David Hughes
David Hughes
Hmmm, does anyone know what they use in China? I'm thinking they should still have colour and B&W available...
Regards, David
Regards, David
bmattock
Veteran
I do not believe they are still in production, but it was Lucky (color, B&W), Shantou Era (B&W), Shanghai (B&W), and a few others. Kodak invested heavily in upgrading Lucky's facilities and became a minority stake owner some years back, which ended badly and Kodak lost a bundle. There was a news release some time ago that said that Lucky was leaving the photographic film business in favor of other type of coated plastic film manufacture, but others here have disputed that and claimed they are still manufacturing film. YMMV.
dfoo
Well-known
What is absolutely certain is that as of this summer all of these films are still widely available in China in 135 and 120. I didn't check sheet film.
bmattock
Veteran
Of that I am certain. They also show up on eBay.
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
That makes sense, Al. For the longest time I wondered why do those places kept their C-41 machines alive. Two brand new drugstores popping up near my neighborhood, both have 1-hr film processing.
I wouldn't think that they (the minilabs) would have anything to do these days, but then again I never see those machine without any negatives hanging to dry either.
Lilserenity
Well-known
We need to worry a little I think ... no one wants their hobby shut down by circumstances beyond their control!
Should we all learn to crochet maybe?
Crochet, my mum does that, but it's not something I plan on taking up
DOn't get me wrong, the day I can't buy a roll of Tri X I'll be mortified, gutted and distraught, but I'm just going to enjoy myself and hey it might be here another 10 years, maybe 20, maybe 30, or 5, who knows -- so I'm just going to make the most of it now, and with a bit of luck in 20 years time I'll still be able to load up my M2, shoot some film, process it, print it in the darkroom and get the thrill from it that I do now, the thrill I don't get one jot out of digital processing and digital photography.Anyway, I have two rolls of Tri X to process, a roll of FP4+, dinner to cook and I planned on an early night!
The main thing is I love photography, that's the true thrill.
Vicky
DerekF
Established
I don't know, it's hard to say. However, 10 years ago, if you had asked me whether I'd be willing to spend $12 on a roll of 36-exposure colour film, I'd have said "no way." Yet that's where we're at now and I still buy colour film from time to time. (I was never a big user of colour film, though.) I've also seen Tri-X roughly double in price locally over the last five years, and I continue to buy it anyway and it hasn't affected my shooting habits at all. The price increases have always been gradual so I basically just work it all into my budget.
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
Derek, surprisingly to me, many people I've asked that question have said they would pay significantly more to keep shooting film. The numbers range from $25 to $30 a roll for Tri-X. That many film buyers appear insensitive to prices is a good sign for the film industry.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Last photokina I talked to an Iranian company that was (from all I could tell) coating their own colour film. Unless my memory is at fault and it was only colour paper...
Cheers,
R.
Cheers,
R.
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
I buy Tri-X and Sensia100 slide film from freestyle: $2 each roll aprox... Two of the best emulsions ever for B&W and color... But yes, I guess we all would pay a lot more, and just shoot with more care...
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
That may be a good sign but it is also easy to say until you are faced with the grim reality.
Bob
dfoo
Well-known
I wouldn't pay $25-$30 for a roll of TriX. No way.
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
Today, some rolls of slide film here in Europe are around 12 euros: $15-$20. And go develop them in a Q-certified Lab...
Cheers,
Juan
Cheers,
Juan
TEZillman
Well-known
I've read through seven pages of this thread now and I can't understand how a Kodak or a FujiFilm could possibly stop producing film at any time in the near future. Film has been their core business. It's what they are known for. Its part of their DNA. They may stop making a particular type (e.g. Kodachrome), but to stop making film would be suicidal from a marketing perspective. They would become "that company that used to make film and know makes ... " what? batteries? In order to exit the film industry, a Kodak or a FujiFilm would need to reinvent themselves. They would need to become known for something other than film. I do accept that they may stop making film should they go out of business, but I can't see them intentionally leaving the business until they have a strong marketing presence with brand recognition in some other field.
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
Tom, they HAVE reinvented themselves. Only a very tiny percentage of Fuji's business is film. And Kodak changed course publicly to become a completely digital company several years ago.
TEZillman
Well-known
I disagree. They have little to no brand recognition in any other field. It would be like GM trying to stop making cars. Their brand value as the best known makers of film is extremely valuable, even in the digital age. For instance, the Kodak name can sell many different items, but without being a manufacturer of film are they still Kodak? How long will the brand recognition last? They stopped making photo paper, but that was such a small niche that the general public never noticed. When they announced they were going to stop making Kodachrome you would have thought that some great and beloved statesman had passed away (even though Kodachrome lost out as "the" slide film to Fuji 20 years ago). I would say that from a marketing perspective, they have not reinvented themselves. You say Kodak and people think film. Same goes for FujiFilm.
TEZillman
Well-known
By the way, the name of the company is Fujifilm. Not Fuji. Makes it very difficult to stop making film. If they changed their name to Fuji they might be mistaken for the bicycle company of one of the other thousands of companies that have Fuji in their name.
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
Tom, obviously not for Kodak. They are selling film for about half price through Freestyle under another name. They don't seem too concerned about brand recognition.
Fuji's primary business has been information and document solutions, along with commercial film processors and chemicals for years. Film has not been more than 18 percent (12 percent over the last year) of a single division of the company for the last seven or eight years.
I always preferred Fuji slide film to Kodak. Switched completely back in the 1980's. But time marches on.
Fuji's primary business has been information and document solutions, along with commercial film processors and chemicals for years. Film has not been more than 18 percent (12 percent over the last year) of a single division of the company for the last seven or eight years.
I always preferred Fuji slide film to Kodak. Switched completely back in the 1980's. But time marches on.
wgerrard
Veteran
Tom, I suspect that if went out in the streets here in the States and said "Kodak" to people, a fair number would associate that name with photography, but not necessarily film. If you said "Fuji", few would make that association. Most of the Fuji film sold here has to be rebranded drugstore film.
The fact that Fuji's actual name is "Fujifilm" but they are known as "Fuji" does not speak well for the place of film in the general population. The corporation could legally change its name to "Fuji" and no one would notice.
However, none of this, I think, has much to do with the longevity of film as a commercial retail product. Film will survive if people want it, if it can be sold to those people at a profit, and if someone wants to do that. None of those conditions imply the other two.
The fact that Fuji's actual name is "Fujifilm" but they are known as "Fuji" does not speak well for the place of film in the general population. The corporation could legally change its name to "Fuji" and no one would notice.
However, none of this, I think, has much to do with the longevity of film as a commercial retail product. Film will survive if people want it, if it can be sold to those people at a profit, and if someone wants to do that. None of those conditions imply the other two.
dfoo
Well-known
All this speculation is just that. At the present time I can buy film. Very cheaply even! Color, black and white, whatever. I saw rolls of superia 800 in the local shop for $2 a roll. I just bought 10 rolls of Portra for $30 CDN. I can buy 100 foot roll of Tri-X for $48.99 USD, or if I want to buy Arista $34.99. As far I'm concerned the situation right now is far too good to worry about the future. Whatever comes comes. In the meantime I'm going to enjoy shooting film!