Resurgence of film?

[justin_stott]

<p>I don't have insight into the big economic picture, but I was glad to hear that my local B&M camera store has had significant increases in film sales over the past year or two, especially in B & W. I take them to be a better sign of what's going on in my area than Wally-world.</p>

[Sycamoe]

<p>Ty, for anyone who can afford the time and the money to shoot film, more power to them. The choices in films, retailers and processing will shrink--that much seems clear. </p>

<p>The thing I have noticed is that some really phenomenal prints are being made from digital and I think they will conquer the dynamic range hurdle with digital at some point. That, to me, is its greatest weakness. (At least in comparison to good old color negative film. Frankly, as far as slide film, which I always loved to shoot, digital is no more finicky IMHO.)</p>

<p>As far as the high ISO, why would we want it? To be free from the tripod of course! We may not eliminate it for every situation but between VR/IS lenses and high ISO, it's getting a lot easier to leave them at home. By the way, I explored your work and you have some beautiful images.</p>

[exposed1]

<p>My niece who is 23 and for most of here adult life has only know digital, called and asked me about some photos I had taken. She ask why they look so good and what was the difference between what she takes with her camera. The photos she question me about were taken with a Nikon Fm2n and a 28mm nikkor lens loaded with some very old Kodak royal gold 200. She love the look of them so much she asked me to find her a film camera so she could learn to use it. I was so excited to hear this. She wants to learn how to really use a camera and how to use film. <br>

Film for me never died, and I have no problem finding film. Ektar and the portra films, for me, make digital a wast of time. I shot with film as a pro for 25 years and I still shoot film in everything from my Hasselblads to my little point and shoot Nikon.<br>

One thing than really gets under my nails is, how can someone talk about how bad film is, or that digital blows film out of the water if you never have had much experience with film, and I mean long term experience with film? If you have never done darkroom work, have at least 15 years of full time experience with film and how it works and how to make the best of it, do not say things you read about online or where ever you get it from. With experience and time shooting film, then will you be able to talk about things you really know.</p>

[keith_anderson7]

What kind of logic is it that bases a determination of value on Wal-Mart's selection of goods? If I were to take a walk

thru Wal-Mart I could logically assume that society has totally abandoned dental care, basic hygiene, and the only

music of value is produced by Brittney Spears or Fitty Cent. So as much as I appreciate film in the digital age I think

I'll refrain from drawing any conclusions from a stroll thru Wal-Mart other than seeing how skanky white trash teenage

girls are dressing these days.

[andylynn]

<p>Good point. Wal-mart is based on profit in low margin, high volume goods. Film sold locally is lower volume, higher margin than Wal-mart wants to work with.</p>

<p>I could go so far as to propose that local availability of any low volume good that is widely available by internet / mail order is a poor indicator of that good's popularity. For example, most people live nowhere near a good computer guts store, but the market for parts for DIY system builders is very healthy based on web sales.</p>

[kelly_flanigan1]

<p>Walmart and Kmart sold the bulk of the public's Canon EOS film cameras; before that the bulk of folks bought their Canon AE-1s their.</p>

<p>Thus Canon EOS fans entire camera system was supported by the devil; ie the Common mans store(s) where he got his film Rebel; or dRebel.</p>

<p>If you want to be stupid; you can just ignore where the bulk of retail items are bought; and assume as lay person that the entire planet mailorders cameras; or even plywood too.</p>

<p>Photo.net really is not a place where most folks run an actual business; thus you can come up with wacky business ideas; ie artist types with no money sense.</p>

<p>Kmart sold Nikkormat Ftn's; Minolta SRT's and Canonet RF cameras in the 1970's</p>

<p> The entire Canon EOS camera system owes its life to Walmart; where masses got their first EOS camera. Dolts on this thread cannot fathom that the largest vendor(s) of a product matters. The majority of total EOS mount cameras were bought locally; NOT via mailorder. The average person got their EOS camera at Walmart; Kmart, Best Buy, Office Depot, Office Max or Sams club and not buy mail order.</p>

<p>So if Walmart is a sign of poor goods;</p>

<p>How does your rigid mindset handle that they once carried Nikkormats; Kodachrome; Panatomic-X; Tri-x; D76 ?</p>

<p> Are you happy and glad to see the devil/Walmart drop Tri-x since you think it is a horrible film?</p>

<p>When I shot 110 back in the 1970's with a Rollei A110; Kmart had Verichome Pan and Kodachrome in 110 size. Do you really think theses are seconds compared to mail ordering them?</p>

<p>The NYC camera stores margins on many films and cameras is low too; just like Walmarts.</p>

<p><br /><br /><br /></p>

<p>**IF FILM is making a such a comeback; why are labs dropping like Falls leaves?</p>

<p><br /><br /><br /><br>

If you look at the number E6 slide/transparency closings; it follows the decline of dialup usage.</p>

<p>C41 labs are also closing; many places that had in house C41 are now farming it out; all due to the poor economics of too few rolls for the overhead of the lab. Again; this is money issue; so most here cannot fathom this concept</p>

<p> Kodachrome died due to lack of usage; the average person *who has ever* shot some Kodachrome shot their last roll 30 years ago. </p>

[kelly_flanigan1]

<p>Film has been in a long decline now for over 10 to 20 years.<br /> <br /> There are gobs of average folks who mothballed their film camera after their 1st or 2nd digital camera.<br /> <br /> I know die hard ; hard core photographers who shot film in the 60's to 90's ;and have not shot any film in 10 years.<br /> <br /> In printing the scanning I do is most folks old pre digital stuff.<br /> <br /> The most common (mean) 35mm slide I scan is from the 1970's; with MORE 1950's than 1990's stuff; ie folks stopped shooting slides a generation ago<br>

<br /> One pro that use to shoot MF transparencies 10 years ago is now totally digital; and he said he never would go digital 10 years ago</p>

<p>The bulk of the used cameras I sell on Ebay are for customers mothballed film cameras; like dialup modems they just want the money out of them as they drop in value</p>

[keith_anderson7]

<p>I don't think anyone said Wal-Mart sells poor quality goods. In fact, they still do sell good cameras there. I don't know if Canon owes their life to Wal-Mart or not, but certainly getting them to sell your product is a good thing where profit is concerned.</p>

<p>However the point is not that Wal-Mart's lineup is always good or bad, it's rather that there are good things that they sell and bad things they sell (sorry for the oversimplification) and I wouldn't assume film is "dead" if Wal-Mart doesn't want to sell it, I'd just assume they've made a business decision that their particular customer base isn't buying that stuff much.</p>

<p>I get my film ALL online or at the last good pro photo shop near me. I'm sure film will occupy a strong niche market moving forward, but it will be small and probably limited to the "pro" level or advanced shooters, or regular people who started with film and still love it.</p>

[kelly_flanigan1]

<p>Keith;</p>

<p>Walmart once had 2 to 3 Canon film EOS cameras; along with a token zoom or fixed telephoto lens. many millions of the lower end Canons were sold at Walmart; Kmart; even Office Depot type; Best Buy and even Fries Electronics.</p>

<p>The volumes sold by model cost is a big pyramid; there are were truckloads of starter EOS film cameras sold compared to the super high end 3 to 6k camera bodies.</p>

<p>In the holiday seasons; Walmart in Oxnard and the bigger Fries in the San Fernando Valley in the pre DRebel days had many film Canon EOS cameras; and they sold like hotcakes. This bothers folks who believe that most folks buy cameras via mailorder.</p>

<p>When I was a kid every drug store had 120 and 620 Verichrome; even in town of 5000 folks. Now today in 2010 with a vist to New Orleans; no store there; even pro carries a single darn roll of B&W 120; thus one has to mailorder it. I fail to see how film is resurging; when a town of about 1 million has no 120 B&W at all for sale.</p>

<p>The resurgence of film articles are just fluff to pump up stock options; ie one lies to get a jump in stock price; ie short term BS to raise sales.</p>

<p>Even in the Los Angeles area film is harder to find; thus one mailorders or special orders locally.</p>

<p>Not everybody does mailorder; here I eons ago I got 120 in Verichrome from Cambridge camera; after B&H ran out. I stocked up on Panatomic-X; Royal-X; and Super XX sheets; as these products dies due to lack of usage.</p>

 

[thephotophile]

<p>No Walmart in Africa, and in Africa film is still king. (See my previous post)</p>

[dave_b15]

<p>There is no resurgence: the decline is just slowing. Of course, nothing says that the decline won't pick up again either.</p>

<p>The whole resurgence statement was the exaggeration of a PR guy.</p>

[timm_douglas]

<p>Digital photography allows for quick dissemination of our photos and gives us a digital darkroom. However, for most of us, most of our pictures are displayed on a monitor that provides lower quality than what we see in paper pictures coming from film cameras. That is a big problem that isn't discussed by those looking for cameras. Many on here are asking and discussing the newest cameras and the features, but the full richness and resolution of their pictures aren't being seen because they're displaying the pictures on computer monitors or their televisions. Until a newer and better display type is used, pictures will be the better way to see more of what's in the pictures taken. Thus, if you're shopping for a digital camera, don't go overboard on price. You won't be seeing the full richness of the pictures until you see them on an OLED display or something better than what we have now. The recent electronic expos may dwell on the newest cameras when it comes to digital photography, but what is really needed is better displays.<br>

So I don't know if film will come back. Digital photography is very expensive and film is a cheaper alternative and one that surpasses the quality of digital photos per dollar. With the economy being the way it is, some people may choose the cheaper alternative. <br>

There is an article on the Wall Street Journal about the large number of people going to stores at midnight on the first of each month to get food because that is when the government releases the money to accounts for food stamps or aid. Not everyone is fortunate enough to be able to afford cameras costing hundreds or thousands of dollars - some people may opt for something dirt cheap to hone their skills on or enjoy. Film can give them more for their dollar in terms of quality. They don't have to buy the gear, software, etc. And, yes, people on food stamps can still enjoy photography, so don't say they don't have the right or whatever to enjoy it.</p>

 

[paul_scharf_]

<p>Why are we even talking about what Walmart sells or don't sell? Walmart sells only amateur film, not professional. Going to the link that was provided, I see reference to the Kodak’s US marketing manager of pro film, to Porta film and to B&W film. I do not see any reference to amateur film. So, obviously, the resurgence he is talking about must be in the professional film market and not the amateur film market, which is not surprising.<br>

After we went from large format to medium format, all sorts of people predicted that large format was dead. Sorry, it did not die. But, rather we saw a resurgence back to large format. And, when we went from medium format to 35mm, again we saw a resurgence back to medium format. Now that we have gone to digital, it don't surprise me if we see a resurgence going back to film (among professionals and semi-professionals). Now, when I say resurgence, I don't mean a 100% of the business that was lost, came back. But, rather a significant percentage of the lost business came back. <br /><br /><br /></p>

[paul_scharf_]

<p>Why are we even talking about what Walmart sells or don't sell? Walmart sells only amateur film, not professional. Going to the link that was provided, I see reference to the Kodak’s US marketing manager of pro film, to Porta film and to B&W film. I do not see any reference to amateur film. So, obviously, the resurgence he is talking about must be in the professional film market and not the amateur film market, which is not surprising.<br>

After we went from large format to medium format, all sorts of people predicted that large format was dead. Sorry, it did not die. But, rather we saw a resurgence back to large format. And, when we went from medium format to 35mm, again we saw a resurgence back to medium format. Now that we have gone to digital, it don't surprise me if we see a resurgence going back to film (among professionals and semi-professionals). Now, when I say resurgence, I don't mean a 100% of the business that was lost, came back. But, rather a significant percentage of the lost business came back. <br /><br /><br /></p>

[rustys pics]

<p>I really wonder how many of the "Film is Dead" proclaimers sit around and wait with baited breath to pounce on anyone who DARES to tell photo.net users that Film might just be holding it's own or even managing a small comeback? Apparently quite a few considering the first 6-7 posts on this topic. The dude at Kodak who is quoted in the original article would NOT make a spurious statement like this unless he had some (A) hard facts to back it up, and (B) the confirmation to make such a public statement by his corporate superiors at Kodak. In case some of the posters have not noticed, there is a serious recesssion on, and jobs are difficult to come by. Unlikely he would risk his by making an off the cuff statement to a major photography publication.<br>

Want to see the resurgence of film? Go look at the number of NEW film images and Film related Groups springing up over at Flickr.com. Simple as that. True film is not going to be what it was 10 years ago....but Vinyl records won't be what they were 35 years ago either. As the original article points out. Film and Vinyl is a good analogy for the small resurgence of film. Kodak and Ilford have re-tooled their production and culled their lines to be much leaner and more efficient. Think of them as the Ford Motor company coming out of the U.S. Auto Meltdown lean and mean because they were smart enough to read the writing on the wall and cut back early. Fuji is currently attempting to do the same thing albeit it later and less efficiently.<br>

The film resurgence is real, and has long lasting implications. Talk about Wal-Mart all you like. People who really care about their photographs don't shop there any more than people who want gourmet food eat at a Fast Food restaurant.</p>

[hjoseph7]

<p>Kodak finally woke up. They were too fast to pull the plug on some films and paper.</p>

[dave_b15]

<p>From <a href="http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQuerier.jhtml?pq-path=2709&pq-locale=en_US&gpcid=0900688a80d2ade8">Kodak's Second quarter report</a>:</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Film, Photofinishing and Entertainment Group revenue totaled $466 million, a <strong>21% decline</strong> from $593 million in the second quarter of 2009.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Which is better than the 40%+ decline Kodak was showing a couple of years ago.</p>

<p>I'm going to have to revamp my numbers. I predicted Kodak would be showing a loss in their FPEG group by 2015. It looks like it's going to be sooner than that.</p>

[joe_taylor5]

<p>When I start seeing more new film cameras on the shelf I will start believing that film is making a comeback. When a new film in as good as Kodachrome I will perk my ears up a little.</p>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p>When I start seeing more new film cameras on the shelf I will start believing that film is making a comeback.</p>

</blockquote>

<p> There are many new film cameras for sale. Most of them are large format but there are the two new Fuji rangefinders for 120 film as well.</p>

[mauro_franic]

<p>Dave, this decrease in earnings was primarily driven by industry-related declines in volumes and increased raw material costs, partially offset by cost reductions across the segment.</p>

<p>We can monitor the Q3 webcast on October 28th.</p>

[Spearhead]

<p>Dave quotes revenue, not earnings. These are different things.</p>

[brian_m.1]

<p>If Walmart had dropped <em>both</em> Fuji and Kodak film the argument could have some merit but they still carry film. The thread is not about if Kodak film is making a comeback. All our local drugstores sell film but don't see Kodak films as often as Fuji. The former Ritz camera store sells a box of 6 24 exposure Fuji rolls for 7 bucks. Can't beat that. No mail order processing for me. Just drop it off at Costco for beautiful prints for next to noting. So this will be my routine for as long as I can no matter what Walmart does or doesn't.</p>

[mauro_franic]

<p>Jeff, I think everyone knows what earnings are. The article we are discussing is about a comment that film is doing extremely well - not pointing at gross revenue, hence I quote the earnings statement.</p>

[damon_fernandes]

<p>I sold my 5D Mark 2 and 85mm 1.2 Mark 2 last week. With the money, I bought a Nikon F6, an 85mm 1.8 AFD, an Epson V700 scanner, and tons of film. I am feeling good for many reasons. One, I know that my camera will not be a paperweight in 10 years. Two, my negatives will never crash and be inaccessible. Three, film for me has an intangible quality that digital does not have. And the F6 is freaking beautiful.</p>

[Spearhead]

<p>Mauro, Dave references revenues. You responded to him about earnings. That wasn't Dave's point. This isn't rocket science, film volumes are dropping even through prices are rising.</p>