Nice article on state of film 2017
Old 02-15-2017   #1
Larry Cloetta
Registered User
 
Larry Cloetta is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Jackson, WY
Age: 69
Posts: 1,450
Nice article on state of film 2017

I could not find that anyone had already linked to this article; apologies if it has been done.
The article is not just the writer's personal musings, or a collection of press releases, but the author interviewed people from several current mfg. of film and got some relatively unguarded responses.
In addition to the welcome, upbeat, tone there are some details here about the nuts and bolts of trying to compete in the current climate that I have not seen elsewhere.
Hoping someone else here might enjoy the read.

https://www.zorkiphoto.co.uk/2017/02...film-returned/

Last edited by Larry Cloetta : 02-15-2017 at 05:46. Reason: content
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-15-2017   #2
jbrubaker
Registered User
 
jbrubaker's Avatar
 
jbrubaker is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 108
This is a well researched article. Thanks for posting the link. --- john.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-15-2017   #3
Finglas
Registered User
 
Finglas's Avatar
 
Finglas is offline
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Leixlip, Co Kildare
Posts: 121
Very nice and really good in fact I have just read this - twice.

All the positive news is great, but I can't see Fujifilm re-releaseing
Reala or Sensia in 135 format, now that would really be something.
They're not interested.

The dearth of good 100asa in colour is a real loss to me.
Still, it is great that smaller companies are trying & I will try their film too.
__________________
John
Leica MP, Nikon FM3a
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-15-2017   #4
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,694
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finglas View Post
Very nice and really good in fact I have just read this - twice.

All the positive news is great, but I can't see Fujifilm re-releaseing
Reala or Sensia in 135 format, now that would really be something.
They're not interested.
I would not be surprised if Fujifilm will bring back certain films in the coming years.
As stronger the film revival will be, the greater the chance will be.
Fujifilm is a very very big company compared to Kodak, Ilford, Foma, Film Ferrnia etc.
They are like a huge oil tanker. Decisions and new strategic plans do need much more time in such a company.
I expect Fujifilm to re-introduce films in 3-5 years.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-15-2017   #5
Finglas
Registered User
 
Finglas's Avatar
 
Finglas is offline
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Leixlip, Co Kildare
Posts: 121
Jan,
I hope you are right.
The only reason for my pessimistic view - it from articles I read way back that showed they had a couple of very old men who had the skill set needed in those lines of film and no one else was being assigned to this line of film work.

Fujifilm could well bring in new lines of film - down the road, maybe not Reala.
__________________
John
Leica MP, Nikon FM3a
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-15-2017   #6
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,694
Hi,

in the past I often was dissappointed by the articles of Stephen Dowling (zorkiphoto).
Lots of wrong information and too much Lomo biased.
But this article is indeed a better one.

Nevertheless there are some mistakes in it:

- neither Agfa nor AgfaPhoto is producing reversal film anymore; Fujifilm is the only color reversal film manufacturer (AgfaPhoto CT Precisa is made by Fujifilm)

- the global film market is not only 1% of its record in 1999/2000 as said in the article, it is in the 2-3% range

- JCH Street Pan:
"it’s a traffic surveillance film made by Agfa in Belgium, but it was never available in rolls of 35mm before. Hunt funded the testing process, and then took the gamble of making the first batch of film with his money...."
That is wrong. That film, Agfa Aviphot Pan 400 / ASP 400S, was available in former times re-labeled by Maco / Rollei-Film and Compard for photographers. Nothing is new with this stuff. No tests needed. And Agfa stopped production of this film already nine years ago.
JCH Street Pan is only old film under a new name. At insane prices.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-15-2017   #7
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,440
Quote:
Originally Posted by Finglas View Post
Very nice and really good in fact I have just read this - twice.

All the positive news is great, but I can't see Fujifilm re-releaseing
Reala or Sensia in 135 format, now that would really be something.
They're not interested.

The dearth of good 100asa in colour is a real loss to me.
Still, it is great that smaller companies are trying & I will try their film too.
Portra 160 and Ektar 100 are great! Velvia 100 and Provia 100 as far from bad, too. I miss ISO 400 slide film and FP-100C.
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2017   #8
David Hughes
David Hughes
 
David Hughes's Avatar
 
David Hughes is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,413
Hi,

Considering what we all feared/thought when digital took off, I reckon we've a good range of film available even though it doesn't include our old favourites. OTOH, a lot of the poorer ones have gone too.

But I do miss that Agfa reversal B&W film.

Regards, David
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2017   #9
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 960
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hughes View Post
Hi,

Considering what we all feared/thought when digital took off, I reckon we've a good range of film available even though it doesn't include our old favourites. OTOH, a lot of the poorer ones have gone too.
Fortunately most of our "old favourites" are in production today.
And some of the discontinued favourites will be introduced again in the next years, from several manufacturers.
Ektachrome will just be the beginning!

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hughes View Post
But I do miss that Agfa reversal B&W film.
Why? There is an excellent successor: Adox Scala 160 BW.
It is based on the Agfa Scala 200X.
The Adox is excellent, so similar to the former Agfa that you will have problems to see the differences in a direct comparison.
Just try it, you will be very satiesfied!

The situation on the film market is improving, step-by-step.
Let's support our manufacturers by increasing our film demand!
Then the film revival will be the next big story of the coming years.
It is in our hands.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2017   #10
David Hughes
David Hughes
 
David Hughes's Avatar
 
David Hughes is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,413
Thanks, didn't know about the Adox and will have to look into it.

Regards, David
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-16-2017   #11
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,440
There is also Fomapan 100 R and you can buy a kit to develop it at home.

__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2017   #12
David Hughes
David Hughes
 
David Hughes's Avatar
 
David Hughes is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,413
Thanks, another for the list and looking nice but then I always did like B&W slides.

It also reminds me that looking at photo's on a monitor is just like a slide on a screen but not so big. Note how I fear I'm talking myself into digital...

Throw in Ilford's version* and that's 3 B&W slide films compared with the one years ago, but in those days we could buy a B&W reversal kit and it worked on most B&W films as they were all silver based with clear film.

Regards, David

* There's a PDF about it here:-

http://www.ilfordphoto.com/Webfiles/...1220441194.pdf
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2017   #13
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 960
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hughes View Post
Thanks, another for the list and looking nice but then I always did like B&W slides.
There is also the BW reversal kit produced by German chemist and lab owner Klaus Wehner. Gives excellent quality with the Adox Scala 160 BW, Adox Silvermax, Adox CHS 100 II and Fomapan R.
It can be ordered directly here:
http://schwarz-weiss-dia.de/

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hughes View Post
It also reminds me that looking at photo's on a monitor is just like a slide on a screen but not so big. Note how I fear I'm talking myself into digital...
I have to disagree!
A slide on a lighttable, especially with an excellent slide loupe like the Schneider or Rodenstock loupes, is a league of its own.
It delivers much much better quality than any picture on a computer monitor.
With the slide you have
- the full resolution
- much better sharpness
- kind of 3d-look
- much better tonality (BW)
- real half tone reproduction
- higher contrast range
- much better brillance
- original colours.

A computer monitor is a very quality-limiting tool:
- the resolution of the original file is destroyed, with the most used 2k/4k monitors it is only 2MP / 8MP
- no real half tones because of the discrete LCD structure (which also leads to limited colour reproduction).
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2017   #14
borge
Registered User
 
borge is offline
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 171
Film is doing well... The same can't be said for the scanner industry.
Clumsy crappy scanners that requires tons of post-processing and fiddling, or, absurdly expensive scanners that gives good results (Plustek Opticfilm 120).

I want a modern Kodak Pakon F135+ at a decent price. That would seal the deal.
I love film, but the only thing that prevents me from using film full time is the scanning process, which I absolutely hate. The software is crappy, the scanners are generally unreliable and crappy, and it takes a ton of time for trial and error.

And the local labs are simply way too expensive.
__________________
Website: indergaard.net
Flickr: flickr.com/photos/borgei/
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2017   #15
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,694
Quote:
Originally Posted by borge View Post
I want a modern Kodak Pakon F135+ at a decent price. That would seal the deal.
I love film, but the only thing that prevents me from using film full time is the scanning process, which I absolutely hate. The software is crappy, the scanners are generally unreliable and crappy, and it takes a ton of time for trial and error.
The wonderful thing with film is: You don't need scans.
It works perfectly without scans. Film delivered outstanding quality for about 100 years without any scans .

Just shoot reversal film (color and / or BW) and enjoy the results with a slide loupe on the light table or in projection.
That gives you much better quality at much lower costs compared to scans (scanning is always a quality reducing process).
Shoot, develop, enjoy. Simple and easy.

Or make prints in the darkroom (or let your lab make prints for you). Also much better quality than scans.
And doing it by themselve is also a lot of fun.

Quote:
Originally Posted by borge View Post
And the local labs are simply way too expensive.
Using an excellent mail order lab instead? In most countries there are mail order labs which offer excellent quality at reasonable prices.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2017   #16
roscoetuff
Registered User
 
roscoetuff is offline
Join Date: May 2016
Location: Washington DC
Age: 62
Posts: 518
borge: I'm gearing up to shoot my negatives with my Sony A7II... 'cause I don't see much encouragement on scanning and the word is that using a digital camera is much better, the files are smaller, and it "just works". Will let you know.
__________________
-JW Mersereau ("Skip")

"Go out looking for one thing, and that's all you'll ever find." Robert J. Flaherty, Cinematographer
"If a day goes by without my doing something related to photography, it's as though I've neglected something essential to my existence, as though I had forgotten to wake up." Richard Avedon, Photographer
“There’s nothing worse than a sharp image of a fuzzy concept.” Ansel Adams
  Reply With Quote

A Terrific Film
Old 02-17-2017   #17
Pioneer
Registered User
 
Pioneer's Avatar
 
Pioneer is offline
Join Date: Dec 2011
Age: 65
Posts: 3,109
A Terrific Film

Quote:
Originally Posted by HHPhoto View Post
Hi,

in the past I often was dissappointed by the articles of Stephen Dowling (zorkiphoto).
Lots of wrong information and too much Lomo biased.
But this article is indeed a better one.

Nevertheless there are some mistakes in it:

- neither Agfa nor AgfaPhoto is producing reversal film anymore; Fujifilm is the only color reversal film manufacturer (AgfaPhoto CT Precisa is made by Fujifilm)

- the global film market is not only 1% of its record in 1999/2000 as said in the article, it is in the 2-3% range

- JCH Street Pan:
"it’s a traffic surveillance film made by Agfa in Belgium, but it was never available in rolls of 35mm before. Hunt funded the testing process, and then took the gamble of making the first batch of film with his money...."
That is wrong. That film, Agfa Aviphot Pan 400 / ASP 400S, was available in former times re-labeled by Maco / Rollei-Film and Compard for photographers. Nothing is new with this stuff. No tests needed. And Agfa stopped production of this film already nine years ago.
JCH Street Pan is only old film under a new name. At insane prices.

Cheers, Jan
I found the article to be a very good read. It is encouraging to see that film is being rediscovered by young people.

As for the slide film referenced in the article I assumed they were discussing the film being sold as Rollei Digibase CR200. I hope it isn't discontinued since I use a bit of it every now and again.

Sorry to disagree with your final remarks Jan but you really need to adjust your skirt. Your bias is showing again.

JCH Street Pan 400 is a terrific film and I am really enjoying it in 35mm. I really don't care where it came from it has turned out to be a pretty good film regardless of its beginning. Though I have settled in on about 3 different developers, I am still playing with agitation routines and times.

However, it is really nice to know that the response from consumers was encouraging enough to justify a 2nd batch. I am coming due for another order in April or May, which appears to be perfect timing. This film when developed in Beutler 1:1:8 gives wonderful results, and it doesn't look bad in D23 either.

I will also be placing a pre-order for the upcoming 120 film as well.

Great news in the film world!
__________________
You gotta love a fast lens;

It is almost as good as a fast horse!
Dan
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2017   #18
David Hughes
David Hughes
 
David Hughes's Avatar
 
David Hughes is offline
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 7,413
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiff View Post
There is also the BW reversal kit produced by German chemist and lab owner Klaus Wehner. Gives excellent quality with the Adox Scala 160 BW, Adox Silvermax, Adox CHS 100 II and Fomapan R.
It can be ordered directly here:
http://schwarz-weiss-dia.de/



I have to disagree!
A slide on a lighttable, especially with an excellent slide loupe like the Schneider or Rodenstock loupes, is a league of its own.
It delivers much much better quality than any picture on a computer monitor.
With the slide you have
- the full resolution
- much better sharpness
- kind of 3d-look
- much better tonality (BW)
- real half tone reproduction
- higher contrast range
- much better brillance
- original colours.

A computer monitor is a very quality-limiting tool:
- the resolution of the original file is destroyed, with the most used 2k/4k monitors it is only 2MP / 8MP
- no real half tones because of the discrete LCD structure (which also leads to limited colour reproduction).
Hi,

Thanks for the link but I have to disagree about viewing because, as I see it, photographs are for sharing and few people notice much about them apart from the subject. Also you have to have very young eyes when using loupes, and a lot of other optical devices...

Regards, David
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-17-2017   #19
DanskDynamit
Registered User
 
DanskDynamit's Avatar
 
DanskDynamit is offline
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 401
thanks for sharing, good read but I still can't understand why Japan Camera Hunter's film is on that list.
Lomography kept film alive, lets be honest.
__________________
DanskDynamit
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2017   #20
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,694
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pioneer View Post
As for the slide film referenced in the article I assumed they were discussing the film being sold as Rollei Digibase CR200. I hope it isn't discontinued since I use a bit of it every now and again.
It is discontinued.
This film was produced in huge quantities in 2005 in the former Agfa plant in Leverkusen, Germany. And then all jumbo rolls were cold stored in the Agfa warehouse in Mortsel, Belgium.
This stock is now depleted. And Agfa in Belgium will not make this film again.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pioneer View Post
Sorry to disagree with your final remarks Jan but you really need to adjust your skirt. Your bias is showing again.
I am not biased at all. In contrast to Bellamy Hunt and you lots of European photographers, including me, have used this film years ago when it was available in the market under different brand names.
And I have tested JCH Street Pan in the last months, too.
So I am talking from lots of experience.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2017   #21
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,694
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanskDynamit View Post
thanks for sharing, good read but I still can't understand why Japan Camera Hunter's film is on that list.
+1.
Probably Stephen Dowling was uncritical, has not done a proper research in that case and just believed the misleading marketing of Mr. Hunt.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DanskDynamit View Post
Lomography kept film alive, lets be honest.
No.
That "Lomography has saved film" is a fairy tale told by the Lomography marketing guys. It has nothing to do with reality.
Lomo sales peaked already in 2011, and since then they were on a strong decline, and now stabilising on a very low level.
During the last years Lomography had to close lots of their Gallery and Embassy stores worldwide. And lots of their employees had to go.
Some of their cameras were discontinued, and no standard film models have been introduced for years (only Instax).

Lomo is now mainly surviving by
- selling Lomo Instax cameras and Instax film
- selling their 'art' lenses (made by Zenit) mainly to digital photographers.

Lomo was a very small niche in film photography before their boom from 2006-2011, and now they are again a very small niche in film photography.

The film revival is driven by real classic film photography, not by Lomography.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2017   #22
Ruffmeister
Registered User
 
Ruffmeister is offline
Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 40
This is a really good article and well put together. Thanks for sharing!
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2017   #23
Solinar
Analog Preferred
 
Solinar's Avatar
 
Solinar is offline
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Austin, TX
Age: 65
Posts: 2,515
Quote:
Originally Posted by borge View Post
Film is doing well... The same can't be said for the scanner industry.
Clumsy crappy scanners that requires tons of post-processing and fiddling, or, absurdly expensive scanners that gives good results (Plustek Opticfilm 120).
I would like to see Fuji-Film step up to the plate with regards to scanners that rival the old Nikon Coolscans.

While on the subject of old scanners, I keep my fingers crossed for my Minolta Elite 5400 and Nikon Coolscan 8000. The Nikon fits the bill for clunky - but it beats a flat bed Epson.
__________________
- Andrew in Austin, Texas -

35mm Gear Bessa R, Leica II, - IIIg, - M2
Just for fun 35mm Gear a Kodak Retina II, Retina IIa, a Rollei 35 S, plus an Oly 35RD and XA
Modern Medium Format Fuji GW 690III
Vintage MF Folders a Voigtländer Perkeo II and Bessa II, 2 of them - a ZI Mess Ikonta 524/2 - plus an Agfa Super Isolette & a Record III
Digital a D300 and a D700 with some primes - still going over a decade later

"Who spilled the Dektol on the bathroom carpet?"
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2017   #24
giganova
Registered User
 
giganova is offline
Join Date: May 2015
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 1,404
Even Barnes & Noble book stores have 35mm film! (Lomo)
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2017   #25
Nowhereman
-
 
Nowhereman is offline
Join Date: Feb 2016
Posts: 231
Quote:
Originally Posted by borge View Post
Film is doing well... The same can't be said for the scanner industry.
Clumsy crappy scanners that requires tons of post-processing and fiddling, or, absurdly expensive scanners that gives good results (Plustek Opticfilm 120).

I want a modern Kodak Pakon F135+ at a decent price. That would seal the deal.
I love film, but the only thing that prevents me from using film full time is the scanning process...
Quote:
Originally Posted by roscoetuff View Post
borge: I'm gearing up to shoot my negatives with my Sony A7II... 'cause I don't see much encouragement on scanning and the word is that using a digital camera is much better, the files are smaller, and it "just works"...
The Kodak Pakon F135 is quick but it's optimized for scanning for 4x6 prints, which doesn't interest me. The Plustek 120 does permit automated batch scanning, but like many other scanners, has mechanical aspects that are likely to jam up of break down often, particularly in hot and humid climates like that of Bangkok or even Washington DC and Tokyo in July and August. For example, I have an old Imacon Precision III (real optical resolution of 6300ppi and dMax of 4.2 — 2 stops more than the Plusteks), but I'm junking it because it requires extensive servicing of the drive mechanism, at least every 6 months: that is suitable for a photo lab but I don't want to make a career out of DIY servicing of a scanner. Even if I were willing to shell out $14,000, I wouldn't buy a Hasselblad X1 because it has virtually the same drive mechanism as my Imacon. New high quality scanners are not likely to come on the market because film use, while growing, is tiny.

The best solution I have found is to digitalize film using the Leitz Beoon copy stand. Using a Focotar-2 enlarging lens and a Leica M9 or MM, it takes me less than 5 minutes to copy a whole roll of 35mm film — and the quality is close in resolution and dynamic range to that of the Imacon. For me it also has the advantage the I'm a nomad, moving annual between Thailand, Paris and Washington. The BEOON is small and easily disassembled, so that I can take it with me.
_______________
Alone in Bangkok essay on BURN Magazine
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2017   #26
willie_901
Registered User
 
willie_901's Avatar
 
willie_901 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 5,299
What would motivate FUJIFILM to market scanners?

The market is relatively small.

FUJIFILM does not sell 135 format cameras or lenses.

FUJIFILM discontinued many 135 format films and shuttered its motion-picture film business.


Scanners are useless for FUJIFILM's most popular (and perhaps profitable) film products... Instax. That is, the Instax image quality is not worth of the effort to scan. It may be Instax wide prints are worth scanning, but at about $1 per print Intax wide does not seem to enjoy the sales volume of the smaller Instax format. This may change.

FUJIFIM probably released some new 135 format films. I sure someone will mention these.
__________________
Basically, I mean, ah—well, let’s say that for me anyway when a photograph is interesting, it’s interesting because of the kind of photographic problem it states—which has to do with the . . . contest between content and form.
Garry Winogrand
williamchuttonjr.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2017   #27
charjohncarter
Registered User
 
charjohncarter's Avatar
 
charjohncarter is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Danville, CA, USA
Posts: 8,683
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hughes View Post
Hi,

Considering what we all feared/thought when digital took off, I reckon we've a good range of film available even though it doesn't include our old favourites. OTOH, a lot of the poorer ones have gone too.

But I do miss that Agfa reversal B&W film.

Regards, David
You are so right. let's hope it stays that way.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2017   #28
Faintandfuzzy
Registered User
 
Faintandfuzzy's Avatar
 
Faintandfuzzy is offline
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 394
Quote:
Originally Posted by HHPhoto View Post
I would not be surprised if Fujifilm will bring back certain films in the coming years.
As stronger the film revival will be, the greater the chance will be.
Fujifilm is a very very big company compared to Kodak, Ilford, Foma, Film Ferrnia etc.
They are like a huge oil tanker. Decisions and new strategic plans do need much more time in such a company.
I expect Fujifilm to re-introduce films in 3-5 years.

Cheers, Jan
Kodak's film production dwarfs Fuji.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2017   #29
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,694
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faintandfuzzy View Post
Kodak's film production dwarfs Fuji.
Certainly not.
Fujifilm's film production has been much more successful in the last years than Kodak's:
- Kodak has discontinued more films than Fuji in the last 15 years
- Kodak did give up on several silver-halide product segments completely, instead of Fujifilm
- Fujifilm has smaller and more flexible production capabilities
- in 2014 Kodak was very close before stopping film production completely (their CEO Jeff Clarke said that several times in different interviews); Fujifilm has never had similar thoughts.

Film demand is increasing. All manufacturers will profit from that, including Fujifilm, which offers several unique films no other company has.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2017   #30
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,694
Quote:
Originally Posted by willie_901 View Post
Scanners are useless for FUJIFILM's most popular (and perhaps profitable) film products... Instax. That is, the Instax image quality is not worth of the effort to scan.
1. Instax is very profitable. And all other silver-halide products at Fujifilm are profitable, too.
Their digital camera production is less profitable.
Look at their last years FRs.
2. The internet is full of scanned Instax pictures. So there are lots of people who like to scan Instax (and Impossible) pictures.

Cheers, Jan

Last edited by HHPhoto : 02-18-2017 at 08:12. Reason: typo
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2017   #31
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,694
Quote:
Originally Posted by borge View Post
Film is doing well... The same can't be said for the scanner industry.
Clumsy crappy scanners that requires tons of post-processing and fiddling, or, absurdly expensive scanners that gives good results (Plustek Opticfilm 120).
There are good scanners on the market. For example the Reflecta 10T, RPS 10 M and MF 5000.
They deliver results a bit better than the former Nikon Coolscan V.
https://reflecta.de/en/products/list...o-Scanner.html

They told me last Photokina the demand for their scanners is increasing for years.
If you look at used prices for the Nikon Coolscan V, 5000 and 9000, then mint one are selling for more (!!) than their former new prices.
A clear indication for a very good demand.
If Nikon is clever, they would satisfy this demand with a new Coolscan VI, 6000 and 10000 line.

Personally I do almost no scanning anymore.
Because the classic optical imaging chains with slides (silde loupe and small lighttable, projection) and negative film (optical printing) are so much better in quality, so much more fun and have much lower costs.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2017   #32
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,694
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hughes View Post
Also you have to have very young eyes when using loupes, and a lot of other optical devices...
As someone who is (unfortunately) not a young guy anymore, and someone who needs glasses, I must completely disagree with your comment.
Good loupes have diopter adjustments, and you can perfectly fine tune them to your eyesight. No matter whether you are using glasses or not when using the loupe.
I have excellent loupes from different manufacturers (e.g. Schneider, Rodenstock, Kaiser, Adox, BIG), and all give excellent results with my older eyes.
I also have them and a slimline lighttable with me at photographer meetings to present my slides. So lots of other photographers are also using my loupes at these meetings. And all are always very impressed by the stunning quality which surpasses every computer monitor by a big margin.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-18-2017   #33
Out to Lunch
Registered User
 
Out to Lunch's Avatar
 
Out to Lunch is offline
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 5,145
The upsurge in 35mm film production is great....but I'm concerned about the wipe-out of the 35mm film infrastructure: in Saigon, most photo shops -many of them family businesses, sold their developing machines and closed their doors many years ago...
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-19-2017   #34
HHPhoto
Registered User
 
HHPhoto is offline
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Germany
Posts: 1,694
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Wijninga View Post
The upsurge in 35mm film production is great....but I'm concerned about the wipe-out of the 35mm film infrastructure: in Saigon, most photo shops -many of them family businesses, sold their developing machines and closed their doors many years ago...
Peter, but there are labs in Saigon, right? Probably not so much as in former times, but some have been stayed in business. At least I remember some posts here on rff about recommendations of labs there.
The remaining labs will have increasing business in the next years.
I also know of lots of new labs in both industrialised and developing countries, which opened in the last two years.
Probably there will be more new labs in the coming years.
And self-developing and printing at home is also becoming more popular again.

Cheers, Jan
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-19-2017   #35
Steve M.
Registered User
 
Steve M. is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 3,382
That was a fun read. Thanks for posting the article. It's nice to read something that is not rah rah marketing hype about photography, and rare these days.

Film will always be a niche industry, so the downsizing and elimination of some companies was going to happen no matter what. The people I know that shoot film do so because they understand the medium is capable of producing images that are quite different than digital, and most of them think those images are better. They're not shooting it because it's a cool thing to do, or trendy, or for a tactile experience. Most people are not really that concerned about photography anymore, or in having prints. They just want a way to get a quick and free image that can be viewed on their computer monitor or sent to someone's cell phone screen. Digital satisfies those desires.

At some point, these old film cameras are going to reach the end of their lives. Since very few new film cameras are being made, and the demand for them is very low, it will be interesting to see what happens to film then. If you don't have a camera to shoot it in.......

Scanners are not needed for film. My old Federal enlargers are capable of making excellent prints, and digitizing an analogue sourced image into a digital file is not something that appeals to me any longer. That was always the unpleasant part of my photography, grappling w/ a cranky and erratic (and expensive) ink jet printer that guzzled pricey inks, and I would rather do my taxes than fool w/ a film scanner's operation.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-19-2017   #36
Sarcophilus Harrisii
Brett Rogers
 
Sarcophilus Harrisii is offline
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,607
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faintandfuzzy View Post
Kodak's film production dwarfs Fuji.
Does it? By what percentage or volume? Is that including motion picture products, or are you referring only to still film products? It would be interesting, actually, to be able to look at how much the different manufacturers have been producing, respectively, so if you've got a reliable source for that information it would be good to know what it is, please?
Cheers,
Brett
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-19-2017   #37
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 960
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarcophilus Harrisii View Post
Does it? By what percentage or volume? Is that including motion picture products, or are you referring only to still film products? It would be interesting, actually, to be able to look at how much the different manufacturers have been producing, respectively, so if you've got a reliable source for that information it would be good to know what it is, please?
Cheers,
Brett
If I remember right, Eastman Kodak recently published making about 200 million $ p.a. with film production.
Fujifilm published making more than 2 billion $ p.a. with all their silver-halide products including all films, Instax cameras, RA-4 photo paper, photo chemistry, BW photo paper, industrial lab operations like Fuji Eurocolor, lab equipment etc.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-19-2017   #38
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 960
Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve M. View Post
At some point, these old film cameras are going to reach the end of their lives. Since very few new film cameras are being made, and the demand for them is very low, it will be interesting to see what happens to film then. If you don't have a camera to shoot it in.......
No problem at all:
1. Film cameras can be quite easily repaired, and there are enough cameras out there for spare parts spending.
2. The number of film cameras out there is very huge, definitely more than 200 million running film cameras out there.
From 2000 - 2007 alone more than 85.5 million (!!) film cameras have been sold.
Here you have the data from the Japanese manufacturers concerning film camera production:
http://www.cipa.jp/stats/documents/common/cr400.pdf
3. The market for digital cameras has collapsed in the last years and will continue to decline for some further years.
On the other hand the prices for good / mint film cameras will continue to increase in the coming years along with the film revival.
Therefore in the coming years we will see new film cameras on the market.
Similar development we've seen on other markets like vinyl / turntables, mechanical watches etc...
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-19-2017   #39
Skiff
Registered User
 
Skiff is offline
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 960
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hughes View Post
Hi,

Thanks for the link but I have to disagree about viewing because, as I see it, photographs are for sharing and few people notice much about them apart from the subject.
I see that differently:
For hobbyists / enthusiasts it is mainly important if you like the picture and its presentation. As a photographer enthusiast you should be "egoistic" and use the best viewing mediums to please you, to have the best enjoyment and most fun for yourself.
Viewing slides on a lighttable with an excellent slide loupe and projection gives you exactly that.
Much much better quality compared to pictures on a computer monitor.
And making prints in your darkroom delivers better quality, too.

And I also regularly share my slide results with others in best quality, without scanning and computer monitors:
I am using the Kaiser slimlite plano LED light box:
http://kaiser-fototechnik.de/en/prod...ge.asp?nr=2453

Excellent light quality, lighter and smaller than a tablet, very cheap. Ideal to show your slides to others out there at other places.
As loupes I am using mainly the outstanding Schneider 4x (for 35mm) and 3x (for medium format) slide loupes.
In comparison pictures on a 4k monitor look quite crappy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hughes View Post
Also you have to have very young eyes when using loupes, and a lot of other optical devices...

Regards, David
No, not at all. Just use a good loupe (with diopter adjustment - fine tuning) and you will get outstanding quality with both younger and older eyes. Even my 85 year old parents are enjoying my slides this way.
  Reply With Quote

Old 02-19-2017   #40
kb244
Registered User
 
kb244's Avatar
 
kb244 is offline
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Grand Rapids, Mi
Age: 38
Posts: 623
It'll be interesting to see if the resurgence continues to grow for color/slide film.
I see it being easier for B&W film to continue to grow especially with self processing.

It's nothing as grand as say Kodachrome coming back, but I wouldn't mind seeing fresh Plus-X and TechPan coming back from the dead.
__________________
Karl Blessing
Film (Working RF): Canon 7, Fed-2A, Argus C3, Mercury II
Digital: Olympus E-M5, E-P3
  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 22:31.


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.