gb hill
Veteran
Tri x isn't but others are. I'm not worried at all about tri x going under. It's their best selling b&w film. You don't seem to get the point at all, If Kodak is manufacturing motion picture film as long as they are making a profit on consumer films it seems foolish for them to quit.
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
One thing about it, only the bean counters at Kodak know for sure.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Picket: LOL! Well, I am NOT too happy with them, haven't been thrilled since the mid-70s when they tried to tell us their RC papers had less silver but looked like they had more silver due to their clever technology ... my a$$.
I switched completely to Ilford for film and most paper, plus some Agfa. I really loved HP4, but switched back to Tri-X when HP5 came out -- it just wasn't as good, and the HP5+ still isn't close, IMO.
And I still don't "forgive" them for discontinuing K25 -- I think that was a mistake from an economic viewpoint as well. I have a feeling (and it's only a feeling) that if they had continued K25, Kodachrome would have survived into its 75th year, maybe longer.
Ilford pretty much shut down the film and paper products, but a management buyout created Harman. I think Fuji continues with film simply because they would like to outlast Kodak. Agfa died at least in part because of its own stupidity and ineptitude with distribution channels in the Americas.
All that said, I try to think in a balanced way about Kodak. There are more than enough people here and elsewhere who trash Kodak as a company based purely on emotion and lack of logic. There is no perfect company. Reality is simply what IS. Getting all hepped up about something is understandable, but in the end it doesn't help when it goes beyond venting some initial emotion. Attachment is the cause of suffering. As much as I like something, let's say Tri-X, if it dies -- it dies. I may stock up if I see the end coming, and/or do whatever I can to move on with something different, just as I will after I complete my "Kodachrome Farewell" project.
If film and its support products go away, I'll just move on. Photography is bigger and more important to me than the products and tools used. Yes, I have an exceedingly high comfort level with film and analog cameras. Yes, losing them as tools would not be my choice. But the choice of whether film continues is not mine, so I refuse to try and make it mine.
You can't fight the universe.
I switched completely to Ilford for film and most paper, plus some Agfa. I really loved HP4, but switched back to Tri-X when HP5 came out -- it just wasn't as good, and the HP5+ still isn't close, IMO.
And I still don't "forgive" them for discontinuing K25 -- I think that was a mistake from an economic viewpoint as well. I have a feeling (and it's only a feeling) that if they had continued K25, Kodachrome would have survived into its 75th year, maybe longer.
Ilford pretty much shut down the film and paper products, but a management buyout created Harman. I think Fuji continues with film simply because they would like to outlast Kodak. Agfa died at least in part because of its own stupidity and ineptitude with distribution channels in the Americas.
All that said, I try to think in a balanced way about Kodak. There are more than enough people here and elsewhere who trash Kodak as a company based purely on emotion and lack of logic. There is no perfect company. Reality is simply what IS. Getting all hepped up about something is understandable, but in the end it doesn't help when it goes beyond venting some initial emotion. Attachment is the cause of suffering. As much as I like something, let's say Tri-X, if it dies -- it dies. I may stock up if I see the end coming, and/or do whatever I can to move on with something different, just as I will after I complete my "Kodachrome Farewell" project.
If film and its support products go away, I'll just move on. Photography is bigger and more important to me than the products and tools used. Yes, I have an exceedingly high comfort level with film and analog cameras. Yes, losing them as tools would not be my choice. But the choice of whether film continues is not mine, so I refuse to try and make it mine.
You can't fight the universe.
wgerrard
Veteran
Well, you're much closer to the source than I am. I'm trying to take a middle course in this discussion. I hope film survives, and I expect it will for years to come. But, I don't think enthusiasm for either film or digital should blind us to reality. The market for film has shrunk and is shrinking. Assuming film survives requires assuming that the decline in film demand eventually plateaus out at a point where film production and sales remain profitable. I expect that to happen, but I have no idea when or at what level.
On the other hand, I expect digital cameras to follow a path much like that taken by personal computers and every other digital toy in the last two decades or so. Pick any price point, and technical capability will improve fairly rapidly for a time. Meaning that vendors can make frequent releases of marginally better and more featured models. That is a sign of a young and immature digital industry. At some point, however, the tech used in digital cameras will mature, just as it has in the personal computer industry, and the market will no longer be driven by the desire to upgrade. People will buy new hardware to acquire capability they need. Users will be able to buy a digital camera and expect to use it for 5-8 years or so without falling behind the technology curve.
Last edited:
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
If Tri-X is their best selling film, don't get me wrong I'm not having a go at you here, why is the stuff going out the back door to be re-branded and heavily discounted as Arista Premium by Freestyle?
beyond
Jason Beyond
I hope they dont discon Tri-X.
Lilserenity
Well-known
Well, no one knows how long it will be with us for. But it won't be forever, otherwise I'd still be able to pop down Staples and buy some papyrus, maybe the odd tablet/chisel back to school set would still be on sale. 
Enjoy it, use it and make the most of it while you can. I think that will be quite a while, but who knows.
Enjoy it, use it and make the most of it while you can. I think that will be quite a while, but who knows.
Mablo
Well-known
Production quantities matter for Kodak. It makes sense for them to produce more film (than the total demand for Tri-X) and sell the rest as rebranded. We don't know what the factory price is for Arista Premium vs. Tri-X but I have a gut feeling that they are making profit with it. So basically everybody wins.
Ten years down the road we propably have approximately the same selection of films available we have today - but all of it might come from one or two production lines.
ChrisLivsey
Veteran
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
The price of "real" Tri-X is far from its production price. A big part of it, is the distribution effort made by Kodak... They found they could avoid distribution and make new profit if other company bought a huge amount of film. I guess for Kodak it's just numbers as always. Even though consumer film market came down long ago, there's a smaller market for pros, students, film lovers, etc... I think that market is stable now and very alive just because it moves millons every month... I feel all this seemed darker a few years ago... Now more young people know film is better than digital talking about the final print, and its only limit is price... But film is not looked at as "a surpassed media from the past" anymore.
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
The market is not stable. Film sales continue to decline by double digits, quarter after quarter. I keep seeing posted that it has stabilized or there is an "uptick" in film sales, but Fuji and Kodak's actual numbers show exactly the opposite.
wilt
Well-known
Relax. Black and white film will be around for a long time.
There are examples of dominant technologies that gets into trouble because of something "better" coming along but continue to live on. Earlier in this discussion, the case of oil-painting equipment has been mentioned, to which could be added cases such as
valve-based audio equipment
analogue synthesizers
vinyl records
old-school motorcycles
An interesting and more general argument about how we are often too neophilic in our views on technology has been made by David Edgerton, a historian of technology at Imperial College, in his book The Shock of the Old: Technology and Global History Since 1900.
There are examples of dominant technologies that gets into trouble because of something "better" coming along but continue to live on. Earlier in this discussion, the case of oil-painting equipment has been mentioned, to which could be added cases such as
valve-based audio equipment
analogue synthesizers
vinyl records
old-school motorcycles
An interesting and more general argument about how we are often too neophilic in our views on technology has been made by David Edgerton, a historian of technology at Imperial College, in his book The Shock of the Old: Technology and Global History Since 1900.
wgerrard
Veteran
If Arista Premium is literally Tri-X in a different container, then, logically, Kodak is either breaking even, taking a loss, or making a profit on that deal.
Perhaps they can't absolutely predict the amount of Tri-X they can put into the market and Freestyle buys the overruns. Perhaps the retail price of Tri-X carries a substantial profit margin and Kodak gives Freestyle a discount because eliminating marketing and distribution costs allow them to keep a profit margin. (Remember, too, that Freestyle also has minimal marketing and distribution costs.)
The book publishing industry does something similar. It's difficult to predict with absolute accuracy how big a press run needs to be. So a company may print 5000 copies of a new novel, in the knowledge that sales will likely fall short of that. What's left -- the remainders -- are sold at deep discount on the remainder tables we've all seen in bookstores.
Perhaps they can't absolutely predict the amount of Tri-X they can put into the market and Freestyle buys the overruns. Perhaps the retail price of Tri-X carries a substantial profit margin and Kodak gives Freestyle a discount because eliminating marketing and distribution costs allow them to keep a profit margin. (Remember, too, that Freestyle also has minimal marketing and distribution costs.)
The book publishing industry does something similar. It's difficult to predict with absolute accuracy how big a press run needs to be. So a company may print 5000 copies of a new novel, in the knowledge that sales will likely fall short of that. What's left -- the remainders -- are sold at deep discount on the remainder tables we've all seen in bookstores.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
Juan, yes, the cost of distribution and marketing is not insubstantial, so when Kodak sends of large quantities of film to Freestyle, indeed it takes a big chunk out of their costs.
"Just about numbers" -- well, isn't that true of any company, ultimately? Fuji has been re-branding for ages, and other companies have supplied emulsions to Freestyle to be branded as Arista.
I don't get why people dump on Kodak for this -- a fortnight without beer for you, Keith. And if you continue to behave badly I'll tell the lovely Carol to stop posing for you!
"Just about numbers" -- well, isn't that true of any company, ultimately? Fuji has been re-branding for ages, and other companies have supplied emulsions to Freestyle to be branded as Arista.
I don't get why people dump on Kodak for this -- a fortnight without beer for you, Keith. And if you continue to behave badly I'll tell the lovely Carol to stop posing for you!
skibeerr
Well-known
the small second hand corner of an Antwerp camerastore has sold almost al of it's analog cameras to students, despite the fact that lokal schools closed the darkrooms and first year students start with digital.
It might be a smal fashion hype but some might stay hooked.
Anyway I am heading for the big 50 so what will be gone first, film or me, I think it will be me.
It might be a smal fashion hype but some might stay hooked.
Anyway I am heading for the big 50 so what will be gone first, film or me, I think it will be me.
JohnTF
Veteran
Czech's have closed down Neobrom (10+ years ago), but Foma seems to be doing OK. The Cz Crown is now 18 to the dollar, five years ago it was 40. However, there are a lot of countries that make film.
I keep urging Roger and Tom to buy Neobrom in Brno, but so far, deaf ears. ;-) Head Bartender, are you listening? They made about 20 terrific papers at one time.
I could see a RFF 400, and Chamois Fiber Karton paper. ;-)
Regards, John
JohnTF
Veteran
I saw the change occurring regionally, as photography instructors retire, they find fewer replacements who know analog at all.
They tend to go with what ever is convenient to the personnel at hand.
Administrator's with brains or savvy have always been rare, so don't expect leadership to be cognizant or help in any way.
It is a crap shoot with loaded dice for the "new" instructors.
Regards, John
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
What I meant in the end is that Kodak, for example, comes out with Ektar 100 in two formats because they trust that small but stable part of the market, not because they want to make that market a lot bigger with a new film.
Film will be here long after all of us have gone.
Cheers,
Juan
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
Juan, Kodak was introducing new B&W photo paper right up to the point where they stopped producing it. Kodak's philosophy over the decades has been to develop new products but not release them until older products have run their course (i.e., made them as much money as they could). They released Ektar when they did, I suspect, not because they believed film had a long future, but because they then pulled the plug on Kodacrome and hoped Ektar would somehow capture that market, as well as provide a hoped for alternative to digital.
IMHO, of course.
IMHO, of course.
bmattock
Veteran
Define 'a lot'. I make it USA, UK, Japan, Italy, Czech Republic, and Croatia. Is that a 'lot'?
Remaining manufacturers:
Kodak - USA
Fujifilm - Japan
Ilford - UK
Ferrania - Italy
FOMA - Czech Republic
Efke - Croatia
Unknown status:
Lucky - China
Shantou Era - China
Shanghai - China
Tasma - Russia
Svema - Belarus
Gone:
Polaroid - USA
Konica, Minolta, and Konica-Minolta - Japan
Mitsubishi - Japan
Forte - Hungary
Agfa - Germany
Slavich - Russia
Tura - Germany
...
This is just a list from memory - if I'm wrong, correct me. However, I do not count companies that 'produce' film made from old stock as 'manufacturers', as they do not create the film, and when it is gone, it is gone. I only count companies that actually create film in their own film manufacturing plants. I also do not accept "well, they still have a web page" as proof of life, nor "well my dealer says they still make it." I am of course aware of the various 'films' produced by Rollei (also out of business), ORWO, Adox, and etc - all films made for them by others, either from old remaining stocks, or Agfa-Gevaert Belgian-made films originally intended for other uses, such as traffic surveillance films. One can certainly take photos with such film, but I don't think they count as 'current manufacture' as they are more like bespoke production.
Last edited: