Imminent demise of Medium Format?

[claudia__]

i don't have hard facts on this....but i would hazard a guess that Hakon and i are not alone in coming to the conclusion that<p>

<i> Z wishes medium format and everything film except digital was dead a long time ago.</i>

[._._z]

That's right: Claudia does not truck in facts, only in unsupported feelings she couldn't

support if she tried.

[claudia__]

now Z is channeling Sgt Friday

[._._z]

You are very good at being wrong, Smith. You must have a lot of experience at it.

[gene crumpler]

This has been beat to death. Anyone that has some decent hasselblad equipment they want to "dump" give me a shout.

 

I don't think that film is dead, there are some of us who will still do film. Digital is just too easy. Great for tourists, kids and high volume. This is great as photographers need to make more money. They are as a group one of the lowest incomes just ahead of actors and musicians. My parents were greatly relieved when I decided to study chemical engineering rather than being a photographer.

 

Zeiss is coming out with the zeiss ikon camera this spring, initially as a film camera with high resolution lenses. Body by Cosina and the lenses based on their movie lens technolgy. I have been looking at gigbitfilm as a worthy new development. I've been talking with Delfot Ludwig the inventor of gigabitfilm, which is not retreaded agfa copy film, but a rather interesting new product. I will be publishing an evaluation of 35mm and 4x5 gigabitfilm as soon as I get access to a microscope with a D70. If I can get Ludwig to get his backers to produce gigabitfilm in 120 size we might see a little revival of MF B&W. I plan to buy the first roll of 120 film.

[gene crumpler]

If he ever makes any!

[claudia__]

.[. Z, heard it. keep repeating how wrong people who disagree with you are. it must be soothing.

[._._z]

It must be fun to be so closedminded and immune to facts, Claudia. No wonder you are

able to imagine that the film biz is in fine shape.

[claudia__]

.[. Z....did i say, or even imagine, that "the film biz is in fine shape?"

 

no, i said "film will be around." you seem to be the only one who disagrees. that cannot be fun.

[tomas_peltan]

... the objective fact of several YEARS of film sales declines in the double-digits...

 

Z, could you give us the link to resource of your information? And is your information valid for whole world, or is it valid only for US and EU countries?

 

I remember, that about two years ago, I read an article with some other data - about the growth of film production. I remember it, because I found it very strange, while reading many articles about great digital technologies at the same time.

[._._z]

Claudia conveniently forgets that she claims that the film camera and film businesses

are sound.

 

They are not.

 

Tomas: I've posted reports about world wide sales figures in numerous posts over the

years. Since 2000, worldwide film sales have decreased yearly by double-digit

percentages. (In 1999 Kodak's worldwide film sales decreased 'only 9%.) A good place

to start looking is Kodak's 10K reports (available on their site), which are required

annual financial statements required in the USA by the Securities and Exchange

Commission (SEC).

[claudia__]

Perhaps .[. Z could offer a citation in which i said " that the film camera and film businesses are sound."

[._._z]

Claudia's hallucinations extend to seeing quotation marks that aren't there.

[claudia__]

how pathetically lame. your little outbursts are undermining whatever your point was. to refresh your memory....<i>my</i> point has always been "film will be around." you have yet to prove the opposite.

[._._z]

It's good to see that Claudia's fulminations haven't ceased. In a previous thread she

talked about how she saw a "renaissance" in MF film sales based on anecdotal evidence

about Mf film availability in a local store. I provided a series of

factual statements showing that she was demonstrably wrong, what did she say? "info.

doesn't mean a thing" <p>

 

Like I said, facts are incovenient things for Claudia Smith. <p>

 

Tomas: Eastman Kodak's latest quarterly results reported sales of film and other so-

called traditional products dropped 20 per cent in the third quarter -- much more

steeply than had been previously, officially anticipated. What's more, it said that volume

in the film industry could decline as much as 20 per cent in 2005. <p>

 

Sales of its digital products, meanwhile, jumped 39 per cent during the quarter. <p>

 

Given double-digit yearly decreases in film sales for the last few years, and MF film

sales being a tiny percentage of overall film sales (and decreasing faster as high-

volume pro film users abandon film for digital), the likelihood that "film was making a

comeback" is remote ... at best, delusional at worst. <p>

 

More here: <p>

 

<i><blockquote>

 

<b>http://www.abs-cbnnews.com/ NewsStory.aspx?section=INFOTECH&oid=65005

</b> <p>

 

IDC, a technology market research firm based in Framingham, Massachusetts, expects

2006 will be the year half of the 56 billion consumer prints made will be digital, up

from 36 percent this year and 46 percent in 2005, Chute said. <p>

 

<b>http://msnbc.msn.com/id/6739236/ </b> <p>

 

Perhaps nothing illustrates the impact better than Eastman Kodak, the company that

popularized film photography and is now fighting for its life -- in January it announced

it would lay off about 20 percent of its 64,000 workers and refocus on digital products

-- as digital cameras slam sales of film, paper and photo-finishing services. Film sales

in the United States have declined every year since their peak in 2000 and are projected

to drop 18 percent this year, according to the Photo Marketing Association. <p>

 

<b>FROM KODAK'S MARCH '04 ANNUAL REPORT: </b> <p>

 

Net worldwide sales of consumer film products, including 35mm film, Advantix film

and one-time-use cameras, decreased 9% in 2003 as compared with 2002, reflecting

declines due to lower volumes of 12% and price/mix declines of 3%, partially offset by

favorable exchange of 6%. Sales of the Company's consumer film products within the

U.S. decreased 18% in the current year as compared with the prior year, reflecting

declines due to lower volumes of 17% and price/mix declines of 1%. Sales of the

Company's consumer film products outside the U.S. decreased 2% in 2003 compared

with 2002, reflecting declines in volume of 9% and price/mix declines of 2%, partially

offset by favorable exchange of 9%. The lower film product sales are attributable to a

declining industry demand driven primarily by the impact of digital substitution and

retailer inventory reductions. <p>

 

The U.S. film industry sell-through volumes decreased approximately 8% in 2003 as

compared with 2002 primarily due to the impact of digital substitution. The Company's

current estimate of worldwide consumer film industry volumes for 2003 is a decrease of

approximately 8%. The Company maintained approximately flat year-over-year

blended U.S. consumer film share as it has done for the past several consecutive years.

<p>

 

Net worldwide sales for photofinishing services (excluding equipment), including

Qualex in the U.S. and Consumer Imaging Services (CIS) outside the U.S., decreased 15%

in 2003 as compared with 2002, reflecting lower volumes and declines in price/mix,

partially offset by favorable exchange. In the U.S., Qualex's sales for photofinishing

services decreased 19% in 2003 as compared with 2002, and outside of the U.S., CIS

sales decreased 8%. These decreases reflect the effects of a continued weak film

industry. <p>

 

Net sales from the Company's consumer digital products and services, which include

picture maker kiosks/media and retail consumer digital services revenue primarily from

Picture CD and Retail.com, increased 6% in 2003 as compared with 2002, driven

primarily by an increase in sales of kiosks and consumer digital services.

</blockquote> </i><p>

[claudia__]

when i can't buy film you perhaps will be proven right. as for now, you are speculating on the basis of projections of earnings and potential bankruptcies. i believe a key word on this thread (way up at the top) is "Imminent"

 

my expectation is that "film will be around" even if i have to order it with my other art supplies from the Daniel Smith (no relation) Catalog. but for now, no worries.

[._._z]

"i believe a key word on this thread (way up at the top) is "Imminent" -- O believe you're

still rather amusingly tapdancing away from your previous claims, as well as reacting as

if I'd said the end was imminent. Only an idiot would believe that.

 

18 months ago, InfoTrends Research Group found that 17 percent of digital camera

users are no longer using film at all, and only 45 percent expect to keep using film least

occasionally" in the long term. That does not augur well for the reversion to or

continued use of film as digital photography continues to make inroads.

 

Given plummeting film sales, increasing year by year, it is not unlikely that film in 2006

could be 20% of what they were in 2000. Considering that 120 film is a tiny subset of

overall film sales, and that it was primarily the provenance of professional shooters --

are overwhelming going/gone digital (and dumping their MF bodies, resulting in

significantly lower prices used) -- it is quite foolish to believe that the MF film market is

healthy, that there is a resurgence or "renaissance" of MF, and it is equally naive to

believe that there is not a big shakeout coming soon which will result in even more

longstanding emulsions to disappear from the market.

[claudia__]

well....guess i am one fact ignoring, naive, idiotic, tapdancing, hallucinating and fulminating fool. so, what's <i>your</i> problem?

[tomas_peltan]

What about other companies than Kodak? There are more important producers on the market and results of only one company may include big error - for example: if Kodak produces very expensive products (with high quality), but most films are sold in rather poor countries, it is bad for Kodak and some cheaper comapany will gain, while Kodak will loose in the shrinking market in rich countries (where Kodak won with quality).

 

So, can you give us more researches and valid data for whole film making industry?

[._._z]

Yes, Tomas I can, but I'll leave that as an excercise for you. I've given you a good start.

Use a good search engine.

 

Claudia's Smith's newly self-described foolishness is a surprising breath of fresh air.

[david_littleboy__tokyo__ja]

"What about other companies than Kodak?"

 

Fuji introduced three new professional 120/220 color negative films last year, and three new slide films the year before that. And a new ISO 100 silver B&W film not all that long ago.

 

While some of the photography on posters one sees in the subway/train stations here is typical 35mm quality, much of it is clearly MF and LF quality. And the Japanese really like quality photography in their magazines. So I expect MF/LF to be around for a while yet.

 

Even if the 1Dsmk2 can replace 645 for much of the work that requires one or two steps above 35mm quality, until 16MP 24x36 digital is a bit more affordable and liftable, the 645 SLRs will remain useful and used.

[._._z]

It takes several years to research, test and prepare a new film for market. Any new films

or plant openings (as we saw with both Fuji and Kodak) are remnants of old plans.

There is no indication that further development is continuing. In fact, given the

inreasingly fast contraction of the worldwide market for film, for all film companies, in

addition to the considerable financial problems seen by other players like Ilford and

Agfa, I'd be surprised if substantial film-related research resources are being applied or

even contemplated by Fuji or anyone other major producer.

[hakon_soreide]

Hard to get something like a fruitful discussion out of this, it seems. The bottom line is we don't know where film will be five years from now, nor what will be possible with digital in comparison to it at that time. We don't know whether film will live on in a small niche in the shadow of digital or whether it will eventually disappear forever. <p>The only thing we can do is speculate, based on sales figures, headlines and trends in digital and traditional photography - as well as personal opinion, for better or worse. And as speculation is speculation is speculation, no one's theory is better than anyone else's until either is proven right or wrong several years down the line.<p>

And, instead of bickering about it, those who think film should survive should go rally at the barricades, launch awareness campaigns, collect signatures to present to the makers that their products are dearly wanted also for the next fifty years, and work further towards ensuring that their favourite emulsions stay on the market. There's definitely no need to waste that energy here.<p>

<a href="http://www.hakonsoreide.com/Photos">www.hakonsoreide.com</a>

[._._z]

<i><blockquote> we don't know where film will be five years from now

</blockquote> </i><p>

 

It is only complete speculation to those to are ignorant or deliberately blinkered to the

facts and clear trends. For example: <p>

 

<b><blockquote>

<u><A href =

http://snipurl.com/cc2c>

http://www.imaginginfo.com/archive/

index.asp?action=details&mag_id=3&channel_id=&magarticle_id=1943</a></u>

<p>

 

 

 

For some time, Tom Crawford, PMA's corporate communications executive, has been

sending out a monthly report called, "PMA Processing Survey." Page one of the report

has always been a chart showing the status of the percentage change of rolls processed

for the previous 12 months. I guess for too many consecutive months the black bar

below the zero line has been getting longer and blacker and for the month of May

(down 10.1%), the most recent, this page has been relegated to the third page of the

report. It had been depressing for the industry to see these roll count neg numbers

month after month. <p>

 

Replacing it as the opening page one in the report is a chart entitled: "Change in

Number of Prints Made from Digital-Still Camera Images." Each of the six bars were

above the zero line as a sign that consumers were definitely finding ways to print their

digital images either from home printers (up 33% for the 12-month period) to self-

service kiosks (up 777%). Overall, digital printing is up 81% for the period, a positive

trend destined to increase each month?even as roll counts go down. This report will no

doubt remain page one of the package for a long time to come.

</blockquote> </b><p>

 

Or these quotes, from indicivuals deep in the industry: <p>

 

<i><blockquote>

 

<u><A href =

http://snipurl.com/cc2e>

http://www.imaginginfo.com/archive/

index.asp?action=details&mag_id=3&channel_id=&magarticle_id=1945</a></u>

 

<p>

 

<b> James L. Chung, President, International Photographic Council (IPC): </b><p>

 

dramatic growth in sales of digital still cameras (DSC).... Worldwide shipment of DSC for

2004 will be about 64 million units, with an expectation of 40 % annual growth.... As a

result of the growth in DSC sales, photographic film sales have declined by about 18 to

20% annually. <p><p>

 

 

<b>Machiko Ouchi, Editor-in-Chief, PEN Weekly, published by the Joint PhotoImaging

Enterprises Association International (JPEAI):</b><p>

 

Digital imaging is becoming more popular and more important every year. The wave of

digitization overwhelmed conventional photography this year as digicams are selling 10

times more than film cameras on the Japanese market (3.952 million units vs 0.358

million) and 6 times on the world market (26.472 million vs 4.440 million) as of June

2004. The dissemination ratio surpassed the 50% mark as of March 2004. <p>

 

.... Over 82 million units of cell phones are now working in Japan with some 70% of the

population owning a cell phone, about 85% of which are camera phones. They can be

used for business or private scenes by taking pictures and transmitting them to share

with your colleagues or family and friends <p><p>

 

 

<b>Mike Worswick, President of Photographic Research Organization Inc. (PRO):</b>

<p>

 

Retailers who have profited for over 20 years from minilab gross margins are

suffering..... the erosion in the film processing business. The good news is that many

aggressive retail marketers are reporting success stories as they convert their

customers to digital printing.

 

</blockquote> </i><p>

[q.g._de_bakker]

Dig far enough in the past, and you'll come across goodies like people-who-should-really-know predicting telephones will be no good, never catch on, because the postal service already provides all people need.<br>It's hard to tell what the future will be. ;-)