Skiff
Well-known
It is
1) demand surpassing supply
2) negative impacts caused by the pandemic to logistics and transportation.
All my film distributors and labs told me that in the last year the demand for film increased by another 15-25%, despite the pandemic. Looks like during lockdown lots of photographers have the time and motivation to get into film photography.
Skiff
Well-known
Right.
Fuji cannot outsource color film production. Because
1) There would be only two potential companies able to produce high quality color film: Eastman Kodak and Inoviscoat.
Eastman would never do that for Fuji, and Fuji would never ask Kodak for that (decades long rivalry and Kodak currently already has problems to produce enough film for themselves).
Inoviscoat has not the capacity to produce Fuji films.They also can only make emulsions and coating, but have no finishing capabilities at all.
2) Kodak color emulsions can only be coated on the specific Kodak coating machine, and Fuji color film can only be coated on the specific Fuji machines. Emulsion and machine must fit perfectly. You cannot change to an other factory with a different technology, it does not work.
Fuji will just continue their color film production. They have increasing demand. They have survived the problematic years. Would not make any sense at all to give up now in an again strongly increasing market with only one real competitor.
Skiff
Well-known
Yes, and the same situation in almost all other countries as well.
I would not be surprised if we see a Pro 400H successor without 4th layer in the short term.
Concerning professional films: Provia 100F, Velvia 50 and 100, and Pro 160NS are in production.
Kodak: Meanwhile the output has even more than doubled, as this Kodak statement is more than a year old.
f.hayek
Well-known
Demand hasn't stopped Fuji from canceling 400H, rather than saying production will return once raw materials are replenished. Their boilerplate, anodyne announcements leave an impression as if a decision was made in 2015 (?) and its corporate bots generate the messages when the frozen supplies run low.
Fujifilm may deny this, but they appear to have decided to step away from film gradually and won't/can't step back once the directive was issued.
Skiff
Well-known
Wrong. You are just repeating all this internet nonsense spread by the Fuji haters who have no knowledge at all about film production.
Pro 400H had to be discontinued because of severe problems getting the raw materials for the 4th layer. Getting raw materials is a general problem in the photo industry (we have had production stops of cameras because of that, too) and many other industries. For example Kodak had officially said that they cannot buy enough raw materials to produce enough ColorPlus 200 (one reason why this film is often sold out). Velvia (RVP) had to stopped because of raw material problems in 2005, and was reintroduced as Velvia 50 (RVP 50) in 2007. Foma had to stop Fomapan 200 and R100 in the past to solve raw material problems. ADOX had reported such problems with some of their products, too. It is a general problem.
And Fuji is generally completely silent during R&D periods. When they reformulated Velvia 50 and Acros II they told no one about it. They simply made it official when the new product was succesfully finished and introduced to the market. When they developed the new BW instax film they were also completely silent.
And then you just repeat this internet BS of "frozen" film. Fact is that film manufacturers do not freeze film. None of them! After coating the masterrolls are stored with a temperature of about +8°C.
Everytime when you read that someone is claiming this "frozen film for 6-8 years" by the manufacturer themselve you immediately know you have some "hot air talker" with absolutely no knowledge about film production.
Fuji has
- strongly invested in instax film and camera products, so that it is now the most successful photo product in the market (surpassing all digital camera sales)
- reintroduced recently Acros
- invested in new film packaging in the NA markets
- invested in marketing and promoting their films in social media
- made a clear statement at the biggest photo fair that they will continue produce film.
If they would intend to step away from film as you are claiming, all the above activities would be senseless and a waste of capital.
f.hayek
Well-known
-Why do you automatically presume I'm a "Fuji-hater"? Quite the contrary. When one emulsion is killed after another, taking their word is challenging. If there was a raw-material problem, they can say so.
-And I wasn't referring to Instax, just regular emulsions.
-Acros is a farmed out emulsion to Ilford. Not sure how to understand that in the greater context.
Skiff
Well-known
I have not done that. Read my post.
They have explained in their official announcement that Pro 400H had to be discontinued because of raw material problems with the 4th layer substances.
It is unknown how much Ilford is doing in that cooperation. It is also possible that the film is made by Fuji, and the finishing is made by Ilford.
That Fuji has designed an Acros II (there were also raw material problems with Acros I) is a clear signal that they don't want to step away from normal photo film. Acros has always been a small niche product in comparison to their color films, so Fuji is even caring for small niche products.
zuiko85
Veteran
Well, good for Fuji if they are making a profit on film. It seems Kodak is struggling to get into the black, despite increasing demand and production. Evidently, the increasing use of film does not automatically mean that a company can make it at a net profit.
One thing for sure, prices are going up....that never seems to change.
One thing for sure, prices are going up....that never seems to change.
john_s
Well-known
I would go back to Fuji if they reintroduced Neopan400 in 120, but that seems unlikely.
nikon_sam
Shooter of Film...
I currently have about 70 rolls each of Neopan 400 and Acros 100 in 120
In the fridge I have 30 (35mm) rolls of Velvia 50 that expired in 2003/2004...I bought it new and its been kept cold from day one...
Also there's a half box of NPS 160 in 35mm
I've shot a lot of the Velvia 50 and with my Nikon FE and a bunch of the NPS with the Nikon F4 & F5 cameras...
I need to get some E-6 chemistry and start shoot the Velvia...
I'm not sure I could afford all this film at today's prices...
In the fridge I have 30 (35mm) rolls of Velvia 50 that expired in 2003/2004...I bought it new and its been kept cold from day one...
Also there's a half box of NPS 160 in 35mm
I've shot a lot of the Velvia 50 and with my Nikon FE and a bunch of the NPS with the Nikon F4 & F5 cameras...
I need to get some E-6 chemistry and start shoot the Velvia...
I'm not sure I could afford all this film at today's prices...
HHPhoto
Well-known
But concerning Kodak you have to differentiate: Eastman Kodak has troubles mainly with their non-film business areas like printing.
And concerning photo film there is the problem that now "two companies have to make a profit from it": Eastman Kodak as the manufacturer, and Kodak Alaris as the global distributor. Two independent companies. This double-structure is of course not optimal from a cost-efficiency point of view.
And Fujifilm, Ilford, Foma don't have that problem. One reason why they can offer films in general at lower prices than Kodak.
Correct. But fortunately Fujifilm, Ilford,Foma, ADOX etc. are profitable. And the Kodak film production will probably be as well soon when their new investments are running and delivering increased output. And when the pandemic is over.
Cheers, Jan
HHPhoto
Well-known
Lots of film photographers are using color reversal film because it is cheaper per picture compared to color negative film. Because with negative film you either have to make a scan and / or a print to get a result. Additional costs. But these second steps are not needed with color reversal film: You already have a finished picture after developing the film. And with a slide loupe and projection you have two perfect viewing methods for optimal quality.
That is valid for 135, 120 and sheet film.
But the reversal film cost advantage ist the biggest in 120, as Provia 100F is cheaper than Portra 160. So already a saving with the film purchase alone, and the savings of the not needed further steps are adding up to that.
I am using both negative and reversal film, but my overall costs are much lower with reversal film because of the factors axplained above.
Cheers, Jan
If your film expired in 2003–2004, it is indeed ISO 50, but it is not Velvia 50 (RVP50). It is, simply, Velvia (RVP), or "Velvia for Professionals" to cite the 120 pro pack packaging. Velvia 50 was its post–2007 replacement.
I have a few 36 exp rolls left from a 100 foot roll of RVP I was gifted 12 or so years ago sitting in my deep freeze. Still comes out like new.
nikon_sam
Shooter of Film...
You are correct..it is RVP @50 ISO...
Glad to hear its coming out like new...
brbo
Well-known
From Kodak's financial report:
The Advanced Materials and Chemicals segment is comprised of four lines of business: Industrial Film and Chemicals, Motion Picture, Advanced Materials and Functional Printing and Kodak Services for Business (“KSB”). Kodak’s Advanced Materials and Chemicals products are distributed directly by Kodak and indirectly through dealers. Kodak Alaris, a professional and consumer still photographic film and chemicals customer, represented approximately 30% and 20% of total Advanced Materials and Chemicals segment revenues in 2020 and 2019, respectively.
Advanced Materials and Chemicals revenue declined $28 million (14%) from 2019 to 2020. The segment loss improved $11 million (32%) from 2019 to 2020 due to price increases on consumer still photographic film and solvents as well as operating cost reductions. Kodak plans to continue to promote the use of film to utilize as much film manufacturing capacity as possible.
So, consumer film and chemicals (Kodak Alaris) part was around $50m and $40m in 2020 and 2019 respectively. Kodak says improvements came mostly from price increase, so for now we are seeing very little (if at all) increase in consumer film supply from Kodak.
And just a wild guess, if Kodak gets on average $3 per roll that would make it around 15 million rolls (or equivalent) of Kodak film sold per year.
But since this thread is about Fuji... Good news is that demand for Fuji film is obviously strong. Fuji can afford almost 50% price increase of C200.
The Advanced Materials and Chemicals segment is comprised of four lines of business: Industrial Film and Chemicals, Motion Picture, Advanced Materials and Functional Printing and Kodak Services for Business (“KSB”). Kodak’s Advanced Materials and Chemicals products are distributed directly by Kodak and indirectly through dealers. Kodak Alaris, a professional and consumer still photographic film and chemicals customer, represented approximately 30% and 20% of total Advanced Materials and Chemicals segment revenues in 2020 and 2019, respectively.
Advanced Materials and Chemicals revenue declined $28 million (14%) from 2019 to 2020. The segment loss improved $11 million (32%) from 2019 to 2020 due to price increases on consumer still photographic film and solvents as well as operating cost reductions. Kodak plans to continue to promote the use of film to utilize as much film manufacturing capacity as possible.
So, consumer film and chemicals (Kodak Alaris) part was around $50m and $40m in 2020 and 2019 respectively. Kodak says improvements came mostly from price increase, so for now we are seeing very little (if at all) increase in consumer film supply from Kodak.
And just a wild guess, if Kodak gets on average $3 per roll that would make it around 15 million rolls (or equivalent) of Kodak film sold per year.
But since this thread is about Fuji... Good news is that demand for Fuji film is obviously strong. Fuji can afford almost 50% price increase of C200.
HHPhoto
Well-known
The price is most probably too high in your assessment, and the number of films too low. Because in 2019 my main film distributor told me that in summer 2019 the number of film backorders alone (ordered films which have not been shipped yet) was about 30 million for Kodak. In fall 2019 Leica had a big "film photography weekend" at their headquarter in Wetzlar. Some other manufacturers were also invited, including Kodak Alaris. And they confirmed it there.
In January 2020 the boss of Eastman Kodak's film business said in an interview that the yearly growth rate in film demand has increased to 30% p.a.
Here in Germany - which has generally an excellent film distribution and lab infrastructure - during the last year it has become quite difficult to get even the standard amateur films like Gold 200, Ultramax 400. They are permanently sold out. My film distributors, my local camera and film shop, the local drugstore chain shops, and the professional labs I use are all saying the same: Demand is so high that Kodak (and Fujifilm) cannot ship enough to satisfy the demand.
Cheers, Jan
Skiff
Well-known
Just as current additional information: Another evidence that Fujifilm is continuing to produce photo film, and is bringing products back:
The Fujifilm Quicksnap Waterproof 800 with Superia X-Tra 800 is back in production:
https://petapixel.com/2021/03/30/fu...e-quicksnap-waterproof-800-disposable-camera/
PKR
Veteran
Increased Film Prices..
Kitco Silver 5 year chart.
https://www.kitco.com/charts/popup/ag1825nyb.html
Could be linked to the increase in the cost of silver ? I'm pretty sure, film is still silver based?
Kitco Silver 5 year chart.
https://www.kitco.com/charts/popup/ag1825nyb.html
Could be linked to the increase in the cost of silver ? I'm pretty sure, film is still silver based?
brbo
Well-known
From Photrio:
According to PE the range of silver content in Kodak films is 150-300 mg/ft sq. If I do the math correctly a 35mm film of 36 photos has 75-150 mg of silver. My local silver nitrate dealer asks 1,5 euros per gram for silver nitrate. So with that price one roll has silver worth of 0.15 euros. That is probably much more than what Kodak pays to silver nitrate..
According to PE the range of silver content in Kodak films is 150-300 mg/ft sq. If I do the math correctly a 35mm film of 36 photos has 75-150 mg of silver. My local silver nitrate dealer asks 1,5 euros per gram for silver nitrate. So with that price one roll has silver worth of 0.15 euros. That is probably much more than what Kodak pays to silver nitrate..
Skiff
Well-known
Yes, it is still silver based. But silver-nitrate is only one of 100 - 130 different substances which are needed for and get into a film. And manufacturers have explained that there have been significant price increases recently on this raw material side, too.
And then we have in addition the cost increases caused by the global pandemic.