"There is a very real resurgence for film"

marketing bull. First says sales are stable and then he says there is a resurgence. Then he stops prodcution of another product. Then we're told its designed for scanners. Well they don't make bloody scanners for you and me so thats very helpful isn't it.
Its targetted at mini labs not you or I. And all this from the company whose CEO said film was dead. Do they know what they are doing?
Reading between the lines I see that as long as motion picture film is profitable they will continue to produce film for the high street. If motion picture film folds then so will all their high street colour films.
 
First of all let me say I love Kodak films and I hope they're around for a long time. That said, the idea of a resurgence is a little interesting to me. I'm trying to dig up actual film sales data, and I'll post when I have it, but this short article doesn't sound quite so rosy in Q2 2010:

Film Sales Tumble in Q2 (Wall Street Journal)

I'm looking forward to trying out the new Portra offering in any case.
 
The good news is that the "film related division" of Kodak made money in the last 6 months whereas the digital side is bleeding a bit.

Not so good news is that the shrinking market for film has created a situation where they cut the R&D on film related items by more than 40%, down to 1% of sales.

All in all as long as the profits stay up film should be fine. I do not see any major resurgence in any of their filings, though I do think that many of us in the enthusiast market certainly are returning to film in large numbers.

Have a peek here if you want to bore yourself with some SEC filings 🙂
 
Hi Michael,

I miss it too... Did you see this shot before?:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/40894234@N07/4909846455/

I'm glad I could use a bit of PKR on my twins... The originals on a light table or projected are a miracle...

Cheers,

Juan

Juan

these look gorgeous (and the pictures too😉)You have hit the nail on the head:
I am using Kodachrome for family stuff because of its archival properties. It's nice to think that your twins will see these pictures, unfaded, even when they have grand children of their own...
For the rest I am a BW shooter...
 
I was in the Lomography shop in London today, was nice to see lots of people cooing over film cameras. Pretty cool in this day and age that you can walk into a trendy shop in Soho and look at brand new TLRs, 35mm compacts, and medium format cameras without a sniff of digital.
 
Juan

these look gorgeous (and the pictures too😉)You have hit the nail on the head:
I am using Kodachrome for family stuff because of its archival properties. It's nice to think that your twins will see these pictures, unfaded, even when they have grand children of their own...
For the rest I am a BW shooter...

Thanks, Michael!

Cheers,

Juan
 
Please forgive me if I remain sceptical about his comment and realistic about the future prospects for film.

There is no way back and if film remains available it will become increasingly a niche product with a price to match.

I'm writing this from a hotel in Wales where I have just shot 18 roles of medium format film in three days. And I still have another 4 days here yet! But when I look at what that film is already costing me I'm not sure that I can continue to shoot that much when I retire from full time employment in a few years time (by which time it will be even more expensive). I'm saving for a decent digital camera (whatever that is).
 
I shoot a lot more selectively because of what Chris says (post #29).

Kodak should be commended for continuing to support film photography, especially given their financial losses in that area. The new Portra 400 looks like it is going to be a fine film.

As a aside, I was in an old-tyme camera shop over the weekend and noticed that they still had film displayed but very little. As I was gawking (mostly at the old cameras on display), the owner, an older guy, was selling digital to a older customer while his young assistant was explaining to another customer, a young man, the difference between film speeds... and the young assistant was doing a wonderful job of using elementary examples.
 
So, in 2010, is film synonymous with cool and digital synonymous with uncool? It seems that way to me. I'm all digital and very uncool... the kids with their film cameras in NYC make me sure of this. 😉
 
OP, your icon was featured in Oliver Stone's Wall Street sequel. What is it a photograph of? Someone winning a motorcycle championship race?

Hey Ray - I didn't get everything the Bretton James character said about it in the movie -- and discounted the bit I caught. Looks like cantilevered road rash in the making. What is the real scoop?

Peter.
 
I'm not against Kodak. The films I use most are 125 PX, Neopan 1600, some Ektachrome and some Fujichrome. So, Kodak is important to me. But, I'm very sceptical of marketing claims made by publicly traded companies. There's just no motivation for them to stay in the business longer term.

He said film was stable, then resurgence, then blah, blah... The sad news is that there are fewer choices. There are good reasons for film to exist. For many people, digital is just a mess. I scan all my film and have problems with it. I'm very computer literate. Many people just don't want to deal with computers, back-up strategies, etc.

Cheers,

JP

ps. - the part about optimizing for scanners is cute, but they do indeed seem to be disappearing...
 
So, in 2010, is film synonymous with cool and digital synonymous with uncool? It seems that way to me. I'm all digital and very uncool... the kids with their film cameras in NYC make me sure of this. 😉

No need for NYC or kids or 2010...

As far as I know film has been cool since 1850... 😀

That's why it can be more expensive than digital... Apart from the tone, of course...

As lots of new digital cameras appear every week, let's say digital is hot and film is cool... 😛

Cheers,

Juan
 
My secret second income... Film cameras

My secret second income... Film cameras

Buy em from folks convinced film is dead, sell em on eBay.

I've been making a tidy income for the last few years selling film cameras. In my experience, prices are going up, particularly on Medium Format and Large Format for the last 4-5 years.

Glean Craigslist, some internet, garage and estate sales, test them, clean them up, sell them on eBay.

Further evidence of film usage, not to mention Walmart and Costco locally are developing quite a bit of film.

The film classes at the local community college are SRO and waiting list only for about the last 3-4 years, each quarter.

I only sell film camera's. Doing digital on eBay works this way.....

"I lose a little bit, sometimes a lot, on each transaction, but I hope to make it up on volume"

Digital cameras drop in value faster than film camera's ever did, even with the transition to digital. I think people are tiring of finding how how far behind the curve they are about three to five months after buying the latest digital.

An OM-1 will still shoot the same IQ it did in 1972, with film emulsion being the only real change.

Yes, I expect film is enjoying a resurgence, and will not be surprise when film overtakes digital in the future.
 
Scott's a great guy and Portra is a great film. Interestingly enough I think what he says is true. I went back to my photo dept last year and there were a number of kids walking around with Leicas, when I went there I don't know that anyone in our class was using one. Many of the young photographers I meet are using film cameras when they don't have to.

There is no question that fewer and fewer people will use film but I think it will not disappear and within the artistic and hobbyist communities there will be enough of a market globally to support the production of film for decades to come. Here's a Portra shot...
3725080200_610752fd6f_z.jpg
 
Well, how do you combine two very different stocks into one? They used to offer Portra Neutral Colour and Portra Vivid Colour and now they only offer one Portra...It's hard not to see that as a reduction in options.

My point exactly. VC and NC were two very distinct products. Losing both (although the Kodak web site still shows both as current options) and 400 UC and a slew of other consumer-level color negative films (the web site only shows the Ultra Max offerings--where's Gold and that awful high definition stuff?).

I don't mean to be sour grapes. I think Ektar can be an amazing film, the grain and prussian blue is really unique. It sort of fits the vivid colour category too. The price point is awesome too. Thanks Kodak!

I've actually grown to like Ektar. It's incredibly sharp (although slow and fickle to exposure) and I've gotten much better at scanning it (since I've discovered the magic Vuescan setting for it 😛)


/
 
I'm not against Kodak. The films I use most are 125 PX, Neopan 1600, some Ektachrome and some Fujichrome. So, Kodak is important to me. But, I'm very sceptical of marketing claims made by publicly traded companies. There's just no motivation for them to stay in the business longer term.

He said film was stable, then resurgence, then blah, blah... The sad news is that there are fewer choices. There are good reasons for film to exist. For many people, digital is just a mess. I scan all my film and have problems with it. I'm very computer literate. Many people just don't want to deal with computers, back-up strategies, etc.

Cheers,

JP

ps. - the part about optimizing for scanners is cute, but they do indeed seem to be disappearing...


If I had to guess at which films Kodak would axe next, based on the 'marketing' inherent on their web site, I would say PX125 or 3200. Neither is featured and both are available as an oh-by-the-way link at the bottom of the Professional Films page. Losing PX, now that would be a real shame, because PX is wonderful stuff.



/
 
Back
Top Bottom