Film prices don't reflect analogue resurgence

[PKR]

Kodak made a lot of stupid moves as we know. They had one if not the first full frame Dslr. They introduced the 14N way before it was ready. It was plagued with color shifts across the frame especially with wides. Kodak repeatedly said they had the fix but nothing happened. Then Kodak introduced a new version stating everything was fixed. Those that bought into the new model had exactly the same problems. Kodak finally abandon their digital pro market customers leaving them stuck with junk that was basically unusable. Tha was the nail in the coffin for the pro digital market.

I owned 2 of those Kodak cameras. A 14n and a 14nx (SLRn) with $1500 sensor upgrade. About $12-14k plus spent, with no support from their tech staff. My last call to the tech support people with an issue (2005?) was answered with: we can't figure out how to do that. There must be a menu error. If you figure it out, would you call us back and tell us how you did it?

After that conversation, I was forwarded to the women who oversaw both film and digital divisions. During our conversation I mentioned that I missed Plus-X after having used it for many years, and bought a big batch of FP-4. She went ballistic, telling me that people were being laid off, etc. and where was my loyalty? I told her I had been on the Kodak site and Plus-X in 135 was no longer listed. I figured since so many Kodak products had been discontinued that, 135 stock was no longer made. She looked at the web site and fumed.. then without saying a word transferred me to another person. The guy says hello, I reply, hello.. who's this. I'm the Kodak Web Master. I explained the previous conversation. He checked the site and said, oh, you're right.. Then, he says, got any other suggestions. I told him since the black and white portion of the film page was illustrated with color photographs, he might think about using some black and white photos in stead .. Oh, a great idea.

F*** Kodak. They left me high and dry with $12000 in useless hardware and didn't give a s***.

I feel bad for the good employees who lost their jobs because of incompetent management buffoons.

Edit: Remember the "Magenta Dot" they claimed didn't exist until plagued with published examples? Kodak had a habit of stonewalling tech problems.

 

[Aristophanes]

Where did you get that figure from?

It's a conjecture from the fact that the industry is utterly awash in film production capacity. One estimate from the Rochester plant is that it could supply the world's demand x8 alone, no other plants necessary worldwide.

So the problem still is not added demand; it's far too little demand compared to supply. Prices are likely to continue rising as there is no effective competition.

 

[x-ray]

I owned 2 of those Kodak cameras. A 14n and a 14nx (SLRn) with $1500 sensor upgrade. About $12-14k plus spent, with no support from their tech staff.

F*** Kodak. They left me high and dry with $12000 in useless hardware and didn't give a s***.

This is exactly what they did to everyone that bought these cameras. Lie after lie about fixes that never came and then left them high and dry with no support. Unlike the 14 series their pro back for MF was good but the 14 series problems liked the trust of their customers which pretty much killed their pro digital hopes.

I almost bought one but as soon as I tried one out I canceled my order and bought 2 Canon 1Ds bodies.

I think today most of the problems could be corrected in software like Light Room and Capture. Corner fix might be of some help. When I was using a Hasselblad CFV39 back with some wides I had to do a correction shot at the working aperture to create a correction profile in Light Room. This is what the Kodak cameras needed to fix files. The problem was similar to what you see on the M9 Leica with aftermarket brands of wide angles.

It would be interesting to take one of those today and see what would happen processing raw files in LR with a correction profile.

 

[PKR]

This is exactly what they did to everyone that bought these cameras. Lie after lie about fixes that never came and then left them high and dry with no support. Unlike the 14 series their pro back for MF was good but the 14 series problems liked the trust of their customers which pretty much killed their pro digital hopes.

I almost bought one but as soon as I tried one out I canceled my order and bought 2 Canon 1Ds bodies.

I think today most of the problems could be corrected in software like Light Room and Capture. Corner fix might be of some help. When I was using a Hasselblad CFV39 back with some wides I had to do a correction shot at the working aperture to create a correction profile in Light Room. This is what the Kodak cameras needed to fix files. The problem was similar to what you see on the M9 Leica with aftermarket brands of wide angles.

It would be interesting to take one of those today and see what would happen processing raw files in LR with a correction profile.

A good friend and lab owner, was almost put out of business because of a series of batches of bad inter-negative film. The Kodak TSR, Jerry Dean, kept telling him it was because he wasn't using a Kodak print processor .. total stonewall BS. All the labs in town had the same trouble. You couldn't get a neutral gray with the stock. So, I got an old friend, who is a well known photo chemist, to help. My lab friend, at his whit's end, sued Kodak. My chemist friend wrote a letter outlining the problem and citing the instructions in the film documentation. The word was that the chemists in Rochester saw my chemists friend's name on the suit and rolled over. They had been in court with him in the past, when he worked for Hunt Chemical.

My lab owner friend called and said, that Dean, the TSR, had just visited and asked, "How much?".

Screw Kodak.

 

[x-ray]

A good friend and lab owner, was almost put out of business because of a series of batches of bad inter-negative film. The Kodak TSR, Jerry Dean, kept telling him it was because he wasn't using a Kodak print processor .. total stonewall BS. All the labs in town had the same trouble. You couldn't get a neutral gray with the stock. So, I got an old friend, who is a well known photo chemist, to help. My lab friend, at his whit's end, sued Kodak. My chemist friend wrote a letter outlining the problem and citing the instructions in the film documentation. The word was that the chemists in Rochester saw my chemists friend's name on the suit and rolled over. They had been in court with him in the past, when he worked for Hunt Chemical.

My lab owner friend called and said, that Dean, the TSR, had just visited and asked, "How much?".

Screw Kodak.

I only had a couple of problems over the years. I bought E6 sheet film by the case when catalog season came around. This was in the day when I shot 11x14 for double page spreads and 8x10 for single. We shot everything to the same scale by putting acetates on the ground glass specing type position and image size. These were all to the same scale and were generated by our art department. The reason was for ganging the separations to save money.

Anyway I ordered a case of 4x5 EPP, 50 sheets of 11x14 EPP and a case of 8x10 EPP. A case was 250 sheets which would get me through the job which was slated to start in a few days. It would allow me time to test each batch which I always did.

I shot a couple of sheets of each size and ran them in our Colenta processor. The 4x5 and 11x14 looked on the money but the 8x10 had a serious problem. We had a great TSR who came out immediately. He called Rochester to find the batch had accidentally gotten out to dealers and had not gone through the yellow coating step. The emulsion was only magenta and cyan.

Our rep took that batch and had another "different" batch fedexed to us overnight. When I received it I checked the emulsion number to find it was from the same batch. We got it corrected on the next try.

I've seen 120 VPL spoiled on VPS backing paper and thats about all the issues I can think of right now. That's pretty good considering all the film I shot.

Kodak screwed up in my favor once. When the ready load packets came out my TSR came to my studio to show how they worked. He said he'd loan me a holder and comp me a box to try. Either he or Kodak screwed up the order and sent me a case. I think it was 12 boxes of 10 double packs each. I contacted him and he said not to worry, just keep it. One bit of feedback I was able to provide, our summers are very humid here and in dry conditions the packs worked perfectly but humid conditions the pack covers woukdntvrelease from the licking clip. On humid days they were useless. I wound up removing all the sheets and used them in regular 4x5 holders. Still a great bonus.

All but one of our TSR's were greT, joe Lowery, Jeff McLeod and Jim Much. Then we got another who I won't name who was a bad joke.

I also had regular visits from my Fuji Rep Bill Prudner. He was another fantastic guy with great info and every solution to your problems at his finger tips. He and the Kodak guys also had lots of great goodies they'd leave to try. Every visit was like Christmas. The best part though was the excellent support for the industry.

 

[PKR]

I only had a couple of problems over the years. I bought E6 sheet film by the case when catalog season came around. This was in the day when I shot 11x14 for double page spreads and 8x10 for single. We shot everything to the same scale by putting acetates on the ground glass specing type position and image size. These were all to the same scale and were generated by our art department. The reason was for ganging the separations to save money.

Anyway I ordered a case of 4x5 EPP, 50 sheets of 11x14 EPP and a case of 8x10 EPP. A case was 250 sheets which would get me through the job which was slated to start in a few days. It would allow me time to test each batch which I always did.

I shot a couple of sheets of each size and ran them in our Colenta processor. The 4x5 and 11x14 looked on the money but the 8x10 had a serious problem. We had a great TSR who came out immediately. He called Rochester to find the batch had accidentally gotten out to dealers and had not gone through the yellow coating step. The emulsion was only magenta and cyan.

Our rep took that batch and had another "different" batch fedexed to us overnight. When I received it I checked the emulsion number to find it was from the same batch. We got it corrected on the next try.

I've seen 120 VPL spoiled on VPS backing paper and thats about all the issues I can think of right now. That's pretty good considering all the film I shot.

Kodak screwed up in my favor once. When the ready load packets came out my TSR came to my studio to show how they worked. He said he'd loan me a holder and comp me a box to try. Either he or Kodak screwed up the order and sent me a case. I think it was 12 boxes of 10 double packs each. I contacted him and he said not to worry, just keep it. One bit of feedback I was able to provide, our summers are very humid here and in dry conditions the packs worked perfectly but humid conditions the pack covers woukdntvrelease from the licking clip. On humid days they were useless. I wound up removing all the sheets and used them in regular 4x5 holders. Still a great bonus.

All but one of our TSR's were greT, joe Lowery, Jeff McLeod and Jim Much. Then we got another who I won't name who was a bad joke.

I also had regular visits from my Fuji Rep Bill Prudner. He was another fantastic guy with great info and every solution to your problems at his finger tips. He and the Kodak guys also had lots of great goodies they'd leave to try. Every visit was like Christmas. The best part though was the excellent support for the industry.

That was the second time I did battle with Kodak. I won both times. But, I was foolish enough to buy two of those cameras. I had Nikon lenses and the Nikon mount came out first. My clients were all about going digital asap', so, I went with it. My poor neighbor had one with a really bad magenta dot problem. I don't think it was ever solved. He donated to Kodak's funeral too.

 

[Alpsman]

There is still no substitute for film.

 

[mani]

Because there hasn't been an analog resurgence.

I see evidence all around me of much more film interest than when I began using film 6 or so years ago: at the tech startup I work at I have two colleagues who've recently started using film; at my kids' school there are parents who've switched (and unfortunately started badgering me with questions about scanners and labs, and so on). One of those dads told me about his friend whose daughter goes to the same gym class as my daughter who's recently bought a film Leica.
Another dad whose kids used to go to the same nursery as my kids has become a fanatical film user - even developing his own film. I met him in the crush of the latest film-camera 'yard sale' I was at in March - there were thousands of people at that event, mostly younger people.
I mentor at one of Sweden's leading tech schools, and I'm amazed at how many students are using film cameras. None of them are using DSLRs (it's either iPhone or film).
When I go to the lab with my film these days, I almost always have to stand in line. That never used to happen 5 years ago.
After my vacation I got my films developed for a lower price, in return for waiting longer than a week - because the workload was just too much for the lab at the time.
New films being released almost all the time at the moment. Looking forward to Ektachrome soon.
Also looking forward to getting my Kickstarter LabBox - have to wait a bit longer, because of delays due to the overwhelming over-subscription.
Been trying to get hold of a couple film cameras that I chose not to buy 3 or 4 years back - but since then the price has spiraled crazily upwards.

Anyways, carry on thinking "there hasn't been an analog resurgence" if the negativity makes you feel better.

 

[Scope79]

[QUOTE This is what the Kodak cameras needed to fix files. The problem was similar to what you see on the M9 Leica with aftermarket brands of wide angles.

It would be interesting to take one of those today and see what would happen processing raw files in LR with a correction profile.[/QUOTE]


Kodak SLR pro and 645 digital back are unique in their color rendering, there is a thread on Russian photography forum where users share their images, I'm quite amazed with what this digital dinosaur can achieve in bright light. There is a custom firmware you can install too. Most people use original Kodak Photodesk editing software and results are very pleasing to the eye, others claim RPP software is the best for it and for KAF sensor in general. Corner fix can fix color shifts quickly (aka Italian Flag effect)

 

[x-ray]

Film sales will never return to where it was in the 90's. As much as I'd like to go back to film for my clients they's never pay the price of film and processing. Budgets are way too tight these days. They days of extravagant budgets has long gone. In the 90's my film lab bills for E6 exceeded $100,000 per year not counting film.

Film, processing costs and time to get film back from the lab are big factors now. The old timers that were art directors then are retired now and the kids that have come in don't have a clue about using film. Schools don't teach this. If we did shoot film, most of the labs are gone. There were 3 within 10 minutes of my studio in the 90's. Now there's one that runs every month or so and the quality is terrible. My favorite lab of all, E6 of Atlanta, closed a couple of years ago.

Ok, lets assume we could get processing in a timely manner. There are no pre press houses now that have scanners or at least very few. There's one in my area that has an antiquated but excellent scanner. There were several very high quality prepress houses within 10 minutes of my studio too. All of them are gone along with their drum scanners. I can think of 4 major prepress houses that did work nationally that have closed around my studio.

Ok, lets assume someone is interested in opening a prepress house. There are lots of drum scanners on the used market. The catch here is these are ancient and run on obsolete operating systems like OS9. No pats are available even if you could find a tech to work on them. Aztec is the only drum scanner company left and the prices start at ~$70,000. The cost of starting such a company is tremendous and the people to run the equipment are scarce now.

Sorry, Film isn't coming back anywhere near the level it once existed. The amateur market isn't even drop in the bucket. Now hopefully though the young guys and gals getting into film will stay interested, if not the future of film could be in jeopardy.

 

[cz23]

...When I go to the lab with my film these days, I almost always have to stand in line. That never used to happen 5 years ago....

Five years ago you could get your film processed at Walgreens, Costco, CVS, and other locations. No more. Which likely explains any lines at the rare remaining processors.

As far as prices, what lower them is competition. That probably will never again be significant.

John

 

[davidnewtonguitars]

This discussion is very similar to discussions guitar builders have about the future availability of suitable guitar woods, and I think it is almost an "apples to apples" comparison.
One elder sage said about the future: "I think there will always be enough wood for someone to build one more guitar".
Seeing the mechanical stamina of good old film cameras, but realizing that nothing lasts forever, lends me to the paraphrase "I think there will always be enough film for someone to shoot one more roll".

 

[cz23]

This discussion is very similar to discussions guitar builders have about the future availability of suitable guitar woods, and I think it is almost an "apples to apples" comparison.
One elder sage said about the future: "I think there will always be enough wood for someone to build one more guitar".
Seeing the mechanical stamina of good old film cameras, but realizing that nothing lasts forever, lends me to the paraphrase "I think there will always be enough film for someone to shoot one more roll".

Except that guitar woods were not supplanted by another product. I think it more closely resembles the scenario of vinyl records. They actually are seeing a "resurgence." And new turntables are now readily available again.

I think film will truly be said to be back when OEMs start offering new cameras.

John

 

[roscoetuff]

David: Your analogy works. 'Cause then you go to some of the rare wood dealers and see a plethora of fine tone woods! and wonder about their true scarcity (though habitat loss is real and the ultimate "cost"). Or maybe you just look around a typical guitar maker's shop and see all the beautiful wood he's collected to let dry, age, and just be available when needed. And picking out wood for a new guitar back, neck, and sides is like choosing the camera, lens and film to use for the day.

 

[davidnewtonguitars]

But haven't you heard of carbon fiber & composite material acoustic guitars? Almost exactly the analog to digital argument that "digital doesn't have the look of film" & "Bring back Kodachrome!" = "composite materials don't have the soul of a real wood guitar"
We guitar builders don't, however, have to wait for a new coating machine to be developed and come on line, we just have to wait for a new tree to be found in the forest that is suitable by our standards and that guitar players will accept the wood from, while moaning about how it doesn't have the same "soul" as Brazilian Rosewood or some other long-gone wood.
By the way, I have enough Brazilian Rosewood for "two more guitars" and know many others like me.

Except that guitar woods were not supplanted by another product. I think it more closely resembles the scenario of vinyl records. They actually are seeing a "resurgence." And new turntables are now readily available again.

I think film will truly be said to be back when OEMs start offering new cameras.

John

 

[cz23]

But haven't you heard of carbon fiber & composite material acoustic guitars? Almost exactly the analog to digital argument that "digital doesn't have the look of film" = "composite materials don't have the soul of a real wood guitar"

Ah, I see your point. I thought you said the issue was the availability of woods. But the end result is the same.

Imagine music without wooden guitars! That strikes me as even WORSE than no film or film cameras.

John

 

[Calzone]

Here is a plot I found on the Internet. Tri-X went up 500% over the past 6 years!

G,

Around 5-6 years ago I was buying Arista Premium (rebranded Tri-X) from Freestyle for $2.89 a roll. I bought hundreds of rolls and still have about a dozen rolls from that era.

Hard to believe those extreme low prices on the graph.

Freestyle also sold close dated Acros for $1.89 a roll back then as Legacy Pro. I loaded up the truck with that film also and still have a small stockpile.

If I found Tri-X cheaper I would of bulked up.

Cal

 

[Calzone]

But haven't you heard of carbon fiber & composite material acoustic guitars? Almost exactly the analog to digital argument that "digital doesn't have the look of film" & "Bring back Kodachrome!" = "composite materials don't have the soul of a real wood guitar"
We guitar builders don't, however, have to wait for a new coating machine to be developed and come on line, we just have to wait for a new tree to be found in the forest that is suitable by our standards and that guitar players will accept the wood from, while moaning about how it doesn't have the same "soul" as Brazilian Rosewood or some other long-gone wood.
By the way, I have enough Brazilian Rosewood for "two more guitars" and know many others like me.

Dave,

I have a friend who is an archtop builder. He has a pretty good stockpile of wood and seems to get to cherry pick and is one of the first to be called when good old growth wood comes in.

An example is European Spruce that is basically for a Cello top because my friend Cris is building me an 18 inch wide archtop and does not want to have "wings" like on some DeAquisto's. Took Cris a few years, but he found even found a figured top wide enough that has mucho bear claw.

Same happened with the wood required for the back. Understand that this will be a "blonde" archtop.

Know that somehow Cris got hold of some of DeAquisto's wood for neck blanks, and my guitar will be built from one of those rare remaining blanks.

What is really treasure here is the old growth wood. CITES now makes those last pieces of Brazilian you have a precious commodity. Cris said he had to document the providence of his stockpile of wood. Be aware of that headache.

Certainly wood is a commodity that can be hoarded, but film cannot be preserved so easily. Age does not add to its premium.

Thankfully I own a Santa Cruz OM that features old growth Brazilian that is well spydered with a Red Spruce top just like the original 1930's Martins.

Stockpiling film when it is cheap and readily available has worked for me, but it does seem like the days of being able to stockpile are over.

Cal

 

[giganova]

Sorry, Film isn't coming back anywhere near the level it once existed. The amateur market isn't even drop in the bucket.

Of course film isn't coming back anywhere near it used to be in terms of popularity and sales, nobody would expect that.

But your posts seem to imply that the highest film sales were in the professional market. I think compared to the millions of tourists around the world in the pre-digital era, the professional market was a drop in the bucket -- not the other way round.

 

[giganova]

If I found Tri-X cheaper I would of bulked up

As many have pointed out here, film prices can only go up. Every day is a good day to stock up now! 😀