Kodak increases film prices

Kodak split off Eastman Chemicals and sold the blood analyzer business to Johnson & Johnson in the mid 90's. They also sold the pharmaceuticals business they acquired in the Sterling purchase to Bayer AG and others. Some of this was underway before George Fisher got there, but he linked Kodak's future to imaging and little else. Most of the synthetic chemists were laid off or pursuaded to take early retirement. If there are any pharmaceuticals operations left at Kodak, they've got to be tiny.

Ilkka,

 

If you haven't checked out 800 speed films in the past year or so, you might want to look again. Current offerings from Kodak and Fuji are a lot closer to 400 speed performance than they used to be. I'm biased towards Kodak's 800 film which I find noticeably faster (when you look at shadow detail) with a barely perceptable increase in grain compared to Fuji 800.

Many of the p&s cameras, when zoomed, have an f11 and a very tiny flash. They need ISO 800 film.

 

I have a colleague who uses one of these constantly and for a long time, he used ISO 400 and wondered why his pics were blurry. We got him moved up to ISO 800 and -- no more blurred pics. The grain really isn't that bad and the color is much improved.

 

Conni

<<I am puzzled at the very existence of iso 800 print film - the quality seems quite bad>>

 

I too don't know where you've been but Fuji makes very nice color print films at ISO 800 and 1600. Their Natura line is especially good but sadly not available outside Japan (save a special import by individuals).

The price of silver has doubled from a year ago. Prices of all metals have gone up as there is more global demand. Considering silver is up 100%, a 3-17% price increase isn't that bad.

Answering Ron Andrews' question about my digital-to-slides biz.

 

I actually did a batch of slides a week ago that were going to be used in a presentation, but that's rare. The vast majority of the slides I make are for artists who have to submit slides of their work, some to galleries but mostly for jurying their work into competitions and shows. As it gets harder and harder to find slide film in some places, and to get it developed reliably, most artists aren't interested in maintaining a dual-medium photo studio when they really want to make pottery or art quilts!

 

Since consumer digicams do a pretty good job for most of what they need (like their websites and flyers), taking their best digitals and making slides saves them a ton of money.

 

Until somebody comes up with an inexpensive program that will allow the show organizers to accept a wide variety of files e-mailed or sent on CD and keep them organized for jurying purposes, the shows are going to want to keep using slides. I'm a bridge between one era and the next.

 

If you are really lucky (like the first film recorder you buy happens to work, and includes the software which is pretty rare) you could start up with under a C-note for the film recorder, a few hundred bucks for an E-6 processor, and another hundred bucks for a used slide mounter. On the other hand, you could easily need to buy several of each piece before you get a real keeper, not to mention you have to learn how to perform all the steps reliably. And no, it wouldn't be too bright to try this without doing your own processing - recent history shows us that any lab could shut down their E-6 line overnight.

 

Fortunately, there used to be thousands of corporate types making PowerPoint presentations and having slides made. Since all those folk have either realized that PowerPoint dramatically reduces corporate productivity or are using digital projectors (so they can keep making changes right up to the start of their pitches), the value of the equipment is now very low. It's no big deal to grab $5 - 10,000 film recorders for under a hundred bucks each.

 

The most expensive part for me was acquiring good mounting equipment and learning to maintain it. If you already have the E-6 parts, the hard thing will be figuring out how to market to a widely dispersed market of individual artists who spend $20 - 40 per order, with the occasional order getting up to $100.

 

Van

I'm not sure what the uproar is, but Kodak (and Ilford) consistently raised prices on film every year at this time, for at least the past 10 years. I suppose you could put it down to inflation, or normal profit taking. The main thing is that film remains profitbale....

The tactic is well-known. Prices will rise until demand drops significantly. Kodak will then cease production claiming there 'is no demand'.

Ilkka, alot of iso 800 print film is used in disposable/reuseable 35mm cameras. The majority of print film users dont have asa 25 Kodak Ektar, or asa 100 Kodak films in their freezers, or own a Kodak Ektra, Leica M3, or alot of Nikon gear. The Joe Six pack crowd often has an older film camera, a zoom P&S 35mm camera that might be F5.6 when at wideangle; probably F8 to F11 at telephoto. They NEED iso 800 film, their auto exposure cameras were designed for it. The Photo.net community is a warped narrow slice of actual 35mm users, no where near the middle average 35mm print film user. In many midwest towns the photo store is Walmart, where the slowest print film is 200, all dusty, about to expire and be dumped.

I know that point and shoots need fast film, but really most of the people who used to use 35 mm point and shoots now use digital compacts. And the digital compacts with their fast zooms easily beat the results of p&s zooms compacts using film.

 

I should give Portra 800 a try now that they've improved it (the last one I used in the summer didn't satisfy me although it was 6x7 format). However, I like 400UC enough that I don't really care about the faster film. Those people I know that use 35 mm color negative film mostly use iso 400.

 

Another bizarre thing is that some retail stores carry Elite Chrome 200 and 400 ... but not the excellent 100 stuff. This is absolutely silly as fast slide film is just ... well, not very good, and definitely ill suited for zoom compact cameras.

 

Kodak isn't rising prices to kill film use. They have to rise prices because of the reasons Ron mentioned in the beginning of this thread: lower volumes, higher cost per roll for real estate, machinery etc.) It was every bit expected and a good thing that they do it so that production can continue. I don't think a <20% increase has any effect on my film consumption. A 100% increase might.

"Most of the people using p&s have moved to digital."

 

No, they haven't. Get out into the neighborhood drug stores and mini-marts and you'll find that most of the p&s crowd sees no reason to change. After all, their camera still works just fine and developing/printing prices at these places really is low. And they want prints. They don't do prints at home.

 

At the Osco, which is very busy overall, two blocks from where I live in Chicago, the woman in charge of the film area says she's as busy as ever with film. She still has a batch of APS she runs every day. She only does APS in a batch so she doesn't have to fool with changes. They still have a large selection of film, both Fuji and Kodak. It's probably not something photo.netters would want but it meets the needs of their paying customers.

 

Kelly is absolutely right about the skewed distribution here on photo.net and what the rest of the populace is doing. It is rareified here.

 

Conni

Constance, it's not photo.net who I am basing my comments on, just what I see in real life. Like I said, I know of not a single person who uses a film point and shoot zoom camera. Of course, most of my friends were sensible enough to realize the limits of the f/8 or f/11 aperture even before digital, but they all use digital p&s now.

 

This doesn't mean that it's true of every place in the world, but I still very much doubt iso 800 film outsells iso 400 film, outside of the disposable camera realm (which includes people who don't care at all about what they're getting).

Ilkka:

 

Did I say these people were my friends? And I don't doubt that most of them are pretty sensible. They just don't eat, sleep, and breathe cameras and their cameras are working perfectly well so they see no reason to spend money on something they don't need. After all, they can get a disk of their pics if they want and still have prints to carry for show-and-tell.

Conni

Constance,

 

I wish it were true that many P&S users were still using film. If they were, then Kodak would still be the #1 employer here in Rochester instead of #3. Consumer film sales in 2005 were about one third of what they were in 2000. The labs that are still busy are getting volume because many other labs have closed.

 

In 2004 I did an informal survey around Niagara Falls (Canadian side). About 60% were shooting digital. About 30% were shooting single use cameras. About 10% (if I include myself) were shooting re-loadable 35 mm cameras.

 

I'm still shooting film and expect to have SOME film to shoot for many years. There will come a day when I may be buying film the same way I buy Macintosh software--by mail order.

Ron:

 

I'm telling you what is ahppening at a large drug store in my neighborhood to expl;ain why ISO 800 film still sells. I know what the woman I've known for years who runs the photo department told me and what I see when I hang out a bit to talk to heer.'

 

 

Everybody with a P&S definitely hasn't run out to buy a digital p&s.

 

According to Kodak, the average Americna family used 8 rolls of film a year average. That group is very likely to still be doing close to that with the same old cameras because for 8 rolls of film a year, they see no reason to buy a neew p&s camera. These people are not stupid nor idiots. As a matter of fact, given their 'average' usage, they're really quite bright. Everyon is not a photoneetter nor do they want to be. They are quite happy with their disk and their 4x6 prints to show at the next family outing or at church.

 

Conni

Ron; film is contracting in sales for P&S film cameras. With print films the iso 800 cassettes are the most common ones in one time use cameras. Every year FUJI has a huge self sell Kiosk in many southern Walmarts, with Mardi Gras cameras, in mardi gras colors. Folks still like to use good performing cameras that deliver, while dodging beads, throws during Mardi Gras. Alot of folks prefer a low cost camera, since it can be hit, get beer spilled on, and is almost never stolen. On upscale floats sometimes folks throw cameras like these to kids, they buy bulk packs of these cameras at a deep discount from sams club or a mardi gras wholesale store.. A "disposable" camera is not a target for a street theft, compared to typical Photo.net'ers expensive camera. Kodak still after many decades has not marketed cameras for mardi gras, maybe Rochester is a secure staid place with pensions?. :) Maybe Kodak is more of a party pooper company, and cannot figure why on earth folks would want to party, or shoot party photos. After Katrina one couldnt find any film, or disposable cameras. Folks snaped them all up, to photograph the wreckage, house damage, car damage etc. Alot of place had no power for many weeks. <BR><BR>Here I shoot alot of available light stuff; and still burn off a few hundred rolls of asa 800 Fuji Press or Superia each year. At the summer home in katrinaland I used about 4 dozen rolls in the first few weeks, before I had any house power. With digital I had to fire up my Generac and downlload the images with a lame serial cable, the both card readers died due to salt spray, plus one digital camera died too. <BR><BR>Amateur asa 400 and 800 color print films are the bulk of all color print films sold today. In many places it is real hard to buy iso 200 films, and if you do, it is old/expired. <BR><BR>Just because the average Photo.net chap wants Kodachrome, asa 100 print films, slide films, pro films doesnt mean that they are magically going to always be available. The 400 and 800 color print films will be around radically longer after these "better" products are extinct, like the dodo. <BR><BR>Remember all those film sales decline dats of 2005 include the Katrina bubble, where film shelves got cleared in afew days,and folks swarmed pallets of disposibles like a blue light special.

Kelly,

 

You may be right about Kodak being a party pooper company. I will pass along your suggestion for a Mardi Gras camera to the people I know at Kodak who work on one-time-use cameras. We'll see what comes of it.

 

I would also like to offer a suggestion. If you are shooting a lot of Fuji 800 and you haven't tried the Kodak 800 recently, you really should give it a try. The latest version was introduced at PMA in February of this year. I will admit to considerable bias since I had a hand in designing this film while I was still at Kodak. In the side-by-side comparisons I've seen, the Kodak film has better shadow detail (it is faster) than Fuji. That is what I look for in a high speed film.

Ron, I'm driving the 80 miles up to Manhattan today, so I'll get some Kodak 800 at B&H, as well as shooting in Times Square.

 

 

Also, speaking of Times Square, according to Kodak themselves, it's the most photographed place on earth, with 100 million photos per year... Why not Kodak disposable cameras with Times Square packaging?

 

 

Carrying this one step further, since the attraction in Times Square is all the signage and jumbotrons, make these "tuned" to capture the extremely high contrast with ultra-saturated film and 1/30th - 1/60th second shutter time, slow enough to blur the strobing from neon signage yet fast enough to freeze the moving jumbotron images. My colleague had a gallery exhibition last fall of Times Square signage, that you and your contacts would want to see:

<http://www.LisaFiel.com>

--- Most of the shots were on Velvia.

 

 

Cheers! Dan

Has there been any concrete information as to how big a percentage increase is in store for Porta film and Endura paper? I can handle 3-5% no problem; this is the increase that is going to take effect for MoPIc film. However, if they jack up the price of Porta and Endura 17%, it is going to hurt a lot.

 

Regards.

 

~Karl Borowski

I had all the film cameras one could get,than i went digital !!!

After four years it was making forget why i got into photography first place.It is so easy just to sit on your chair and add efects,make corrections,blur,sharpen ,contrast,brightness...I was loosing interest on photography .Why print when i could just burn a cd ?WHy search hundreds of pics when i just had to clique on the mouse ?Why worry about becoming the best with my camera while i could fix any bad picture and make a one of a kind with photoshop ?

Do you like digital?Why don't just go to goolge and do image search .

I going back all the way to film and black and white only .I'm dead serious!!!I have three rolls of portra 160nc left and as i ginish them up this week i will be shooting Black and White only .

Which one of you guys gets tired of looking at Ansel Adams pics??

Black and White shouts life ,it talks to you .Color is distracting .

I want back what digital took away from me .I just hope Ilford commit themselfs to staying in bussines ,if they don't i'll reinvent photography !!I'll make my own film !!I'll discover the world wich is ridden behind all these colors we got so used to seeing every day.

Digital is a thing of the past !Remember my name two hundred years from now.I'll will be a revolutionary .The ahead of his time,the man who saw the end of the Digital era and saw the Dawn of Films new beggining !!!

Let the price of film rise,digital for me, maybe only for proofing !!!

Edersandro Lopes