Fuji apparently ceasing motion picture film production -- what are the consequences?
It was only two days ago when I first read about the rumours of Fuji ceasing motion picture film production. Having read some comments on cinematography mailing lists and forums, it seems this isn't only a rumor. A few voices from within the motion picture industry have been confirming the rumor as valid.
Anyway, the interesting question then is "what are the consequences?" Is Fuji ceasing still film production as well? And if so, does this give an advantage to Kodak?
I guess nobody knows. But at least we can speculate, eh?
If one thing is for sure, commitment doesn't mean these days the same thing it meant before!
kuparikettu can you name other sources than deadline.com, which currently seems to be the only source other than forum reports based on this article.
im not sure what the point is of making motion picture film
if none of the studios want to shoot on film ...
hopefully kodak can make a go of it ...
Uncertainty is the defining characteristic of film photography.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
On Cinematography.com, cinematographer John Holland comments:
Originally Posted by MDR
"the story about Fuji is very true",
"'Seriously John? You have reliable word on this?' Yes very reliable , Fuji arnt going to say anything for a few weeks ."
"'Yes, but are they simply going to shut down the film plant, or are they going to sell it?' Far as i know its closed or closing the plant ."
On cml-film mailing list (cinematography.net), Kevin Phelan, Head of Post Production of LipSync Post comments as follows: "Yes it is true : Fuji cease making stock by December 31 st : all remaining stock in the UK will go to storage in Holland"
I'm guessing that Fujifilm saw the "writing on the wall" when Kodak made the first digital camera, and they took it seriously. The Japanese companies have always had a history of diversifying like mad, so of couse Fuji got into everything else it could, and kept the profits rolling in. Unlike Kodak, which kept spinning off successful branches and selling off good ideas. So in 2000 Fujifilm's revenue was 40% film, and 60% everything else. Now it's 1% film and 99% everthing else.
Fujifilm will, as they have said, continue to make film as long as even one person is using it, but it's going to be done on a small line. So they're going to exit movie film since the studios don't want to distribute actual film any longer, and probably run their still film lines intermittently.
I don't know about Fujifilm's volumes, but they may sell more motion picture film than still, but at what profit? Looking at the price of stuff like Provia 400X, I can't imagine the price per foot is anything like that for motion picture.
If they can give up motion picture, but stick with still, I'd consider that very encouraging that still volumes are actually still reasonably viable.
Thank you kuparikettu. I've already read the post by John Holland but not the cinematography.net one.
I am still waiting for a response from Fujifilm, they act very unprofessionaly imho.
Eterna Vivid 160 and 500 are beautiful films I am sad to see them go, prefer them to Vision 3.
Originally Posted by jnanian
I don't think the problem is with studios not wanting to shoot on film. There still seems to be a fair number of productions shot using film.
The problem is that the distributors don't want to use film to distribute the movie. And it is the millions of feet of film used for release prints that are/were the source of profits for Kodak and Fuji.
“Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”
Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2