How long does film have?

[wilt]

I think that perhaps if a film factory were designed today, with modern concepts and the idea of being able to scale up or down easily, it would be a different story. But most if not all of these factories were built with early 20th century notions of maximum output for maximum efficiency - later improvements and upgrades merely made them produce more, faster, and with more precision. They just were not built to scale down.

Notice what I wrote about the possibility (however remote that may seem to us in this twilight era of silver-based photography) of innovation and entrepreneurship in silver-based photography. The nimble manufacturing style you propose might very well appear: mass-production methods for mass-market photographic supplies; small-scale production for niche-market photographic supplies.

There are some entrepreneurs active in the silver-halide sector, some new products actually reach market and old ones reintroduced.

The same year that saw Kodak withdraw from the IR film business, saw Efke/Fotokemika market their IR 820 film, available in 35 mm, 120, 127 (sic!), 4x5, 5x7, 8x10. Fuji Velvia 50 has recently been reintroduced.

Basically, my whole point of view is that we can not know for sure about the future of technologies and that people often seem to err so that they over-emphasise the complete disappearance of old technologies; in reality, we are surrounded by technologigal palimpsests.

 

[Nikon Bob]

I work in an industry that mass produces a product and the emphasis is on keeping the speed of production up. There are fixed costs that remain the same whether you run slow or fast. To maximize profit and reduce costs per unit you have to run as fast as possible. We ran machines that way right to the moment they were permanently shut down, idled is the euphemism used. Idled is as misleading as using throttled back to describe the reduction in film production. Throttled back means closures and in a declining market with little hope of recovering to previous levels of production leaves no doubt that it is a permanent solution.

Bob

 

[Trius]

Fuji's film division lost 46 billion yen last year, according to their annual report. You think that is indicative of success in the film arena?

The Imaging Solutions Division lost the 46B Yen, not film.

Annual Report/Review of Operations, Imaging Solutions.

As I read it, the picture isn't what some people are painting.

 

[bmattock]

The Imaging Solutions Division lost the 46B Yen, not film.

Annual Report/Review of Operations, Imaging Solutions.

As I read it, the picture isn't what some people are painting.

"The overall decrease was primarily attributable to lower sales of color films and digital minilabs, as well as development services at photo-processing laboratories."

I think you might be splitting hairs a bit, buddy. Any way you slice it, film did not do well - and they say this in several places throughout the report. I'm sorry, but it is what it is.

 

[ferider]

Old news, since the fiscal year ends in March for FF.

Here is a rather positive 9 months update:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080208/bs_afp/japanitcameraphotocompanyearningsfujifilm

 

[antiquark]

The Imaging Solutions Division lost the 46B Yen, not film.

Annual Report/Review of Operations, Imaging Solutions.

As I read it, the picture isn't what some people are painting.

So, in 2007, their revenue for "Color Film and Others" was 103 billion yen (950 million USD). It dropped 20% from the previous year.

Maybe a more realistic question is "when will Fuji call it quits?" I.e., at which point will the film revenue not be worthwhile? Then multiply by a 20% decrease each year, and we should be able to make an educated guess as to when film will officially die.

Next year, revenue will be $790 M USD, the year after, it will be $660 M. Still worthwhile, I'd say. In 10 years, it will be $150 M. Worthwhile? Maybe.

If Fuji's breaking point is $10 M, that works out to 24 years. If Fuji hangs on until revenue is a mere $1 M, that's 36 years.

 

[amateriat]

"Japan's Fujifilm Holdings Corp. said Friday its net profit for the nine months to December more than doubled on robust sales of camera phone lenses and flat panel display materials."

lol. camera phone lenses? You think that bodes well for film?

I think the more relevant question is: what does this mean for photography as you and I practice it, regardles of medium? I'm a guarded optimist about the matter in general, but I do have my dark moments of doubt.


- Barrett

 

[rjporter]

I just chatted with a friend who runs the used counter at a local shop (yes, i was fishing for extra discounts on some cool stuff) and he said this past holiday season was the best season in years for used film gear, it shocked everyone in the store. I'm sure they sold boatloads of digital stuff too, but people wouldn't stop asking for film cameras. We also have a shop here in Portland that only sells film cameras, if you talk digital at all, they show you the door. Must be the market here I guess.

 

[bmattock]

I think the more relevant question is: what does this mean for photography as you and I practice it, regardles of medium? I'm a guarded optimist about the matter in general, but I do have my dark moments of doubt.


- Barrett

If you read the news, Fujifilm is negotiating to buy a medical company that makes virus antibodies or some such. They want to be in the medical business.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2008/02/19/business/toyama.php

Fujifilm, Japan's only maker of photographic film, said last week that it would buy 66 percent of the drugmaker to diversify into pharmaceuticals as demand for camera supplies fell.

...

Global photo-film demand declined 75 percent in 2007 from its peak in 2000, said Yoshikazu Aoki, a Fujifilm corporate vice president

Weird, but weirder things have happened.

 

[Joe]

Flim Forever!

 

[bmattock]

Flim Forever!

Yes. Beer, too. Now that we've solved the world's problems, time for bed.

 

[Ade-oh]

Quote:
Global photo-film demand declined 75 percent in 2007 from its peak in 2000, said Yoshikazu Aoki, a Fujifilm corporate vice president"

So what? We all know this, it's the reason we're having this discussion.

The question is, is demand for film rapidly falling to zero as 'consumer' photographers abandon cameras for cellphones? The answer is no. We know that demand for film won't fall to zero, because there are photography enthusiasts - like the contributors to this forum - who will continue to want to buy it, and there are other specialist users who want to or need to continue using film for one reason or another. That doesn't include consumers who don't want to go down the digital route.

So, will this much smaller market be enough to sustain a degree of film production in the future? I suspect yes. Obviously the industry is going through dramatic changes but the decline in film sales, while fast, has not been catastrophic and the companies have had time to restructure and react whilst still generating significant revenue from film.

For now, I think we can confidently say that film is still a mass market product, but won't be for much longer. After that, film will still be required in industrial quantities by some users, like the movie industry, and in less predictable quantities by photographers. My guess is that the industry will try to make a profit from the residual market for photographic film before abandoning the business entirely, if they ever do.

 

[windraider]

Digital and camera phones currently rule the image making world - I'm quite certain that currently there are more digital images than prints/slides & negatives combined.
Another clear sign is that all major camera manufacturers have ceased development and drastically wound down production of new film cameras for the mass market.
Almost all new film cameras produced in the last 2 yrs were for enthusiast (ie the Leica, Ikons & Bessas). I can't seem to recall a new consumer grade film camera (PnS or SLR) that has been released by on of the big 4 camera manufacturers.
That said, do you think the current number of photo-enthusiasts using film cameras are as numerous as the total number of photographers in the 1930s, 1950s or 1960s? If it the film industry (ie manufacturers & users) found it sustainable for film to survive then, shouldn't that apply today too?
Demolishing film factories with no replacements are a clear sign of the medium's decline, but would there be a base number of users that will still economically sustain a one or two mega-factory industry?

Btw on the analogy of digital & mechanical watches - mass market producers such as Seiko, Citizen & Swatch still produce new automatic watches that are equivalent in cost to their digital sibilings. Not sure if this would have any relation to the photo industry - but I hope so 🙂

 

[Ade-oh]

All the industry numbers show that the drop in sales has not bottomed out, but continues to decline at 15 or 20 percent year over year. What does Fuji do when they look at the rapidly declining film market and consider their big money makers are lenses for cell phone cameras and building LCD screens? At some point the cost of infrastructure, equipment and staffing to service that rapidly falling asset makes it a liability that they will eliminate.

But we probably aren't talking about all film products here, are we? My suspicion is that while consumer film sales have fallen through the floor, other types of film will be less affected. I had a conversation with my dentist recently when she x-rayed my teeth. I asked her if her surgery was likely to convert to digital x-rays; the answer was no, the current film-based system was fine and they would continue to use it. I suspect the same will be true across the world, particularly where there are publicly-funded health systems. Similarly the movie industry is unlikely to go fully digital any time soon. This kind of business will keep film being manufactured and will dissaude companies from getting out of film entirely.

 

[Kim Coxon]

Ah! but you are trying to discuss the matter with logic and reasoning. That is never going to succeed with people who only wish to "prove" their point and are more than happy to distort the issue with selected "facts" and quotes. Indeed, my favourite quote this week comes from another thread:

And I'm not sure how to respond to your comment, because its spirit seems less discursive than argumentative.

Kim

But we probably aren't talking about all film products here, are we? My suspicion is that while consumer film sales have fallen through the floor, other types of film will be less affected. I had a conversation with my dentist recently when she x-rayed my teeth. I asked her if her surgery was likely to convert to digital x-rays; the answer was no, the current film-based system was fine and they would continue to use it. I suspect the same will be true across the world, particularly where there are publicly-funded health systems. Similarly the movie industry is unlikely to go fully digital any time soon. This kind of business will keep film being manufactured and will dissaude companies from getting out of film entirely.

 

[Sparrow]

This is just like a tennis match, an entertaining and a fairly innocuous way of passing the time.

🙂

 

[Kim Coxon]

The discussion is about the cost effectiveness of keeping a factory open. The medical profession etc will pay what they need to to get x-ray film etc. If the factory is open, running small batches of 35mm film like Fuji do with special emulsions could be a cost effective way of producing 35mm film. It is not about trying to use x-ray film in 35mm cameras or buying it from Wal-Mart but perhaps that doesn't suit your arguement. 😉

Kim

Ade-oh, perhaps we should then develop cameras that use X-ray film and provide instructions at Wal-Mart on how to bulk load 400 ft movie film "ends" at home. And then you have to get the stuff processed.

You're arguing at the fringes. I don't care how dedicated a film shooter you are, how many film shooters do you think are going to actually struggle to find and process film once it is scarce?

 

[Trius]

I think you might be splitting hairs a bit, buddy. Any way you slice it, film did not do well - and they say this in several places throughout the report. I'm sorry, but it is what it is.

My point was that it wasn't FILM that lost 43B Yen, it was the whole division, and that part of that loss was due to vicious competition in digital cameras. If you read the summary I referenced, there were some bright spots. Well, less dim.

I am not saying film isn't declining; not even I am such a moron. Film is being kept alive largely because of the movie industry, and Kodak has the lion's share of that market I believe. But film is still a cash cow at Kodak, they were able to reduce production costs significantly recently by modernization, automation and centralization. They wouldn't have made that investment if it weren't worth it for some reasonable period of time.

 

[Ade-oh]

You're arguing at the fringes. I don't care how dedicated a film shooter you are, how many film shooters do you think are going to actually struggle to find and process film once it is scarce?

No, this is at the heart of the argument. I think it's very unlikely that Kodak and Fuji will get out of film entirely because there are still profits to be made from manufacturing it. What is entirely obvious is that photographic film as a mass-market consumer item is not going to be around for very long but that doesn't mean film will disappear completely or become prohibitively expensive.

 

[bmattock]

But we probably aren't talking about all film products here, are we? My suspicion is that while consumer film sales have fallen through the floor, other types of film will be less affected. I had a conversation with my dentist recently when she x-rayed my teeth. I asked her if her surgery was likely to convert to digital x-rays; the answer was no, the current film-based system was fine and they would continue to use it. I suspect the same will be true across the world, particularly where there are publicly-funded health systems. Similarly the movie industry is unlikely to go fully digital any time soon. This kind of business will keep film being manufactured and will dissaude companies from getting out of film entirely.

Kodak sold off their health care system entirely, rather than modernize it.

As well, industry analysts seem to be saying that your dentist is not keep up with the current trends:

http://www.frost.com/prod/servlet/report-brochure.pag?id=F500-01-00-00-00

Digital x-rays also expose patients to less radiation - so doctors and dentists who use it are also showing increasing concern for their patient's long-term exposure to radiation danger.