Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Rangefinder Forum > RFF News

RFF News News related to photography and rangefinderforum.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Old 03-03-2019   #121
BillBlackwell
Registered User
 
BillBlackwell's Avatar
 
BillBlackwell is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Orange County, CA
Age: 61
Posts: 873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
Wrong. The facts are clearly against what you suggest. ...
http://time.com/4649188/film-photogr...stry-comeback/
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toron...aphy-1.4757070
https://sleeklens.com/film-making-comeback/
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-03-2019   #122
dourbalistar
Registered User
 
dourbalistar's Avatar
 
dourbalistar is offline
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 2,407
There seems to be a circle of confusion. Some think Fujifilm is zooming toward extinction and that's all there is Touit. But only time will tele whether they keep producing film or whether the focus will shift to other products.
__________________
I like my lenses sharp as a tank and built like a tack.

flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-10-2019   #123
Faintandfuzzy
Registered User
 
Faintandfuzzy's Avatar
 
Faintandfuzzy is offline
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 398
The fact that film demand has been increasing for many years is a proven fact and not open to debate. The issue in Fuji's case is that unlike Kodak, I.ford and others, they were not able or willing to invest in equipment designed for lower volumes tha there were at the peak of film sales.

Saying demand is down is completely false.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-10-2019   #124
dourbalistar
Registered User
 
dourbalistar's Avatar
 
dourbalistar is offline
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 2,407
I think this is a well researched and balanced article. We may not agree with or like the discontinuations, but it puts Fujifilm's business decisions in some perspective:
https://emulsive.org/articles/though...of-the-fittest
__________________
I like my lenses sharp as a tank and built like a tack.

flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-10-2019   #125
richardHaw
junk scavenger
 
richardHaw's Avatar
 
richardHaw is offline
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Tokyo
Posts: 417
i dont mind if film costs go up a bit so long as it keeps it going.
__________________
Take me down to the Parallax City
Where the viewfinder's tiny
And the framing is tricky
http://www.richardhaw.com
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-10-2019   #126
dourbalistar
Registered User
 
dourbalistar's Avatar
 
dourbalistar is offline
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 2,407
I hope there won't coma time when film prices increase so much we can't f/4 it. Otherwise, we will f/2 shoot... digital.
__________________
I like my lenses sharp as a tank and built like a tack.

flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-10-2019   #127
brbo
Registered User
 
brbo's Avatar
 
brbo is offline
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 1,462
Quote:
Originally Posted by Faintandfuzzy View Post
The issue in Fuji's case is that unlike Kodak, I.ford and others, they were not able or willing to invest in equipment designed for lower volumes tha there were at the peak of film sales.
Kodak and Ilford need to keep making film to survive. Fuji doesn't. Fuji's cost of making film might be much much higher than Kodak's when you also take into account the opportunity costs of Fuji's film production (Fuji could probably convert their film production capacities to something much more profitable and future-proof). The incompetence of Kodak to (successfully) transition into other branches could actually save colour film.

Quote:
Originally Posted by dourbalistar View Post
I think this is a well researched and balanced article. We may not agree with or like the discontinuations, but it puts Fujifilm's business decisions in some perspective:
https://emulsive.org/articles/though...of-the-fittest
I especially liked his closing arguments that we will always have Instax (still waiting for the answer how he managed to put Instax into Xpan) and that it's just a matter of time when there will be new colour films flying out of garage size "factories". Seem like he really knows what he's saying...
__________________

  Reply With Quote

Old 03-11-2019   #128
Teemō
Registered User
 
Teemō is offline
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by brbo View Post
The incompetence of Kodak to (successfully) transition into other branches could actually save colour film.
Eastman Kodak is largely a Printing Systems and Industrial Chemical manufacturer. Consumer film and industrial chemicals generate one of the minor portions of revenue. Whether you consider that enough diversification is up to opinion.
Kodak's problem is that they have a lot of debt (which they pay a lot of interest on), but they also spend a lot on Research and Development - for what? For a company that was haemorrhaging hundreds of millions of dollars every year not long ago, to be back to minor profitability is still quite a success. However, if they were to stop producing film tomorrow, they would increase their profits because right now the whole Consumer and Film segment is running at a loss.

I still think there's a lot of consumer market potential that Kodak could tap into beyond the popularity of their name only, and there's certainly many technologies related to the production of coated thin-films and that is a global market still with a lot of growth even if they are only a part-supplier and not a producer of finished products.
Think solar panels, intelligent building cladding, superior micro building wraps, solar panels, television/computer/smartphone/camera displays/aerospace products.

Why has Kodak not produced photographic lenses again under an external supplier like Cosina or Tamron (autofocus)? They should be able to sell the MOQ on hype alone.

It looks like they are trying to move into Consumer 3D Printing... but why not just serve the small-scale commercial manufacturing segment instead? CNC machines, extruders, casting machines, presses etc. and maybe those larger metal 3D printers - things that Kodak already uses in their day to day operations. The sort of things that local businesses will buy.

They have swathes of unused patents, surely they didn't need to lower themselves to (struggling) to produce a simple Super 8 camera? If Fuji can make decent money selling digital cameras, in a market that is totally bloated, surely Kodak can sell a few lenses every year. Having so many different camera mounts on the market should make it a breeze.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-11-2019   #129
Larry Cloetta
Registered User
 
Larry Cloetta is offline
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Jackson, WY
Age: 69
Posts: 1,528
Ten years from now it will be interesting to look back on this thread and see who could read the writing on the wall, and who couldn’t.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-11-2019   #130
Teemō
Registered User
 
Teemō is offline
Join Date: Oct 2016
Posts: 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Cloetta View Post
Ten years from now it will be interesting to look back on this thread and see who could read the writing on the wall, and who couldn’t.
Well, it's probably a decent time to buy Kodak shares if you ever wanted them.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-11-2019   #131
dourbalistar
Registered User
 
dourbalistar's Avatar
 
dourbalistar is offline
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 2,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry Cloetta View Post
Ten years from now it will be interesting to look back on this thread and see who could read the writing on the wall, and who couldn’t.
If you've Cosina the writing on the wall, the Bessa solution is to stock up now while you can. Otherwise, you may end up banging you head on the wall.
__________________
I like my lenses sharp as a tank and built like a tack.

flickr
  Reply With Quote

Film is Cheap
Old 03-11-2019   #132
chipgreenberg
Registered User
 
chipgreenberg is offline
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 125
Film is Cheap

Thanks for posting the Emulsive article. Interesting. Especially the current cost comparisons adjusted for inflation.

When I was in college the Professors would preach "Film is cheap." Don't skimp on film not to get the shot you need.

Easy for them to say. I was making $3/hr working part time and living on peanut butter and jelly. Didn't seem so cheap but I understood their message.

When photography paid the bills I realized film was cheap. Sure, it helped that somebody else was paying for it. It was billable. But in the BIG PICTURE (sorry) of producing a commercial shoot film cost was pretty insignificant. I remember one of the last jobs we did we had a model with make up/stylist in front of a small private jet we rented at a small airport in NJ. With all those costs going on nobody would complain if I shot a few more rolls to make sure it was covered.

No that photography is an avocation film is the cheapest part of my hobby. Table equipment costs for now, that's another discussion. I don't burn a lot of film. My goal is to have fun and make images that make me smile that if I really like I hang on the wall.

I shot this great abandoned old house the other day. Shot 4 frames of 120. I did 2 different angles and 2 exposure brackets of each. So the 4 frames cost me about $2.65. Processing, scanning, printing are much more expensive. If I like the image and want to frame it, with Museum Glass, that's expensive!

So if my film for that shot cost me $3.65 would it make a difference? Naw.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-11-2019   #133
Hogarth Ferguson
Registered User
 
Hogarth Ferguson's Avatar
 
Hogarth Ferguson is offline
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 646
Quote:
Originally Posted by dourbalistar View Post
If you've Cosina the writing on the wall, the Bessa solution is to stock up now while you can. Otherwise, you may end up banging you head on the wall.

Are these puns funny to you? They are incredibly annoying to read.
__________________
My Website
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-11-2019   #134
Yokosuka_Mike
The Beat Goes On
 
Yokosuka_Mike's Avatar
 
Yokosuka_Mike is offline
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Yokosuka, Japan
Age: 64
Posts: 2,263
I think the puns are funny and I enjoy reading them.

Dourbalistar, your puns are very clever and creative, please keep ’em coming.

Mike
__________________
Why don’t you knock it off with them negative waves? Why don’t you dig how beautiful it is out here? Why don’t you say something righteous and hopeful for a change?
-- Oddball
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-11-2019   #135
bjolester
Registered User
 
bjolester is offline
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Posts: 222
Quote:
Originally Posted by dourbalistar View Post
If you've Cosina the writing on the wall, the Bessa solution is to stock up now while you can. Otherwise, you may end up banging you head on the wall.
These puns are immensly disruptive for these of us trying to follow the comments on topic. Why not start a new 100% puns thread in the humor section of RF?
__________________
Bjørn
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-11-2019   #136
pyeh
Registered User
 
pyeh is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Taylor Square
Age: 58
Posts: 601
I'm a fan of dourbalistar's punning too. It adds levity to this circular, polarizing topic.
__________________
Peter
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-11-2019   #137
CMur12
Registered User
 
CMur12 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Moses Lake, Washington, USA
Age: 67
Posts: 1,053
I'm in agreement with Bjørn. A little joking/punning is fine, but when it interferes with finding the intended subject matter of the thread, it's a major hijack and it becomes trying.


- Murray
__________________
Still shooting film: Medium Format with assorted TLRs; 35mm with manual-focus Minolta SLRs and a Canonet.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-11-2019   #138
dourbalistar
Registered User
 
dourbalistar's Avatar
 
dourbalistar is offline
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 2,407
Fair enough, apologies for the disruption - I didn't mean to hijack the thread, just trying to have a little fun. Out of respect for the OP and those who are trying to stay on topic, I've started a new pun thread. I didn't actually find a humor section on the forum, so for now, I've posted in the Photography General Interest sub-forum, where the other joke thread lives.
__________________
I like my lenses sharp as a tank and built like a tack.

flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-11-2019   #139
CMur12
Registered User
 
CMur12 is offline
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: Moses Lake, Washington, USA
Age: 67
Posts: 1,053
Quote:
Originally Posted by dourbalistar View Post
I think this is a well researched and balanced article. We may not agree with or like the discontinuations, but it puts Fujifilm's business decisions in some perspective:
https://emulsive.org/articles/though...of-the-fittest

I just read this article and found it very well thought out and probably closer to the truth of the matter. Thanks for sharing it with us!


I also like your idea of starting a separate photographic pun thread.


- Murray
__________________
Still shooting film: Medium Format with assorted TLRs; 35mm with manual-focus Minolta SLRs and a Canonet.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-14-2019   #140
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by Teemō View Post
Well, it's probably a decent time to buy Kodak shares if you ever wanted them.

Kodak shares have ripped higher for the past 2 weeks. It has been on an absolute tear. Not sure why. No news has been published that I can find.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-14-2019   #141
Mackinaw
Think Different
 
Mackinaw is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: One hour south of the Mackinaw Bridge
Posts: 3,585
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
Kodak shares have ripped higher for the past 2 weeks. It has been on an absolute tear. Not sure why. No news has been published that I can find.
Probably because of their new CEO. Year's ago, Microsoft's stock shot up, after Steve Balmer left.

Jim B.
__________________
My fancy-schmancy gallery:
http://snowcountryphotography.com

My RFF Gallery:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/phot...user=1453&sl=m
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-14-2019   #142
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mackinaw View Post
Probably because of their new CEO. Year's ago, Microsoft's stock shot up, after Steve Balmer left.

Jim B.

Steve Ballmer was awful. Perez was the awful CEO for Kodak and he is long gone.


I dont think it's because of the new CEO. Kodak just sold off their most profitable and fastest growing part of their company. It seems odd that the stock would rip higher after that. What's left has very little growth to show. Regardless, the numbers dont lie, although Kodak is down sharply today.


I believe there's an earnings report after the bell today so maybe some news will come from that.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-14-2019   #143
dourbalistar
Registered User
 
dourbalistar's Avatar
 
dourbalistar is offline
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 2,407
Kodak stock, as of this posting, is $3.49 per share. Meanwhile, a 36-exposure roll of Tri-X from B&H is $5.79.
__________________
I like my lenses sharp as a tank and built like a tack.

flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-14-2019   #144
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by dourbalistar View Post
Kodak stock, as of this posting, is $3.49 per share. Meanwhile, a 36-exposure roll of Tri-X from B&H is $5.79.
I bought 4 shares today with what was left in my brokerage account. It traded up to $3.50 so I have made $0.04.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-14-2019   #145
dourbalistar
Registered User
 
dourbalistar's Avatar
 
dourbalistar is offline
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 2,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
I bought 4 shares today with what was left in my brokerage account. It traded up to $3.50 so I have made $0.04.
If you had quadrupled your initial investment, you'd be able to afford one frame from a roll of Tri-X with your profits. Sadly, hoarding and re-selling discontinued Fujifilm flim stock (no pun intended) might get you better return.
__________________
I like my lenses sharp as a tank and built like a tack.

flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-17-2019   #146
Ted Striker
Registered User
 
Ted Striker's Avatar
 
Ted Striker is offline
Join Date: Aug 2017
Posts: 814
Quote:
Originally Posted by dourbalistar View Post
If you had quadrupled your initial investment, you'd be able to afford one frame from a roll of Tri-X with your profits. Sadly, hoarding and re-selling discontinued Fujifilm flim stock (no pun intended) might get you better return.
I have 50 pro packs of Neopan Acros in the freezer so my film investments are doing nicely.
  Reply With Quote

Old 03-17-2019   #147
dourbalistar
Registered User
 
dourbalistar's Avatar
 
dourbalistar is offline
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 2,407
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ted Striker View Post
I have 50 pro packs of Neopan Acros in the freezer so my film investments are doing nicely.
Got it. Instead of cold, hard cash, you have cold, hard film.
__________________
I like my lenses sharp as a tank and built like a tack.

flickr
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:04.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.