Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > Photography General Interest

Photography General Interest Neat Photo stuff NOT particularly about Rangefinders.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

The end of Fuji film?? NOPE - False Alarm
Old 12-01-2012   #1
Pickett Wilson
Registered User
 
Pickett Wilson's Avatar
 
Pickett Wilson is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,846
The end of Fuji film?? NOPE - False Alarm

"In September, Fuji said, "it has been decided to discontinue the sales of negative films, positive films, and some other products of motion picture in a prospect of March 2013." (Its translation.)"

Quoted from here:
http://www.economist.com/blogs/babba...-analogue-film
__________________
______________________________________________
"There is something rather sad about a truckload of caviar"

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...0&ppuser=28005
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #2
Marc G.
film loving student
 
Marc G.'s Avatar
 
Marc G. is offline
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Bayreuth
Age: 31
Posts: 216
would be a strange move with neopan 400 being re-introduced in europe while they said that if the demand rises they'll re-introduce astia again..
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #3
MartinP
Registered User
 
MartinP is offline
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Netherlands
Posts: 2,031
As a native English speaker I suggest the quote is referring to motion-picture products -- "some other products of motion picture". This is already known.

What's the surprise?
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #4
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
 
sevo is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Posts: 6,363
Yawn. That well known announcement concerns motion picture stock. As far as announced not positives proper by the way, but intermediates.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #5
PatrickONeill
Registered User
 
PatrickONeill's Avatar
 
PatrickONeill is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Weatherford, Tx
Age: 39
Posts: 361
threads like these keep me away from RFF..
__________________
flickr | tumblr | twitter
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #6
Ezzie
E. D. Russell Roberts
 
Ezzie's Avatar
 
Ezzie is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Norway
Posts: 2,708
I heard an interview a couple of weeks ago at the NYC PDN expo with NA Fuji rep stating this was related to motion picture stock only.
__________________
Eirik

RF: Leica M4-2 | Royal 35-M | Polaroid 110A/600SE hybrid
VF: DIY 4x5 | DIY 6x17 | Voigtländer Vito CL | Foth Derby | Welta Weltix | Smena Symbol | Lomo'Instax
SLR: Canon EF | Pentacon SIX | Pentax SP1000 | Pentax SV
TLR: Rolleiflex 2.8E3 | DUO TLR
CSC: Fuji X-E1
Pinhole: 6x17 Vermeer | ONDU 6x6 | DIY 4x5 | DIY 6x24

My Flickr
Silver Halides - Pictures in B&W
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #7
Pickett Wilson
Registered User
 
Pickett Wilson's Avatar
 
Pickett Wilson is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,846
It's never a good sign when a manufacturer stop producing any kind of film. It's a slope right now, but at some point there will be a precipice.
__________________
______________________________________________
"There is something rather sad about a truckload of caviar"

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...0&ppuser=28005
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #8
Eric T
Registered User
 
Eric T is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 752
If Fuji and Kodak eventually stop production of color films, will any niche manufacturer maintain production? Several small manufacturers produce black and white film, but do any make color?
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #9
thegman
Registered User
 
thegman is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 40
Posts: 3,813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pickett Wilson View Post
It's never a good sign when a manufacturer stop producing any kind of film. It's a slope right now, but at some point there will be a precipice.
Sure, but at the same time, there are new films coming to market. Kodak 500T is not that new, but I understand that it's not been available ready to shoot in 35mm until now. The Brothers Wright are selling it in 35mm canisters ready to shoot, with remjet removed. Now these are just details, but the point is that a month ago, as far as I know, I could not buy 500T ready to shoot in 35mm, now I can.

Same goes for SilverMax, last year, this was not for sale, and now it is.

Some things will come and some things will go, but it's not all bad for film, not by a long way. New cameras have appeared, new films have appeared, it could be a lot worse. The film market could have contracted by half over the last year, but it didn't, the digital camera market did though.

The digital camera market needs to adjust to market changes, as does film, neither is in a death spiral.
__________________
My Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #10
Eric T
Registered User
 
Eric T is offline
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 752
See this article about the future of Kodak film from today's Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/busine....html?hpid=z11
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #11
Pickett Wilson
Registered User
 
Pickett Wilson's Avatar
 
Pickett Wilson is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,846
So the argument that the movie film business was propping up the still film business wasn't correct. The movie film industry was actually irrelevant.
__________________
______________________________________________
"There is something rather sad about a truckload of caviar"

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...0&ppuser=28005
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #12
Pickett Wilson
Registered User
 
Pickett Wilson's Avatar
 
Pickett Wilson is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,846
Wow. As much as I loved 55PN, I sure wouldn't pay $6 a pop for a new version. But, there are a lot of folks that would. Niche markets where price is no object are going to be where its at with film.
__________________
______________________________________________
"There is something rather sad about a truckload of caviar"

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...0&ppuser=28005
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #13
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
 
sevo is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Posts: 6,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pickett Wilson View Post
So the argument that the movie film business was propping up the still film business wasn't correct. The movie film industry was actually irrelevant.
There will have been periods when Kodak were struggling to keep above some threshold where they could buy some raw materials cheaper - and then, total volume does count. But in general, no - there will not be that much overlap except in the production line. And the impulse of a modern MBA when facing one high and one low volume product, both struggling, will be to "concentrate on the core business" and ditch the latter, so overall we'd better hope that motion picture and film don't end up too closely bundled within Kodak.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #14
Pickett Wilson
Registered User
 
Pickett Wilson's Avatar
 
Pickett Wilson is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,846
Come on Mod, if you don't like the thread, delete it. Don't chnge the name.
__________________
______________________________________________
"There is something rather sad about a truckload of caviar"

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...0&ppuser=28005
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #15
thegman
Registered User
 
thegman is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 40
Posts: 3,813
To be fair on the Mod, there is nothing wrong with the content of the thread, but the title is scaremongering. Changing the name seems harmless and fairly "hands off" as far as moderation goes.
__________________
My Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #16
grainhound
Registered User
 
grainhound is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 377
Quote:
Originally Posted by thegman View Post
Sure, but at the same time, there are new films coming to market. Kodak 500T is not that new, but I understand that it's not been available ready to shoot in 35mm until now. The Brothers Wright are selling it in 35mm canisters ready to shoot, with remjet removed. Now these are just details, but the point is that a month ago, as far as I know, I could not buy 500T ready to shoot in 35mm, now I can.

Same goes for SilverMax, last year, this was not for sale, and now it is.
Last summer I bought two short ends of Vision 3 cine stock: 240' of 250D and 230' of 500T, all for $20. It's that cheap because 200' of film = 2:13 minutes of time. Another way to put it is that 200' of cine stock is garbage to motion picture guys. I've rolled my own since the 60s, so I'm only somewhat apprehensive about getting the rem-jet off. However, in Vision 2 and cine Fuji I have 500' of film to experiment with, so I think I can figure it out and not worry about wasting film.

Regional disparities: no retailers will import C-41 chemistry into Canada, so when the kit I have is finished, I'll get it from macodirect.de if I stick with Digibase C-41.

I bought the film here: http://www.certifiedfilm.com/. They're good to deal with, and they'll ship. No connection, other than getting almost free film. I couldn't find The Brothers Wright on line.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #17
thegman
Registered User
 
thegman is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 40
Posts: 3,813
Quote:
Originally Posted by grainhound View Post
Last summer I bought two short ends of Vision 3 cine stock: 240' of 250D and 230' of 500T, all for $20. It's that cheap because 200' of film = 2:13 minutes of time. Another way to put it is that 200' of cine stock is garbage to motion picture guys. I've rolled my own since the 60s, so I'm only somewhat apprehensive about getting the rem-jet off. However, in Vision 2 and cine Fuji I have 500' of film to experiment with, so I think I can figure it out and not worry about wasting film.

Regional disparities: no retailers will import C-41 chemistry into Canada, so when the kit I have is finished, I'll get it from macodirect.de if I stick with Digibase C-41.

I bought the film here: http://www.certifiedfilm.com/. They're good to deal with, and they'll ship. No connection, other than getting almost free film. I couldn't find The Brothers Wright on line.
They are selling via Etsy.com, just search for kodak 500T there.
__________________
My Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-01-2012   #18
grainhound
Registered User
 
grainhound is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 377
Not a bad price for colour neg stock, but 5 rolls are double what I paid for 470 feet. I'll continue to roll my own and sort out the rem jet problem. I'd love to know more about their "very custom "Premoval" (patent-pending) process" too.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-04-2012   #19
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 967
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric T View Post
If Fuji and Kodak eventually stop production of color films, will any niche manufacturer maintain production? Several small manufacturers produce black and white film, but do any make color?
First of all, both Kodak and Fujifilm recently have clearly said that they will continue to produce color photo film.

And yes, there are other film manufacturers producing color film:

- Agfa-Gevaert, Belgium ( www.agfa.com ) which is the third biggest film manufacturer worldwide behind Kodak and Fuji, and also producing color film

- Impossible Project in Enschede, Netherlands

- InovisCoat in Monheim, Germany www.inoviscoat.de ; they are also producing color film, e.g. the color negative film base for the Impossible films, see here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vw4rttFGHiM

They also offer contract coating of color film: If you want a color film, they will make it for you (see their statement on their website); of course you have to invest the money

InovisCoat is the successor company of Agfa Leverkusen. They have the staff and machinery from Agfa Leverkusen.

- Ilford Suisse; they produce a color microfilm. They could make other films, too.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-04-2012   #20
thegman
Registered User
 
thegman is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 40
Posts: 3,813
Quote:
Originally Posted by grainhound View Post
Not a bad price for colour neg stock, but 5 rolls are double what I paid for 470 feet. I'll continue to roll my own and sort out the rem jet problem. I'd love to know more about their "very custom "Premoval" (patent-pending) process" too.
The price is not too bad for me, as I don't shoot that much, but the shipping to the UK is remarkably expensive. I'll end up getting some anyway, I just know I will...

For me the extra cost to have the remjet removed, and loaded into 35mm canisters is worth it. If I was planning to shoot it all the time, maybe not.
__________________
My Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-04-2012   #21
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 967
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pickett Wilson View Post
So the argument that the movie film business was propping up the still film business wasn't correct. The movie film industry was actually irrelevant.
Yes, for most of the photo film market movie film is indeed irrelevant.

This myth, or better said "forum fairy tale" that if movie film production may be stopped one time, then photo film will be stopped, too, is nonsense.

That is a myth circling around in photo forums for years. Lots of people copy that without critical thinking about.
It is so easy to see that it is wrong:
Just look at the different film manufacturers and see what type of films they are producing. And then you see that most of them do not manufacture motion picture film at all!
Nevertheless they are producing photo film!

Only Kodak is more dependent on that market. But not the others, which either have never produced movie film, or have already stopped production of it some time ago, but continue to produce other types of film, or only have a very small percentage of movie film products in their portfolio.

Fujifilm has clearly said this autumn at Photokina, that the production stop of most of their motion picture films will not affect the production of photo films.
They even re-introduced Neopan 400.
And they introduced a new Instax camera for their growing Instax instant film business.
And they introduced new RA-4 papers.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-04-2012   #22
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,646
I don't see why people have a problem with these threads about the future of film being under threat.

There's a lot more useless purile threads around here than these 'potential demise of film' ones!
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-04-2012   #23
Pickett Wilson
Registered User
 
Pickett Wilson's Avatar
 
Pickett Wilson is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,846
I still think the end of film for the various makers will depend more on the life of existing equipment than the absolute amount of film they are selling. Of course, they could simply keep raising the cost of film to cover these replacement costs. There is a theory that at this point, many current film users would pay any price for continued access to film. So, that's the wild card. Interesting times.
__________________
______________________________________________
"There is something rather sad about a truckload of caviar"

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...0&ppuser=28005
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-04-2012   #24
Pickett Wilson
Registered User
 
Pickett Wilson's Avatar
 
Pickett Wilson is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,846
Keith, lots of folks get very defensive when the end of film is discussed. A mod even thought he had to change my title, suggesting it was a false alarm, when my title only asked a question. I just wondered if the demise of motion picture film for Fuji would lead to the end of film production in general for them (notice the two question marks at the end of my title).

The mod obviously thought I was threatening to single handedly kill film production.
__________________
______________________________________________
"There is something rather sad about a truckload of caviar"

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...0&ppuser=28005
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-04-2012   #25
thegman
Registered User
 
thegman is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 40
Posts: 3,813
@Keith: I don't have a problem personally with the "film is dead" posts, but I don't like the jumping to conclusions and scaremongering. On APUG a while back I saw some guy ask if Ektar was dead, as B&H were out of stock. If my local corner shop did not have coffee in that day, it would not cross my made that it had stopped being made.

The film makes don't help themselves by having such terrible PR, especially Fujifilm, and Kodak tries to keep in touch, but that seemed to die a death and just confuse more.

@Pickett: I don't shoot a whole of film, maybe 1 - 4 rolls a month, so if XP2 or Portra 400, or Fujilfilm 400H doubled in price, in would not effect me that much, so you may have a point. The roll-a-day guys might think differently I expect.
__________________
My Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-04-2012   #26
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,646
The laughable thing is Pickett ... that from what I gather about your PJ past you probably shot more film in a year back in the eighties than some of these defenders of the faith will see in their lifetimes!
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-04-2012   #27
thegman
Registered User
 
thegman is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 40
Posts: 3,813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pickett Wilson View Post
Keith, lots of folks get very defensive when the end of film is discussed. A mod even thought he had to change my title, suggesting it was a false alarm, when my title only asked a question. I just wondered if the demise of motion picture film for Fuji would lead to the end of film production in general for them (notice the two question marks at the end of my title).

The mod obviously thought I was threatening to single handedly kill film production.
It is just a question, and in a reasonable world/forum/newspaper that should be fine, but these are just questions too:

Is Obama's birth certificate fake?
Are immigrants stealing our jobs?
How often do you beat your wife?

There is nothing wrong with what you asked other than the place you asked it. The Obama question can be dismissed in sensible discussion, but on Fox news?
__________________
My Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-04-2012   #28
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,646
Quote:
Originally Posted by thegman View Post
@Keith: I don't have a problem personally with the "film is dead" posts, but I don't like the jumping to conclusions and scaremongering. On APUG a while back I saw some guy ask if Ektar was dead, as B&H were out of stock. If my local corner shop did not have coffee in that day, it would not cross my made that it had stopped being made.

The film makes don't help themselves by having such terrible PR, especially Fujifilm, and Kodak tries to keep in touch, but that seemed to die a death and just confuse more.

@Pickett: I don't shoot a whole of film, maybe 1 - 4 rolls a month, so if XP2 or Portra 400, or Fujilfilm 400H doubled in price, in would not effect me that much, so you may have a point. The roll-a-day guys might think differently I expect.


Whatever your stand on this is the potential demise of film is a relevant point and if there is a little over reaction to that possibility occasionally that's fine with me ... because I sure as hell don't want to lose it!
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-04-2012   #29
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
 
sevo is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Posts: 6,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pickett Wilson View Post
A mod even thought he had to change my title, suggesting it was a false alarm, when my title only asked a question.
Don't forget that the majority of the readers will not be native speakers, and that a fair amount of them have a first language where question marks have different semantics or come from countries where tabloid-style suggestive titles are less common.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-04-2012   #30
Pickett Wilson
Registered User
 
Pickett Wilson's Avatar
 
Pickett Wilson is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,846
Actually, as so many here have moved, at least partially, to digital, discussions on the topic have become generally less hostile. For a lot of us who do not live in or near large cities, dealing with film has become too much of a hassle. So the whole thing has become a moot point.

None of our group of newspapers have even had a darkroom in over 10 years. We don't physically print even digital photos. Everything is straight to the computer, and from the computer to the press.
__________________
______________________________________________
"There is something rather sad about a truckload of caviar"

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...0&ppuser=28005
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-04-2012   #31
thegman
Registered User
 
thegman is offline
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Australia
Age: 40
Posts: 3,813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
Whatever your stand on this is the potential demise of film is a relevant point and if there is a little over reaction to that possibility occasionally that's fine with me ... because I sure as hell don't want to lose it!
Indeed, that is the important thing, I don't either, I've only been taking photos a few years now, and I'd hate to lose film just as I was getting started.
__________________
My Blog
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-04-2012   #32
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 967
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
I don't see why people have a problem with these threads about the future of film being under threat.
No one has a problem with a rational discussion.
The problem is that the digital marketing guys and fundamentalistic "doom and gloom preachers" permanently start such threads spreading misinformation.
Most of all these doom and gloom theories have been proven wrong.
Nevertheless they were repeated again and again.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-04-2012   #33
Keith
On leave from Gallifrey
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Keith is offline
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 18,646
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiff View Post
No one has a problem with a rational discussion.
The problem is that the digital marketing guys and fundamentalistic "doom and gloom preachers" permanently start such threads spreading misinformation.
Most of all these doom and gloom theories have been proven wrong.
Nevertheless they were repeated again and again.


Geez ... you're all common sense and logic!

Where's your irrational passion man?
__________________
---------------------------
flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-04-2012   #34
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 967
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pickett Wilson View Post
I still think the end of film for the various makers will depend more on the life of existing equipment than the absolute amount of film they are selling.
No, definitely not, because that don't make economic sense.
If they sell the amount of film needed, they have the the money to keep their lines running.
Fujifilm has invested in the last years, Ilford has (they now even can make 135 cassettes by themselves!), Agfa-Gevaert has, Foma has. Impossible has renewd their factory.
InovisCoat even build a complete new modern factory for coating and emulsion making. And Adox build a complete new modern factory for film / paper converting and emulsion making.
The investments in modern manufacturing are there, that are the facts.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-04-2012   #35
Range-rover
Registered User
 
Range-rover is offline
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,164
They said the same thing about records and turntables, back in the 80's that CD's
would replace them, well records are still here and Turntables are too!. So will be
film as long as us guy's keep using it and try to teach the next generation about
it, they should keep making it (I hope).

Range
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-04-2012   #36
Pickett Wilson
Registered User
 
Pickett Wilson's Avatar
 
Pickett Wilson is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 3,846
I'm certainly no evangelist. In fact, I'm pretty platform agnostic. I've burned many thousands of rolls of B&W film, and shot hundreds of thousands of frames of digital.

I do think that film, in some capacity, has a chance to survive because it has found a market where price is no object (Impossible Project being a good example), which makes possible some smaller scale production. The threat will come when that market moves on to something else.
__________________
______________________________________________
"There is something rather sad about a truckload of caviar"

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...0&ppuser=28005
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-04-2012   #37
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 967
Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith View Post
Whatever your stand on this is the potential demise of film is a relevant point and if there is a little over reaction to that possibility occasionally that's fine with me ... because I sure as hell don't want to lose it!
Keith, if you really want to keep film alive, then change your behaviour!
Because you often told here that you have (almost) stopped shooting color film. Therefore you are part of the problem. If you don't shoot film by yourself you have no right to complain about the current film market.

Only shooting some BW films is not enough to keep film alive!

You like Neopan 400, right?
If you want Neopan 400 in future production then the best you can do is not only shooting Neopan 400, but also using Fuji Provia, Velvia, Superia, Pro 400H etc.

Why that? Because the BW film production at Fujifilm and Kodak is dependant on the color film production. 90-95% of the photo film production at Kodak and Fuji is color film, BW is a niche in comparison. Color film is needed to run the lines at their planned capacity.
With only BW film that is not possible.

Therefore for all of you Kodak and Fuji BW film shooters: Shoot also color film to keep BW film alive.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-04-2012   #38
Roger Hicks
Registered User
 
Roger Hicks is offline
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Aquitaine
Posts: 23,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiff View Post
. . . Therefore for all of you Kodak and Fuji BW film shooters: Shoot also color film to keep BW film alive.
Or of course switch to Ilford!

Cheers,

R.
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-04-2012   #39
Photo_Smith
Registered User
 
Photo_Smith's Avatar
 
Photo_Smith is offline
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pickett Wilson View Post
None of our group of newspapers have even had a darkroom in over 10 years. We don't physically print even digital photos. Everything is straight to the computer, and from the computer to the press.
I thought the press was dying? I doubt it will be too long before we get rid of paper copies...:-)

That's what I read on 'da interwebby thing on my iPad !
  Reply With Quote

Old 12-04-2012   #40
sevo
Fokutorendaburando
 
sevo is offline
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Frankfurt, Germany
Posts: 6,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiff View Post
Therefore for all of you Kodak and Fuji BW film shooters: Shoot also color film to keep BW film alive.
That is unreasonable. Even if it would work out (even today, amateurs heavy into black and white are no relevant market for C41 film makers), you'd be deviating part of your support away from what you want to sustain. In the worst case, the makers might even believe colour to be more in demand, and drop black and white accordingly...
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:41.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.