Nikon going out of the film camera business

[aad]

One last amusing thing I noticed-I brought a disk of scanned slides to a cheapie lab, and told them they were "digital" shots. The print process this lab uses for digital is LOUSY! The dots show up under a 5x loupe. But if you bring in a roll of film you get a very acceptable print.

 

[Gabriel M.A.]

Correct. A fact is not opinion or conjecture. Gravity is not opinion. Film is dead. that is not opinion and not conjecture. Kodak says they are exiting film. Agfa is gone. Film sales are decreasing like they fell off a cliff. The inescapable conclusion is that if you fall on your ass, you'll feel it. Gravity exists, and film is dead.

Whoa whoa whoa. You had me until your last sentence. I think one of the strings is out of tune because it don' sound rite: "I'm nobody. Nobody's perfect. Therefore, I'm perfect." There's a leap in there somewhere.

Your observation that film is really kicking the bucket is correct. But to claim flatly that it is "dead" is a fallacy: how come is it still being produced?

Dagerrotypes are dead. Cyanotypes are dead. Hell, the TQM fad is dead. Even the "Paul is dead" thing is dead. But film is still being produced, manufactured, shot, developed and printed as I type. It is not dead. And that is both fact and opinion.

Film's just...sick.

"Why did you shoot Agfa?"
"She was sick"
"Well, you were sick. How come we didn't shoot you?"
"That was different"

 

[bmattock]

Film's just...sick.

Terminally.

Would be it more reasonable to say that Film is dying, and not yet dead? One might be led to suspect that under the right conditions - if we all just tap our ruby slippers together and wish real hard - film might not die. It seems more honest to report that film is, for all intents and purposes, dead. It is all over but the shouting.

There is sick from which one will recover. Sick from which one may recover. And sick from which one will not recover. Monty Python's 'Bring out Your Dead' skit seems appropriate here.

"I'm not dead yet."

"Shut up old man, you soon will be."

If people squick at the use of my term 'dead', I posit that they merely wish to avoid facts by pretending the illness that has befallen film is something from which it will recover one day. But I think we agree that film is not going get better, yes?

I also say that 8-track tapes are 'dead'. And yet there are those who still trade them, buy and sell them, plot to make some kind of mythical minimum order with a son of a sailer in a Balkan nation who has a cousin who will make some new tapes for them at an un-named factory. They would say 8-tracks are 'not dead'. Just sick, they'd say. Due for a comeback any old day now. Soon as people come to their senses.

Film is not yet in the condition that 8-track tapes are in, but the tune is mighty familiar. Our final destination is 123 Mockingbird Lane, Twilight Zone City, and there are no detours, no stops, no waiting, end of the line.

We can argue forever about what 'dead' is. We can say that as long as one roll of film sits on one retail shelf in one camera store anywhere in the world, waiting for a buyer, film is not dead. OK, fine. Film is not dead. When I pass away, have me stuffed and prop me up in the corner - I'll never be dead if they don't plant me, right? It's just a word game at that point.

One is more polite when one speaks of people with terminal diseases - and none of us will live forever, either. But that's just being polite to people. Film is a thing, not a person - it has no feelings to hurt. Perhaps people who have a strong emotional bond to the use of film feel hurt instead.

Shall we rage against the dying of the light? Well, certainly, and with zeal besides. But leave us also prepare the stone and look for what's next after film is no longer our alchemical bride.

I shall use all the film that I can. I will enjoy it and try to procure more, and share it with my friends if I can. And when it is gone I will move on. Photography lives.

If it makes anyone feel any better, digital will one day be eclipsed as well, by some newer technology. And yes, there will be a generation of people who rant and rave and cling to their memory cards like they were Sacred Relics. And we'll think they're nuts. Good thing we don't look in mirrors much, eh?

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

 

[Bryan Lee]

I found some DEAD FILM!!!

 

[Bryan Lee]

Chicken Little


One day Chicken Little was walking in the woods when -- KERPLUNK -- an acorn fell on her head

"Oh my goodness!" said Chicken Little. "The sky is falling! I must go and tell the king."
On her way to the king's palace, Chicken Little met Henny Penny. Henny Penny said that she was going into the woods to hunt for worms.

"Oh no, don't go!" said Chicken Little. "I was there and the sky fell on my head! Come with me to tell the king."

So Henny Penny joined Chicken Little and they went along and went along as fast as they could.

Soon they met Cocky Locky, who said, "I'm going to the woods to hunt for seeds."

"Oh no, don't go!" said Henny Penny. "The sky is falling there! Come with us to tell the king."

So Cocky Locky joined Henny Penny and Chicken Little, and they went along and went along as fast as they could.

Soon they met Goosey Poosey, who was planning to go to the woods to look for berries.

"Oh no, don't go!" said Cocky Locky. "The sky is falling there! Come with us to tell the king." So Goosey Poosey joined Cocky Locky, Henny Penny and Chicken Little, and they went along as fast as they could.

Then who should appear on the path but sly old Foxy Woxy.

"Where are you going, my fine feathered friends?" asked Foxy Woxy. He spoke in a polite manner, so as not to frighten them.

"The sky is falling!" cried Chicken Little. "We must tell the king."

"I know a shortcut to the palace," said Foxy woxy sweetly. "Come and follow me."

But wicked Foxy Woxy did not lead the others to the palace. He led them right up to the entrance of his foxhole. Once they were inside, Foxy Woxy was planning to gobble them up!
Just as Chicken Little and the others were about to go into the fox's hole, they heard a strange sound and stopped.

It was the king's hunting dogs, growling and howling.
How Foxy Woxy ran, across the meadows and through the forests, with the hounds close behind. He ran until he was far, far away and never dared to come back again.
After that day, Chicken Little always carried an umbrella with her when she walked in the woods. The umbrella was a present from the king. And if -- KERPLUNK -- an acorn fell, Chicken Little didn't mind a bit. In fact, she didn't notice it at all.

The End​

 

[parks5920]

I wish I was surprised at what this turned into. Seems like any excuse to to see who can swing it bigger.

The announcement was also on Fox news, this evening. How in the world did this become a soap opera for Andy to jump on the "my way is better bandwagon" and Bill to once to take things to a new level. I am amazed at what this tuned into. All i was trying to show was that Nikon was getting out of the pro-sumer film camera business and I am sure Canon will soon follow. This only means more cheap manual focus and now some Af cameras being dumped. In the current issue of Rangefinder magazine, Fuji runs a four page pull out ad about there pro film. I don't think they are quitting just yet.

 

[Andy K]

The announcement was also on Fox news, this evening. How in the world did this become a soap opera for Andy to jump on the "my way is better bandwagon" and Bill to once to take things to a new level. I am amazed at what this tuned into. All i was trying to show was that Nikon was getting out of the pro-sumer film camera business and I am sure Canon will soon follow. This only means more cheap manual focus and now some Af cameras being dumped. In the current issue of Rangefinder magazine, Fuji runs a four page pull out ad about there pro film. I don't think they are quitting just yet.

I realise this entirely. Btw I haven't said my way is better, but when someone claims film production is one of the biggest polluters on the planet, in the face of the several silicon chip Everest's needing disposal each year. Most of which is shipped to third world countries for children to dismantle and burn thus releasing highly toxic gases and heavy metals. Then something has to be said.

Only 280 pounds, big fella. You stallion, you. You know you want some.

I knew I recognised you! You're YankmeSpankme over on the Leather
'n' Lube forum right? If you'd had your gimp suit on I'd have realised sooner! 😀

 

[RJBender]

No doubt about it ! Same in 2018 and in 2028. Film is "dead" when it isn't available any longer. Nowhere in the world. Not for $30 a roll and not for $300. As long as it is available it is not dead tho. So far about my definition of "dead" !

That's all not more than the silly conjuration of those who some years ago decided to sell us digital cameras solely and who try to do their very best to accelerate this process of changing the technology by partly giving up film production.
At the time the screaming about "film is dead " isn't more than plain marketing propaganda. Markets are made by consumers tho and they solely decide if film will vanish.

Agfa was killed intentionallyy, Ilford tho was saved and I am optimistic it will be one of those companies who will survive. And instead of staring of what kind of film isn't produced any longer we should better watch what an amazing portfolio they still produce, that's a really amazing bunch of "dead" stuff .
And considering that film is dead since 5 years already it is amazing what a stunning variety of products i still can buy here at any photoshop next corner, not to speak of the mail order companies.
There were too many players on the film market anyway, long before digital developed serious impact on the market, and there would have come a very serious consolidation anyway. That is forgotten as it seems tho this situation was the driving force for Kodak to go digital . Digital was the way out of a crowded and
not longer growing photo market, film as well as cameras !

And considering this pre-condition , which had an enormous additional impact, the shrinking of the film market since 2000 looks surprisingly undramatic, the reduction of sold film as well as the narrowing of the product portfolios.
CEWE, Germany's largest lab said half a year ago that still 70% of their 3 Billion prints per anno come from negs, THAT's what the FACTS are now, 5 years after
film was declared as beeing definitively dead. Tells me they still haven't managed to kill the P&S film market, not to speak of that niche about we WE speak here.

To parrot the conjurations of some puffers is a popular sport but has nothing to do with any kind of forecast competence, the truth is in the markets , not in the babble of those who try to push their business. And the markets tell us film is still alive and it will stay alive, no matter how fast and intensive the shrinking process of this market will run in future.

bertram

Good post, Bertram! I'm glad Bill is not licensed to practice medicine! I would not like to be declared dead when I still have a pulse. 😱

The sales of cheap, consumer grade film might be declining but that's understandable. Just because it disappears from the store shelves at Wal Mart might not mean that it is dying. Someone might be storing it in the freight containers behind the building to give customers an incentive to buy a new digital camera. 😀

R.J.

 

[Bryan Lee]

I see Bill likes to be on the recieving end of as many inflamed posts as he can arouse 😀 ​

 

[jaapv]

Aren't we confusing shifting markets with the apparent demise of film? As Bertram2 pointed out this only seems to hold true for the USA, not for Europe. And should Europe follow the USA, what about the developing world and China? Film will be the norm there for decades to come, and we are outnumbered by a fair margin there. The only thing that might happen is that you'll have to order your "Great Wall Tri-X" from Shanghai at some point in the futire.

 

[bmattock]

Aren't we confusing shifting markets with the apparent demise of film? As Bertram2 pointed out this only seems to hold true for the USA, not for Europe. And should Europe follow the USA, what about the developing world and China? Film will be the norm there for decades to come, and we are outnumbered by a fair margin there. The only thing that might happen is that you'll have to order your "Great Wall Tri-X" from Shanghai at some point in the futire.

http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.asp?feed=FT&Date=20060109&ID=5399371

Initially, Kodak had forecast continued growth in sales of traditional film canisters in markets such as China and India. The US company had hoped this would cushion the impact of losing this highly-profitable business when customers switched more rapidly to digital cameras in Europe and the US.

But consumers in China quickly adopted digital photography and in June 2005, Kodak accelerated plans to phase out its traditional film business – in part due to having underestimated the rapid decline of film in China.

Kodak will continue to sell film in China but is slowing investments while converting factories, such as a plant in Xiamen, to become centres for digital technology.

And Kodak owns the traditional film market in China, having beaten Fujifim and been given permission to aquire senior ownership positions with all five Chinese film manufacturers - so I think that pretty much does it for China.

And I think I've said this before. But go ahead, let's all pretend that film sales are growing in China and Europe and etc.

I said that China was 'technology jumping' and would go directly from nothing to digital, rather than from nothing to film to digital. This is typical and predictable in emerging nations - their new middle class moves right into the latest greatest, they don't replay the last twenty years that got us there. You think they're going to start buying B&W TV sets and putting up antennae? No, they're going right to HDTV and well-mounted plasma screens. That's how it works. I predicted it. I was right. Again.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

 

[Andy K]

I said that China was 'technology jumping' and would go directly from nothing to digital, rather than from nothing to film to digital. This is typical and predictable in emerging nations - their new middle class moves right into the latest greatest, they don't replay the last twenty years that got us there. You think they're going to start buying B&W TV sets and putting up antennae? No, they're going right to HDTV and well-mounted plasma screens. That's how it works. I predicted it. I was right. Again.

Best Regards,

Bill Mattocks

I would hardly call China an 'emerging nation'. Film photography has been strong in China for many years. Also the majority of their population live on the land, as sharecroppers etc. They do not have the infrastructure for the 'digital age'. A household computer would be about as much use as a doorstop to many in rural China. They do however have and use their old film cameras, from 35mm through medium format up to large format.
It isn't just China, even here in Britain there are areas where you cannot use mobile phones, where you cannot get broadband connections.
The assumption that everyone everywhere can adapt to digital technology is foolish. What about areas like the Himalaya? The Russian Steppes? These are vast places with large populations, where digital technologies are useless.
Not everyone lives in cities with access to all the necessary back up technology for the 'digital age'.

 

[jaapv]

Initially, Kodak had forecast continued growth in sales of traditional film canisters in markets such as China and India. The US company had hoped this would cushion the impact of losing this highly-profitable business when customers switched more rapidly to digital cameras in Europe and the US.

Could you please explain the rise in prints from negatives in Germany last year?

 

[bmattock]

Could you please explain the rise in prints from negatives in Germany last year?

Can you cite a source? I have lots of data on prints from film last year, I'd be happy to research it.

 

[jaapv]

I'll really have to look, Bill. I hope I can find it.I can hazard an explanation: Throwaway camera's i.e. film and lens in a box.

 

[bmattock]

I would hardly call China an 'emerging nation'.

7% GDP year on year for the last 5 years. By 2012, they'll be the largest economy on earth. They've gone from not even on the world economic power radar to front-runner in a decade. What do you call it if not 'emerging'?

In any case, does that invalidate the quote?

Film photography has been strong in China for many years. Also the majority of their population live on the land, as sharecroppers etc. They do not have the infrastructure for the 'digital age'. A household computer would be about as much use as a doorstop to many in rural China. They do however have and use their old film cameras, from 35mm through medium format up to large format.
It isn't just China, even here in Britain there are areas where you cannot use mobile phones, where you cannot get broadband connections.
The assumption that everyone everywhere can adapt to digital technology is foolish. What about areas like the Himalaya? The Russian Steppes? These are vast places with large populations, where digital technologies are useless.
Not everyone lives in cities with access to all the necessary back up technology for the 'digital age'.

How does that jibe with Kodak's results and their determination that they had underestimated the digital adoption rate? You figure mebbe they fired their top dogs in Asia and admitted that they made a big mistake just because?

 

[bmattock]

I'll really have to look, Bill. I hope I can find it.I can hazard an explanation: Throwaway camera's i.e. film and lens in a box.

I'm at home having a sammich right now, but I have the data at work - I saw the data. The entire market was a turn-down, with one blip, as I recall. In one month. And that's what got reported. Clutching at straws, I call it. Hey, Agfa is gone - should this not be telling someone something? I mean besides the Alien Conspiracy Black Helicopter guy.

 

[Bertram2]

. Just because it disappears from the store shelves at Wal Mart might not mean that it is dying.

No, the shelves of walmart are not a reliable indicator for what's going on on the film market, but for many these shelves seems to be the horizon line 🙄

Someone might be storing it in the freight containers behind the building to give customers an incentive to buy a new digital camera. 😀

In principle your thoughts go in the right direction, 😀 I wouldn't be surprised to learn that this really happened.

Digital was a big economical promise , all wanted to sell P&S for $ 800 instead for $ 200 and it was a seducing idea to sell consumer SLRs for $1500-2000 again , the same stuff you could have for $500 as analog technology. So whay not "talk film outta business" whenever ther was the chance, many of the photo mags did their very best too to help us into the new world.

Obviously up 'til today it has not worked as expected. The funny thing tho is that tho the analog film market has not died but is only shrinking the digital market istelf is shrinking aready ! The P&S market is almost saturated and attacked by the advanced cellphone cameras, dealers confirm that here in Europe.

And the market for DSLRs has too fast shrinking margins and is not so very far away from where it was 5 years ago on the analog side. No fat profits any longer.
An increasing market is only the printing from digital files, that's where the profits are now. But, as I said, here in Germany there are still much more prints ordered from neg than from a file.

bertram

 

[Bertram2]

Could you please explain the rise in prints from negatives in Germany last year?

Must be a misunderstanding . The RISE happened for the share of printing from SD cards, but the share of analog negative prints is still at 70% of the complete amount here.
The digital P&S shooters re-detected an old truth, a paper print in the hand is far better than a file on a monitor.
bertram

 

[jaapv]

You might well be right Bertram2, maybe I misunderstood;mea culpa. Anyway, I find myself that I have been having far more prints made from digital and film combined than I did before from film alone. It may well be because the Kodak prints I get online from Germany are far better than the ones chemical labs used to do. That goes for scanned film prints as well. It is also helpful that I can do darkroom work again, albeit in the computer. I simply lack time for chemical darkroom work, especially colour negs.