The movie industry is VERY slow to change, a lot of that has to do with money. For example, Hollywood in general has been using Kodak film stock more than any other. Even if Fuji was somehow slightly better, they wouldn't risk switching systems because the risk of processing a whole movie and having the result come out differently than planned because of a new and unfamiliar film is too great a risk. So Kodak cornered that market long ago.
I work in the industry and though I'm not involved in that side per-se I work with those guys enough to know I'm pretty much on target with this statement.
They would prefer to use something that is tested even if of lesser quality because they can guarantee the result. With $100,000,000 dollars on the table, changing films isn't easy.
Plenty of tv shows, movies, and commercials have been shot on fujifilm. Often it was due to cost savings but also for the particular look being sought. No one shoots a "new film" for a project w/o testing so there aren't suprises. Kodak changes thie emulsions quite frequently and no one would shoot it for a serious job w/o testing (which is always done on feature films). kodak's films were inferior to fuji's, cinematographers wouldn't switch?
Both companies make/made some great films but choosing one over the other has nothing to do with "changing systems."
Last edited by wildbill; 02-03-2013 at 11:27 PM. Click to view previous post history.