more about the future of film?

Tom Nutter · Oct 23, 2011

...might be more telling than some of that other news out there:

http://magazine.creativecow.net/article/film-fading-to-black

BrianShaw · Oct 23, 2011

good news or bad? I don't want to read it if I'll be getting depressed.

Tom Nutter · Oct 23, 2011

Well, to sum it up...manufacturers are no longer making motion picture film cameras...not even to special orders, as they had been in recent years. Within 3-5 years, the motion picture industry is expected to be at least 85% digital.

"It's up to Kodak and Fuji to decide when film stops being profitable."

BrianShaw · Oct 23, 2011

Bummer. I heard that a few days ago. I'm not sure if it is true but two things has kept film available to folks like us: movie industry and US government needs. I'm not surprised that neither seems to have needs any more. Sad isn't it? Now I'm depressed. Thanks my friend.

Tom Nutter · Oct 23, 2011

My proposed new slogan: "Shooting film prevents E-waste!" Let's see if that works.

Dr.Pain-MD · Oct 23, 2011

Even if the two film giants decide to stop film production, I have faith that a smaller company will take over and continue making all kinds of film for our niche market. At the very least, I don't see black and white film going away.

Sean · Oct 23, 2011

I still think that where there is a niche market someone will step in. The biggest problem is how to scale down film and paper production from the massive machinery and runs required. I have been saying for years the technology behind ink jet coatings will be the way to go. Ink jets are now coating thin film solar panels with perfect uniformity, they are even layer by layer printing out human organs. These capabilities should mean that film and paper formulas could be laid down on materials with perfect uniformity. Films and papers could be made to order in very small runs. It seems the same ink jet spray tech that can coat solar could be adapted to lay down emulsion. I hope someone experiments with this in the near future.

polyglot · Oct 23, 2011

I think Kodak will go, merely because their manufacturing scale (overheads) is too large for the leftover market. However, Ilford shows it can be done profitably on a small scale and Fuji is doing OK without US-gov or motion picture business (yay for selling shitloads of RA4 paper) so if Kodak stops, there will be a huge boost in business for both Fuji and Ilford. Kodak isn't averse to subcontracting out manufacturing either - all the Kodak RA4 chems I bought recently were made by someone else in China and I see no reason for them to stop if Kodak gets out of the market, since all the digital printing is still happening on RA4.

Things will change but there will still be film. There's still paint and brushes, right? There are enough cameras to last out my lifetime at least.

Can we have a bit less of the doom and gloom around here?

tomalophicon · Oct 23, 2011

This is getting boring.

Tom Nutter · Oct 23, 2011

The funny thing for me is...I now own more film cameras and related stuff now than when I did ten years ago after "Going Digital." It is what it is for sure...no sense losing sleep.
Besides...for less than 10% of the cost of new in many cases, you can get some really cool gear to play with, and have nothing much to worry about financially at least, if and when when the rollers do stop.

Tom Kershaw · Oct 23, 2011

I've not read the article yet but I have been disappointed to see these 'film is dying' pieces have seen a resurgence recently. They will be proved wrong.

Tom

removed account4 · Oct 23, 2011

film isn't going anywhere, its just the smaller companies that will take over.
and chemical photography will be re-established as it was years ago before the multi faceted, multi national conglomerates
took such a large chunk of the pie ...

lxdude · Oct 23, 2011

Sean said:
I have been saying for years the technology behind ink jet coatings will be the way to go. Ink jets are now coating thin film solar panels with perfect uniformity,

I've been wondering about that myself. I figure one of the hurdles would be to make the surface of each layer as smooth as current methods do. It's really quite amazing to me when looking at photomicrographs of film emulsion cross-sections how thin and precise each layer is.

they are even layer by layer printing out human organs.

You mean pretty soon we'll be able to order up an organ? Will we be able to order... umm... certain ones in a larger size?

tomalophicon · Oct 23, 2011

lxdude said:
I've been wondering about that myself. I figure one of the hurdles would be to make the surface of each layer as smooth as current methods do. It's really quite amazing to me when looking at photomicrographs of film emulsion cross-sections how thin and precise each layer is.

You mean pretty soon we'll be able to order up an organ? Will we be able to order... umm... certain ones in a larger size?

They only come in black...

lxdude · Oct 23, 2011

That's all right! Supersize me!

tomalophicon · Oct 23, 2011

Off topic is the only way this thread can go... AWesome.

Dr.Pain-MD · Oct 24, 2011

I wish I never sold my Mamiya C-33. If all 120 film was gone, it could have doubled as a very effective blunt weapon.

timparkin · Oct 24, 2011

I did like this quote

Eastman Kodak, Chris Johnson, Director of New Business Development, Entertainment Imaging, counters that "I don't see a time when Kodak stops making film stock," noting the year-on-year growth in 65mm film and popularity of Super 8mm. "We still make billions of linear feet of film," he says. "Over the horizon as far as we can see, we'll be making billions of feet of film."

And in terms of quantity references, they still print billions of feet and hence with his ratios it's still half a billion feet of film being using by the stills industry. That's still tens of milllions (about 50) of rolls of film per year and given the move industry film as well, that works out (given a 30% profit) of very approx a billion dollar profit industry. Even if they only make 5% on the film stock (and they don't do any marketing so it should be more) it is still a $200m profit business.

Tim

swhiser · Oct 24, 2011

Film Trend Defies (Normal) Logic

The story is actually positive, but the old names are retiring. The demise of film isn't true.

Speaking about still, now: Fuji & Kodak <em>will</em> be leaving the business, but that's merely because their manufacturing lines are scaled to pre-digital levels of demand and they would have to guess at future levels and rebuild plants to address the new markets in a financially viable way. The numbers inevitably look small to them, given where they've been.

There are several good examples of companies picking up the old manufacturing assets and addressing the new, yes GROWING, markets for particularly black & white camera film.

o Rollei, see ADOX below
o ADOX Fotowerke GmbH (ADOX in Leverkusen): Adox bought the machinery from the old AGFA plant and hired some of AGFA Leverkusen's former employees.
o Fotikemika (Efke in Croatia)
o Foma Bohemia (Fomapan in the Czech Republic)
o Impossible Project (new Polaroid-type instant formulas in Enschede, Netherlands),
o New55 Project (new better-than Polaroid Type 55 instant, still in development)
o there are good film stocks coming out of Shanghai (probably based on some of the above classic formulations)

The trend defies mainstream logic; but of course mainstream thought has always struggled against a bias toward coherence.

The landscape is changing, but film will not be going away in <em>this</em> generation.

AgX · Oct 24, 2011

tomalophicon said:
This is getting boring.

Yes, there is already a thread on this.

AgX · Oct 24, 2011

Swhiser:

You got something wrong on Adox.

And Fotokemica and Foma are old companies going on, you can't make them an examnple for new initiatives.

emjo · Oct 24, 2011

Tom Nutter said:
The funny thing for me is...I now own more film cameras and related stuff now than when I did ten years ago after "Going Digital." It is what it is for sure...no sense losing sleep.
Besides...for less than 10% of the cost of new in many cases, you can get some really cool gear to play with, and have nothing much to worry about financially at least, if and when when the rollers do stop.

Mee too! I found that medium format was the way to go when developing at home. My small errors won't get noticed on such large negs. Mamiya 645, Zeiss Ikonta (6x6), Agfa (6x9), Fuji (6x9) etc etc. Fun to play with, I even do C-41, and my 5D mark II gathers dust in the mean time There is a certain /something/ in the process of it all.

Jeff Kubach · Oct 24, 2011

I have a digital camera myself but hardly ever use it. I still like my film cameras better.

Jeff

removed account4 · Oct 24, 2011

... i have a digital camera and
have started to use it often again.
its almost as much fun as using film ...
except my card got kind of nasty when i removed it from the caffenol

railwayman3 · Oct 24, 2011

Jeff Kubach said:
I have a digital camera myself but hardly ever use it. I still like my film cameras better.

Jeff

Same here.

But I'm quite sure that film, and cameras to use it, will outlast me. If, however, I live to be 104 and there is no film left, I'll be more than delighted if I'm still well enough to use a digital camera.

I have a friend of my own age (early 50's), who is too ill to use any kind of camera, or even his much-loved paint brush and easel....and never will again... It puts this kind of discussion and worry about film into perspective, and shows that it would be more productive to get out and enjoy our hobby. As my old boss used to say, "there are enough real problems around without inventing any new ones to worry about".

more about the future of film?

Admin

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency