on) do have numbers. They know about the demand for their products and services. And they do expand their business. In 2016 I travelled to Germany for last Photokina fair and I have talked to all of the film photography related companies which have been there: 90% of them have had a positive outlook for the coming years. Saying that they will invest in their business. The rest said they see stable demand and are watching the next 2-3 years before decisions on further investments will be made.
I believe all these active companies much more than any of the outside "armchair wannabe experts" here .

A growing number of smaller labs can easily be explained by taking over the tiny resting commerce of the big ones closing.

Which bigger labs have closed in the last 12 months? Please give me their names! I've not seen any closure announcement of a big lab in the last months.

We got as active member Mirko, founder and CEO of Fotoimpex/Adox and his reports on the market situation are far less enthusiastic than those of many other members here. That should make one think.
But maybe that is just our german character trait...

I've read all his comments here and in other forums / social media. And I talked to his staff at Photokina. He has been very clear that he has increasing demand in the double digit range for years. His problem is not the demand, but that still too much film photographers are very parsimonious and don't want to pay fair prices. And that he - as someone who is building a new factory and has to invest a lot of fresh money - of course has problems in such a situation where margins are very low.

 

[Film-Niko]

I am not dissing film, I'm just trying to keep the narrative accurate.

No, you have just given one local example you know of. That is the situation at your institution. O.k. But is that representative? No.
Here in my town the public darkroom see increasing interest. My two local labs see also increasing demand. One has 4x more film business than five years ago, and almost 50% of their business is now from film and silver-halide prints. Is that because of other labs closing? No. In the last six years no labs here in my surroundings have closed. Is that representative for the global situation? No.
But let's have a look at this whole thread: We now have here dozens of reports from labs from all over the world reporting significantly increasing demand. Reprsentative? No, not completey. But from a statistic point of view indeed interesting and an indicator. And just add all the countless activities on facebook, instagram and youtube. From a market research point of view, that tells you something.....I think I've given quite a lot of examples in my quite long posting. But probably only a few here will read it or follow the links I've given.

 

[Film-Niko]

It is in no way reasonable to extrapolate from Swan's success to a conclusion that overall film use is increasing.

I have not done that. Sorry, but you haven't read my posting with attention.

 

[Film-Niko]

I was in a room about a month ago with people from about 20 other mini labs with a couple of representatives from Kodak Alaris and Fujifilm. All the labs were seeing an increase in film developing and sales. The guy from Kodak estimated demand for their film had increased around 15% in 2017 and another 20% this year. It was a very interesting discussion.

Thanks a lot Brady for that insight! Very interesting.

 

[Film-Niko]

Here are some figures from one of the biggest labs in Moscow. First graph shows the number of films sold per month, the second - number of films developed.

Thanks a lot for the data! May I ask the name of this lab in Moscow? Have you been there?

 

[Berkeley Mike]

I'm afraid that IS a demand problem. Back in the film days pros would pay the going rate and pass on the cost to clients. The other 98% of film users were much less frequent users with "family record" (I cannot think of a better description) goals who absorbed the cost for its personal rewards, but not necessarily an avocation, which is represented by many on this site. Pro usage is different than a personal usage which is very different Avocational usage.

It is sort like the Decisive Moment vs Kodak Moment vs the Shot of the moment. The vast majority of Pros are not a part of the film market. The Kodak Moment folks are on digital cameras or phones. The personal/hobbiest/avocational//advanced users spend money very differently than the first two. Film cost, for them, is much more at issue. As the largest remaining market for film, the effect on Mirko's goals is to effect demand.

 

[Sal Santamaura]

I have not done that. Sorry, but you haven't read my posting with attention.

Nor did I say you did. Paying close attention to posts is a good thing.

 

[Berkeley Mike]

No, you have just given one local example you know of. That is the situation at your institution. O.k. But is that representative? No.
Here in my town the public darkroom see increasing interest. My two local labs see also increasing demand. One has 4x more film business than five years ago, and almost 50% of their business is now from film and silver-halide prints. Is that because of other labs closing? No. In the last six years no labs here in my surroundings have closed. Is that representative for the global situation? No.
But let's have a look at this whole thread: We now have here dozens of reports from labs from all over the world reporting significantly increasing demand. Reprsentative? No, not completey. But from a statistic point of view indeed interesting and an indicator. And just add all the countless activities on facebook, instagram and youtube. From a market research point of view, that tells you something.....I think I've given quite a lot of examples in my quite long posting. But probably only a few here will read it or follow the links I've given.

Another local example: San Francisco.
I don't say this gladly at all. I know most of these folks. I am simply challenging the blythe claim that "film is coming back" based upon reports that lab business is increasing. Here is a list of Labs that I used to do business with in SF that are now out of business:

The New Lab
Robyn Color
Faulkner
Color Pro
South Park Photo
Co-Lab
Red Shoes
Light Waves
Advanced Imaging Services
L’Image
Custom Process
Photo Lab
Monaco (switched to Digital)

Monaco (Reza’s color lab in Berkeley and SF)

Many of these were huge mainstays of the business with long histories and pedigree. There are a few more but I cannot recall them.

Gamma (my old savior Peter) has closed its old Russ St. location, then it's Clementina location, in SOMA and is now sharing a space in the Bayview district. It is only open from 12:30-6PM 3 days a week.
Rayko's location on 3rd in SOMA is closed, it reduced its services and classes. It is reported to have closed in August of 2017.

6 of these were BW labs. Oscar's seems to be doing well enough to maintain an expensive location in SOMA. Has a nice following. E-6? Photoworks, long a producer of C41 and 3rs now Full Service, is still going well. My friends at Photolab in Berkeley say that their E-6 is increased as an SF couple bought a lab but can not get it going. Shooters are running out of places to go. So the “last man standing” rule is in effect. Ooops! I should say last Woman standing.

 

[AgX]

I believe all these active companies much more than any of the outside "" here

One of this armchair wannabe experts is behind tenth of milllions in revenue in film sales and indeed can read figures. Figures that ARE published.
BUT some figures just either are veiled or confidential. To the same effect...

And as long as this is the case anyone can take some figure, some experience or some statement and try to proof his stand.

 

[aleckurgan]

I've read all his comments here and in other forums / social media. And I talked to his staff at Photokina. He has been very clear that he has increasing demand in the double digit range for years. His problem is not the demand, but that still too much film photographers are very parsimonious and don't want to pay fair prices. And that he - as someone who is building a new factory and has to invest a lot of fresh money - of course has problems in such a situation where margins are very low.

If the customers are not willing to pay it, then I guess it cannot be called a fair price, it's wishful thinking. Let the market define the price.
I have another interesting quote from Mirko though - "Photographic manufacturers live on paper not on film and while film is increasing again paper is staggering."
(I understand he meant B&W photographic manufacturers, because EK's film business apparently lives on motion picture industry.)

 

[Berkeley Mike]

If the customers are not willing to pay it, then I guess it cannot be called a fair price, it's wishful thinking. Let the market define the price.
I have another interesting quote from Mirko though - "Photographic manufacturers live on paper not on film and while film is increasing again paper is staggering."
(I understand he meant B&W photographic manufacturers, because EK's film business apparently lives on motion picture industry.)

Fair price considers a fair profit. If the consequent price doesn't succeed in the market then manufacturers will not produce the product and/or investors will not invest. Fuji doesn't see enough profit in film. Kodak Alaris seems to have set the mark. Ferrenia thinks they have a shot.

 

[Berkeley Mike]

One of this armchair wannabe experts
And as long as this is the case anyone can take some figure, some experience or some statement and try to proof his stand.

I have already presented a very substantial and elaborate argument as a result of a long study I have done. If someone doesn't want to hear it, if they have some other agenda, then it can be dismissed with the language above.

 

[AgX]

You quoted and seemingly understood me wrong.
I do not doubt at all what you experienced. It even is along the line what I experience and what I am told by deans, head of departmentsl etc. I found it very interesting as your experience is contrary of the common picture of the USA being the stronghold of film-use in education.

 

[Film-Niko]

Another local example: San Francisco.
I don't say this gladly at all. I know most of these folks. I am simply challenging the blythe claim that "film is coming back" based upon reports that lab business is increasing. Here is a list of Labs that I used to do business with in SF that are now out of business:
.........

Mike, you are missing the essential point: The labs in SF you've listed had stopped business years ago. Not in the last 12-18 months.
And that is also valid on the global scale. The "big dying" of the labs happened in the first and second phase of the digital revolution. But definitely not recently, not in the last 1-1.5 years.
In the recent past we even have new, additional labs starting business. I know 6 ones in the US alone.
Therefore: The recent demand increase of lots of labs is definitely because of increasing film usage, and not because of changing market share from closed labs to remaining labs.

 

[Film-Niko]

One of this armchair wannabe experts is behind tenth of milllions in revenue in film sales and indeed can read figures. Figures that ARE published.

Which one do you mean? Tell us his name! I don't know anyone here in this thread who is behind tenth of millions in film sales revenue.
And we are still waiting that you tell us which big labs allegedly have recently closed (well, you can't tell us, because there are none).

 

[Film-Niko]

If the customers are not willing to pay it, then I guess it cannot be called a fair price, it's wishful thinking. Let the market define the price.

Your comment is a bit unfair: Companies like Ilford or Foma are producing with written off machines and buildings. Adox has to build most of their factory new. That does mean investment costs. As a manufacturer you have to calculate these costs in your prices.
Lots of film photographers say "hurray, new factory and film, do it, you're the hero", but then, when it is done, they don't want to support it by paying the prices that have to reflect these massive investments. That is the problem for companies like Adox (and partly Film Ferrania).
Unfortunately lots of people don't put their money where their mouth is.

I have another interesting quote from Mirko though - "Photographic manufacturers live on paper not on film and while film is increasing again paper is staggering."
(I understand he meant B&W photographic manufacturers, because EK's film business apparently lives on motion picture industry.)

Well yes, this importance of silver-halide paper for BW film production is only valid for Ilford, Foma and Adox. Because they do produce paper and film on the same coating machine.
It is not valid for Kodak and Fujifilm: Because the RA-4 paper production is so huge (its a gigantic market with several hundred millions of m² p.a.) that is has always been made on separate machines, often even in complete separate factories.
Kodak Alaris' RA-4 paper is meanwhile made by Carestream for Kodak Alaris (Alaris closed its own paper factory in England).
By far market leader is Fujifilm. They have three RA-4 paper factories on three continents.
Lucky is the smallest one, serving the low-cost / low-quality market in some emerging markets.

 

[aleckurgan]

Fair price considers a fair profit. If the consequent price doesn't succeed in the market then manufacturers will not produce the product and/or investors will not invest.

What do you mean by "fair" profit? I know words like "typical" or "healthy" or "reasonable" are usually used to describe profit. But "fair profit" to me sounds like something from the socialist era.

 

[AgX]

Your comment is a bit unfair: Companies like Ilford or Foma are producing with written off machines and buildings. Adox has to build most of their factory new. That does mean investment costs. As a manufacturer you have to calculate these costs in your prices.

True and not true. Of course the machinery of the established manufacturers has been written off. But they have other running costs for instance with their employees. Employees who even stopped production. Adox did not had new machines made, but got just those written off. The same time big manufacturers with big batches can much better economize the work of their employees. Building a new plant of course was done in the belief to be profitable in the long run, and not so by beneficence. So, there are many facets to such evaluation.

The biggest bargain of a manufacturer as Adox is being driven by someone driven.

 

[Berkeley Mike]

What do you mean by "fair" profit? I know words like "typical" or "healthy" or "reasonable" are usually used to describe profit. But "fair profit" to me sounds like something from the socialist era.

Often the term used is "reasonable profit."

 

[Arthurwg]

Just shot a roll of SP2 and took it to my usual custom lab in Santa Fe for processing. They told me they don't do C41 and suggested I take it to the mini-lab (!) down town. Took them 10 minutes and charged me $6.50. This is a great way to process 35mm B&W.

 

[Berkeley Mike]

Labs, just as manufacturers of film and related products, have had to scale-down radically to position themselves in a radically reduced market stream. Profit margins are challenged. Supply is uneven. Vendors have had to be creative to market rebadged films and films modified from old stocks (some of which will never be produced again) to establish a foothold in a market that is being redefined.

It is in this time of redefinition that we experience the comings and going of film and related products, labs, vendors and manufacturers. There is money to be made but the model for success, aside from small size and tenacity, had yet to emerge.

Yet there is a new model based upon internet markets ruled by companies such as Amazon, and Big Box stores. And what did this do to the ma & pa shops who used to vend the same merchandise?

BTW, I just spoke to the owner of our local lab as she was unwrapping the last brick of film in the lab. Both her lab and the local, last one standing, camera shop are nearly out of all Kodak film.

 

[Berkeley Mike]

Mike, you are missing the essential point: The labs in SF you've listed had stopped business years ago. Not in the last 12-18 months.
And that is also valid on the global scale. The "big dying" of the labs happened in the first and second phase of the digital revolution. But definitely not recently, not in the last 1-1.5 years.
In the recent past we even have new, additional labs starting business. I know 6 ones in the US alone.
Therefore: The recent demand increase of lots of labs is definitely because of increasing film usage, and not because of changing market share from closed labs to remaining labs.

The loss f the large labs was in years past. However Rayko and Gamma, largely BW labs, are recent. The resettling is still in process.

 

[Berkeley Mike]

You quoted and seemingly understood me wrong.
I do not doubt at all what you experienced. It even is along the line what I experience and what I am told by deans, head of departmentsl etc. I found it very interesting as your experience is contrary of the common picture of the USA being the stronghold of film-use in education.

Where do folks get the idea of "the USA being the stronghold of film-use in education"?