Can and will Kodak still make film?

<p>In another forum, Ron Andrews , Dec 27, 2011; 09:36 a.m. posted “When I first saw the headline that Kodak was selling Eastman Gelatin, I was concerned. When I learned they were selling to Rousselot, I felt better. Rousselot is a quality supplier. Kodak has been buying gelatin from them for years.” (Partial quote). </p>

<p>I understand that gelatin is a necessary ingredient in film. If so, their future in film sales raises questions. </p>

<p>Did they retain enough gelatin to make at least some more master film rolls? Will they end film production when their supply is exhausted? </p>

<p>Did they sell the company and retain the right to share use of the intellectual property rights and enough machinery to still manufacture film but on a smaller scale? </p>

<p>Did they sell the company with the exclusive rights to market what was formerly their gelatin? Will they then buy gelatin from to Rousselot and keep making film? Or, has Kodak made their last master roll of film but will presumably continue to cut and roll marketable product until the supply of already made film runs out? </p>

<p>Is the sale irrelevant and will have no bearing on Kodak film production? Or is there some other answer to their gelatin needs?</p>

<p>I doubt even Kodak can answer this. :) My bet is .. Don't worry be happy.</p>

<p>Only Kodak can answer this, but do like Larry says... ;)</p>

<p>I worked for a company that wound up selling the building they ran their business from. They negotiated a lease as part of the sale. I would think they still have access to all the gelatin they need; management may be doing stupid things but I don't think their lawyers are.</p>

<p>This was a good sale for Kodak (for once). Rousselot will provide EK with as much gelatin as they need, possibly for LESS than it cost Kodak to produce it 'in house'.</p>

<blockquote>

<p><em><strong>This was a good sale for Kodak (for once). Rousselot will provide EK with as much gelatin as they need, possibly for LESS than it cost Kodak to produce it 'in house'.</strong></em><br>

<strong>I hope you are correct<br /></strong></p>

</blockquote>

<p>Stock answer; if more and more of these companies did stop making film, the remaining company/companies would be making all the film used worldwide. Whether its Kodak,Ilford or someone else, there will be one or two companies left making truely huge profits on producing film.</p>

<p>Lack of gelatin will not keep Kodak from making film. Rousselot has the capacity to supply all of their needs for the foreseeable future. </p>

<p>The sale makes sense for Kodak. The Eastman plant has capacity far beyond what Kodak can use today. Roussellot has the marketing contacts to sell more gel from the Eastman plant.</p>

<p>The factor that is likely to end film production at Kodak is the conversion to digital in the motion picture business (both negative and print). This conversion is underway and will probably take about as long as the conversion from film to digital in still cameras. Once the conversion approaches the 90% point, Kodak will not have enough volume to keep their one remaining film coating facility running. </p>

<p>Watch the expiration dates on current Kodak emulsions. Maybe this is a coinidence or not, but I noticed the expiration dates of 120 Plus-X didn't go beyond a certain date for nearly a year before it was announced as discontinued. I've noticed the same with 35mm Plus-x which was discontinued in 100' bulk rolls, but for now is still available as boxed rolls. I'm guessing that the latest expiration dates are from the last master roll and once it's been cut into single rolls and sold there will be no more if it is indeed discontinued.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Once the conversion approaches the 90% point, Kodak will not have enough volume to keep their one remaining film coating facility running.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It would be quite sad if this happened. I'd actually be a little angry. That sounds odd coming from someone who shoots 90% digitally, but I hope to increase my film usage eventually. I just like it that much (I always did but thanks to digital I like it even more). That's not a prescription for other photographers but just my preference. YMMV.</p>

<p>Fuji seems to be sticking it out, for which bless them. Otherwise, future film supply looks increasingly to be likely to be made in those old "non-economical", formerly nationalized, film factories in the former Second World. Former Jugoslavia, etc.</p>

<p>I would not worry about BW production. If the big two go, it's really the death of good quality C41 and E6.</p>

<p>We know for a fact that they can and I'm sure that they still will.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>one or two companies left making truely huge profits on producing film.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>As "truly huge" as profits being made from Super 8, VHS ect... ?</p>

<p>I have no idea what kind of future profit will exist but, if you're that confident, wouldn't you want to invest in the remaining few now to sit on the eventual vast fortune to come? Shouldn't we all?</p>

<p>I find this topic sobering and a little depressing. It appears that the general consensus is that once the movie industry mostly transitions to digital, then the manufacture of color film will very likely end. The only expensive film camera I have left is my Hasselblad 501CM. I suppose I can hold on to that with the hope that perhaps someday, maybe with new sensor technology, a digital back for it will not break the bank? What doth thou think?<br>

On a related topic: I'm getting close to actually buying a digital camera. With more of them looking and acting like real film cameras, with knobs and dials to twist and turn, instead of looking and acting like plastic-encased, menu-driven, programmed appliances, the temptation is biting me to plunge into the dark side. Besides, having purchased CaptureOne Express to process my digital files from scanned film, and liking it as a great tool, the transition to digital should be painless.<br>

If film diehards like me transition to digital, how can the future of film be anything but dark?<br>

And with those thoughts.....Happy New Year!</p>

<p>A bunch of news caught my attention lately. One is a market research report published in Nov, 2011 about "The End of an Era Arrives as Digital Technology Displaces 35mm Film in Cinema Projection". The projection is, "January 2012 will mark the crossover point when digital technology overtakes 35mm. By the end of 2012, the share of 35mm will decline to 37 percent of global cinema screens, with digital accounting for the remaining 63 percent. This represents a dramatic decline for 35mm, which was used in 68 percent of global cinema screens in 2010. In 2015, 35mm will be used in just 17 percent of global movie screens, relegating it to a niche projection format."<br /> <br /> The second news just come in after the New Year 2012: Kodak lost three board directors recently, or in one week, if not bad enough. Kodak sold its digital sensor business. Kodak just sold its gelatin business. And Kodak is trying to find buyers for its patent portfolio. Kodak does not only offload its traditional production capability, but is also selling out its digital lines and research results.<br>

Those efforts are nothing new. All of those points to the same direction as Polaroid did.</p>

<p>When people think of Movie film production and Digital they forget one thing. Not all the world is North America and Europe. I know Bollywood can't afford to switch nor all theaters that show these movies. Take the new and blossoming productions made in the Arab world that is just getting started.</p>

<p> No folks you can't just read local news look at the big picture.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>If film diehards like me transition to digital, how can the future of film be anything but dark?</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You may not have a choice - at least for color. The film market's decline hasn't slowed and doesn't look like it's going to slow anytime soon. And even if enough filmmakers stick with film to make it economically viable to continue its manufacture (not likely), it doesn't mean that film for still cameras will still be available.</p>

<p>As far as Fuji is concerned, if Walmart stops carrying film - everything in stock is Fuji - you can rest assured that Fuji will probably pull out. I think Walmart is the only that's keeping Fuji in the film business here in the US.</p>

<p>In the future, film (most likely just B&W) is going to be made by small specialty manufacturers. </p>

<p>It seems to me the report is talking about the global market. Not just North America or Europe. <br>

"In the United States, there will be no more mainstream 35mm usage from the end of 2013. For Western Europe, this event may happen at the end of 2014, given the large number of countries and the possibility of public support.<br>

The rest of the world will then be under some pressure to follow suit. Because of this, 35mm will see its last mainstream usage by the end of 2015."<br>

Here is the URL for the original article if anyone plans to do further research on this subject:<br>

<a href="http://www.isuppli.com/Media-Research/News/Pages/The-End-of-an-Era-Arrives-as-Digital-Technology-Displaces-35-mm-Film-in-Cinema-Projection.aspx">http://www.isuppli.com/Media-Research/News/Pages/The-End-of-an-Era-Arrives-as-Digital-Technology-Displaces-35-mm-Film-in-Cinema-Projection.aspx</a></p>

<p>Well I do see Color 35mm for still photography in the end times but I must say the decision I made to go B&W is looking better all the time However; Under pressure and doing it are 2 different things as it comes to transferring to all digital projection. Also even Digital movies are backed up on film do the the unknowns of long term storage of Digital media. I just don't see it.</p>

<p>The article refers to motion picture print film. There is another conversion proceeding for motion picture origination. I don't have precise data. I suspect this conversion will take a bit longer. In any event, I will not be surprised if color photographic film is difficult to find in 2020. </p>

<p>I expect B&W to have a long life measured in decades. Ilford will likely be the largest film manufacturer in future decades. </p>

<p>Ron I think many of us old dogs will be hard to find in 2020. :(</p>

<p>Larry, let's hope the 'spirit' lingers around in photo.net after 2020... :)</p>

<p>To our archived spirits. :)</p>

<p>Philip Wang mentioned some of the various divisions and properties that Kodak has been selling off. Another poster (A. T. Burke?) mentioned earlier in another thread that Kodak appears to be in non-bankruptcy liquidation. Assets generally sell for less during bankruptcy than before. Kodak CEO Perez is often quoted strongly denying that Kodak is going to file bankruptcy. On the other hand they did hire a bankruptcy specialist.</p>

<p>I speculate that Kodak hired the bankruptcy specialist (a bankruptcy specialist would be knowledgeable and experienced in asset liquidation) to help them liquidate as many assets as they can before Kodak has to file bankruptcy. During bankruptcy they would otherwise be selling the same assets, but for less money.</p>

<p>Many knowledgeable people think that bankruptcy is going to come to Kodak, sooner or later. If the film unit is and/or would be showing a profit as an independent film producer, the Creditor’s Committee may well petition the judge to require the trustee to continue making film. This would create income to help finance the proceedings and also retain more value for the film unit’s assets eventual sale.</p>

<p>OK It is a new year. I will now from this point on refuse to respond to any Film is going to die threads... :)</p>