Todays Gloom and Doom this time from Fuji.

<p>Well Well looks like there are some things all over the world.<br>

http://www.deadline.com/2012/09/fuji-discontinue-motion-picture-products/</p>

<p>Probably a direct consequence of Kodak's deal with the studios to keep making film for them until at least 2015. The studios got a stable supply of excellent film stocks and print stocks, but probably committed to buying pretty much all of their film from Eastman. In return, the studios get the rebates that they were owed by Kodak, of course that's really factored in to the price of the film they will buy.<br>

The Fuji Eterna-RDS that they are making is a non-color-sensitized low-speed high-resolution film designed for direct digital-to-film printing of color separations. That's still how the studios make archive copies, three B&W separation negatives for red, green, and blue light. They don't trust color dyes, and they don't trust digital archiving.</p>

<p>Unless I missed something - this would not impact a still film shooter in the least. All of the film they are discontinuing is motion picture stock - nothing that is available at the local camera store. </p>

<p>And yes - motion pictures are shooting more and more on digital - cheaper, easier to edit and do cgi stuff to. </p>

<p>Dave</p>

 

<p>The impact is less and less of anything creates less of other things. R&D being one. Exit of minds from a company and 20% of the global market less for Fuji.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>The impact is less and less of anything creates less of other things. R&D being one</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Are you seriously suggesting Fuji has been putting money into film r&d up to now? Other than reformulating Velvia back in 05, what new films have they released in recent years? Pro 400H was updated when? </p>

<p>On a point of order...Provia 400X and T64 (since discontinued) were introduced at Photokina 2006, no?<br>

<a href="http://www.fujifilm.com/photokina2006/list.html">

http://www.fujifilm.com/photokina2006/list.html</a><br>

I don't mind if film isn't updated, as long as it's manufactured. Film technology from 2006 is just fine for me.</p>

<p>I don't think this will be missed. Fuji was never a big player when it came to motion pictures.</p>

<p>This may be disasterous news for still film shooters. The question is now whether still film sales alone will justify Fuji continuing to make color film. The cost and infrastructure associated with color film production is quite high/complex from what I have read. <br>

Especially for slide film shooters like myself, as Kodak has stopped all production of this incredible medium.</p>

<p> If I owned a company like Fuji I would crunch the numbers and if it looked like it's time to bail out on a product then that is what I woud do. Staying profitable is what it's all about for a big company. Nothing I can do about it actually. I can still buy film and shoot it for now. Maybe next week or next year I will not be able to and if not then I will just move on. Bicycling and Golf are both great activities and I do not think I will have to quit those things due to electronic technology advances. </p>

<p>Read John Shriver's comment. Fuji was never a large player in the motion picture industry except for Eterna. They are more of a Consumer still film company. So cheer up, they may devote more resources to that end of the business now. What killed Kodak was the move to digital projection in movie theaters. My local Art House cinema just projected their last 35mm film before switching over. Fittingly it was Casablanca. I don't go to see movies anymore because digital projection looks like crap to me. Sad to see the day even "Movie" theaters are just showing crappy, compressed digital files.</p>

<p>If digital movies are cheaper then why are they charging you very high prices to see them, especially 3d ones and why are the refreshments astronomically priced as well? I can see if it was IMAx which, I am told is shot on film.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>If digital movies are cheaper then why are they charging you very high prices to see them, especially 3d ones and why are the refreshments astronomically priced as well?</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

Movie theater pricing isn't based on markup. If they can fill the theater at $12, why would they charge $8? This is simple business understanding.</p>

<p>If movie producers "don't care" ie, shoot on cheap and convienent digital sensor, then eventually the public will catch on and also "not care".</p>

<p>What is occurring is the end of two industries at once. people are simply not going to be going to cinemas in ten, fifteen years time.</p>

<p>Many do not go now. I found that I can wait for a Redbox night on my sub $400.00 Large screen and Surround sound. I got the idea years ago when I lived in Turkey. Even new movies there for me in English were months behind in both Turkish and English.</p>

<p>Film movies ? verses, the same movie in digital, which theatre would you go to?</p>

<p>Sigh.. The one that is falling down in my old home town that is a hair away from being torn down. Or the one I do go to to watch real film movies here when they do fire up the projector.<br>

<img src="http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8313/7955152094_ded2da2c7c.jpg" alt="" /></p>

<p>Most of the money made is in popcorn and sodas!</p>

<p>For those that work there. I would love to have a Drive in with all the greats showing on film... I bet i would make a fortune.. I doubt Digital could ever project that way.</p>

<p>In 10 or 15 years movie theatres will probably become obsolete. Larry. Find an investor and go for it. You probaly would make money at that idea.</p>

<p>I am too old for that.. I think I just need to keep shooting film and hope that my negatives are not destroyed in a fire again..... No I will just keep shooting film And let the others decide if i captured anything worth my life. I though think the New Nikon D600 is a fine camera where are my Negatives?</p>

Nikon D600? Digital? Sigh. It's okay, Larry. If you want to use digital occasionally, we at this forum forgive you.

<p>As if... Sorry I all all film all the time... :-)</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Movie theater pricing isn't based on markup. If they can fill the theater at $12, why would they charge $8? This is simple business understanding.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>They would lower the price to bring more people in from other theaters. Simple business practices. And Hollywood has been in a slump for almost three years now.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>They would lower the price to bring more people in from other theaters. Simple business practices.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> <br>

There's some sort of reading comprehension problem here. As I said, "if they can fill the theater," so where would they put these additional people?</p>