Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,995   Posts: 1,524,279   Online: 862
      
Page 5 of 13 FirstFirst 1234567891011 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 125
  1. #41
    CGW
    CGW is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,798
    Quote Originally Posted by Sal Santamaura View Post
    That was obvious from the ongoing behavior. Thus my futile attempt to explain why it should.
    So why did you even bother?

  2. #42

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    San Clemente, California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,062
    Quote Originally Posted by CGW View Post
    So why did you even bother?
    Futility wasn't guaranteed in advance. There was a chance, albeit small, that something might get through and it'd start costing you sleep or, better yet, motivate more appropriate interactions.

    With futility now confirmed, my miniscule Ignore List will grow by 100%. To others reading this: Please don't feed the troll or quote it in replies!

  3. #43
    CGW
    CGW is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,798
    Quote Originally Posted by Sal Santamaura View Post
    Futility wasn't guaranteed in advance. There was a chance, albeit small, that something might get through and it'd start costing you sleep or, better yet, motivate more appropriate interactions.

    With futility now confirmed, my miniscule Ignore List will grow by 100%. To others reading this: Please don't feed the troll or quote it in replies!
    Truly no loss to me.

  4. #44
    Leigh B's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Maryland, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,035
    Images
    1
    Film, as a product, suffers from a major problem:

    The unit selling price is quite low, but the equipment and infrastructure required to manufacture it economically are quite expensive.

    The long-term viability of film will depend ultimately on someone inventing a cost-effective way to manufacture it in smaller quantities.

    - Leigh
    “Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something.” - Plato

  5. #45
    Brian C. Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Everett, WA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    495
    Blog Entries
    2
    Images
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by Leigh B View Post
    The long-term viability of film will depend ultimately on someone inventing a cost-effective way to manufacture it in smaller quantities.
    A cost-effective way which allows a positive return on investment.

    According to the PDN article, Kodak E-6 was no longer commercially viable, so it was discontinued, never to be seen again. I've read that it was 1% to 5% of their film production. The amount of chemicals used to make it had to be mostly wasted, as nothing was shared between E-6 and C-41/ECN processes. The C-41/ECN processes share chemicals, so there's some synergy there.

    Lomography is growing, but at 2 million rolls in the last year (of rebranded non-Kodak film), I don't see how it's going to be a serious replacement or source if, say, Kodak reaches the point of non-viability. If Kodak loses, say, 75% of its motion picture footage sales, will that leave it in a position to still be viable? Or will the film division collapse, leaving Kodak with no profit?

    It takes millions of dollars of investment and years of development to bring a modern film to market. So far, there's one ex-Kodak engineer in Australia who build a coating machine in his garage, from scrounged parts, and some new parts. Good B&W, but no color. AFAIK, nobody else has built a home coating machine. There are some basic materials that are problematic to purchase, like the base material for coating.

    Currently x-ray film is plentiful and cheap, very cheap. But of course you have to shoot LF to take advantage of it, and it can be a problem to work with it.

    So far, it appears that the best source in the realm of the established manufacturers. The old Agfa machines are still running, and Fuji's plant is much smaller than Kodak's plant.

  6. #46

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Shanghai, China
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,789
    Images
    36
    It would seem to me, from an uneducated point of view, that there is still a significant amount of people around the world who want to and do shoot film. At the same time, the dinosaur companies like Kodak are just incapable of supporting such a small number of people because they have enormous legacy costs because of the once greater demand.

    All film users need is ONE surviving company to be able to make and sell film while remaining a strong profitable company. Hopefully, this one surviving company could produce enough volume to keep costs reasonable and allow this hobby to flourish.

    It is very hard, almost impossible to see Kodak being that company, even as a spun off entity. They have been so mismanaged that they are lucky to be around today. Fujifilm, on the other hand, seems to keep making film without very much drama. Sure they discontinue films but that is because of decreased demand. Should Kodak cease to exist, film users will flock to Fujifilm (among others) to get their fix.

    For the sake of film, stability is desperately needed. Much like the real estate market, the bottom to this drop has to be found so that the recovery (as it were) could begin.

    It would be nice if some legacy of Kodak could remain once they are gone. It appears unlikely due to the specialized nature of film, but if Kodak could sell off their formulations to Fujifilm or who ever is the survivor, that would be best.

    Film just cant get the economy of scale needed in the fragmented market of today. The slow consolidation seems to be hurting film use, not helping so acceleration to the bottom is needed.

    Just my uneducated thoughts.

  7. #47

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Mission Viejo, California
    Shooter
    127 Format
    Posts
    1,432
    Say you have three machines that can make 10,000 of something a week and replace them with one huge machine that can make 50,000 things a week. Of course you melt down the smaller 3 because you can't save money if you store and house them.

    The 50,000 machine makes a lot of sense until you can only sell 10,000 Then the 3 little machines make better sense.

    Someone lost their sense.
    - Bill Lynch

  8. #48
    Brian C. Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Everett, WA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    495
    Blog Entries
    2
    Images
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by RattyMouse View Post
    ... if Kodak could sell off their formulations to Fujifilm or who ever is the survivor, that would be best.
    Unfortunately, sometimes a formulation can't be move between factories in a single company, let alone another company. The process is that full of "magic." When a formulation process is created, it is created for a fixed batch size. Any other batch size is a completely different formulation. Reformulating the E6 process for a small batch size wouldn't see a positive return on investment. It took a long time for the E6 process to come up to par with Kodachrome.

    Quote Originally Posted by RattyMouse View Post
    Film just cant get the economy of scale needed in the fragmented market of today.
    Film already has an economy of scale, but it is eroding. People keep picking up digital, and now the movie theaters are faced with getting digital projection rammed down their throats. I read that the theater association is upset about this, but I don't know how well they can push back against the movie producers.

  9. #49
    CGW
    CGW is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,798
    We're sliding OT here. The issue of the economies--and dis-economies--of film production have been beat to death already. Why replay it? Nothing has fundamentally changed--for the better, anyway. Check EK's 2012 Q1 results.

    I'd like to see time series data from the PMA on film sales volume(not $)from 2000 to 2011 or later. The oft-cited PMA figure of 1 billion rolls sold in 1999 shrank to shy of 20 million in 2010.

  10. #50
    Mainecoonmaniac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,912
    Images
    6
    Since film is no longer a high profit, high volume consumer item, will developing countries like Czech Republic take up the slack in making film? It's little money for richer countries like US, UK and Japan, but it's a lot for the Czechs.

Page 5 of 13 FirstFirst 1234567891011 ... LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin