IndieTalk - Indie Film Forum

IndieTalk - Indie Film Forum (http://www.indietalk.com/forum.php)
-   Film (http://www.indietalk.com/forumdisplay.php?f=92)
-   -   Kodak stock price. (http://www.indietalk.com/showthread.php?t=34903)

hepabst 10-04-2011 07:14 AM

Kodak stock price.
 
Kodak stock falls to .58 cents it's lowest price since the 1930's on Friday. There's talk of bankruptcy. What will happen to the motion picture film division? Will Fujifilm follow? Has digital "bricked" our film camera's? Thoughts?

bird 10-04-2011 11:10 AM

Ya, I'm getting scared in may go the way the asphalt shingle did once that damn collodion process was invented. :D

Seriously, it'd be a shame if an artist couldn't have access to film.

Psychosis Media 10-04-2011 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hepabst (Post 225033)
Kodak stock falls to .58 cents it's lowest price since the 1930's on Friday. There's talk of bankruptcy. What will happen to the motion picture film division? Will Fujifilm follow? Has digital "bricked" our film camera's? Thoughts?

start buying stock ?

directorik 10-05-2011 10:48 AM

Technology moves on.

In 1990 analogue videotape couldn't touch film. In 2000
digital video couldn't touch film. In 2010 digital video is
getting very close to film. Using a little logic, I would think
that in 2020 what ever we use may be just as good and
by 2030 only people over 40 will even be thinking about
film.

Sure, it's tough for those of you who never really got the
chance to shoot film very often. But someone who is 20
today will never miss it. Someone born today will see film
as worthless just as most of us see cassette tapes as worthless.

indietalk 10-05-2011 07:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Psychosis Media (Post 225065)
start buying stock ?

Film stock, or Kodak stock? :lol:

CamVader 10-05-2011 07:16 PM

Panavision hasn't had a new film camera model since 2004 and have instead been concentrating on their digital Genesis Hero and Panavising models from Sony, Arri, and a handful of others.

richy 10-06-2011 02:11 AM

Looks like George Lucas gets his way, perhaps sooner than some might have predicted. I did read someone's post on a film photography forum (?) claiming that there are other companies out there that would try to fill the void if Kodak and Fujifilm blink out.

CamVader 10-06-2011 02:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by richy (Post 225536)
Looks like George Lucas gets his way, perhaps sooner than some might have predicted. I did read someone's post on a film photography forum (?) claiming that there are other companies out there that would try to fill the void if Kodak and Fujifilm blink out.

I'm sure somebody will and I'm sure film camera manufacturers will be totally on board. The question is cost, from production through distribution, film may end up 10X the cost. Investors rule the world, so what is likely?

If it were 3X the cost, what would that change for people putting up cash?

hepabst 10-06-2011 10:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by directorik (Post 225352)
Technology moves on.

In 1990 analogue videotape couldn't touch film. In 2000
digital video couldn't touch film. In 2010 digital video is
getting very close to film. Using a little logic, I would think
that in 2020 what ever we use may be just as good and
by 2030 only people over 40 will even be thinking about
film.

Sure, it's tough for those of you who never really got the
chance to shoot film very often. But someone who is 20
today will never miss it. Someone born today will see film
as worthless just as most of us see cassette tapes as worthless.

This is so true. My kids are burning up digital cameras making there clips for the web. They look at my film cameras and footage that I project as antique. They often use the phrase "Hey Dad, back in the day... " I answer, "Yeah back in the day they used film". Then they pick up their hv20 and/or iphone and go shoot a skateboard video. Since I don't have a lot of money to shoot film I too end up shooting digital.

My film cameras are like a vintage car your have in the garage and just take it out for holiday parades.

I been trying to get my kids to shoot manual and use a light meter but they don't see the need. Hell they're just trying to have fun.

richy 10-07-2011 02:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CamVader (Post 225538)
I'm sure somebody will and I'm sure film camera manufacturers will be totally on board. The question is cost, from production through distribution, film may end up 10X the cost. Investors rule the world, so what is likely?

If it were 3X the cost, what would that change for people putting up cash?

Sure sounds like you're right. I was reading some discussion about the likely economics of this somewhere else last night. It doesn't bode well. :(

CamVader 10-07-2011 02:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by richy (Post 225799)
Sure sounds like you're right. I was reading some discussion about the likely economics of this somewhere else last night. It doesn't bode well. :(

I'd bet Panavision will contract their own film supplier if there is demand seeing they have millions invested in their camera fleet. The writing is on the wall long term, though.

viz 11-02-2011 09:10 PM

I think we are held in by ideas that mostly affect the legitimate film industry right now. Kodak and sometimes Fuji are trusted, they have a control of the market and the film stock price. This I'm guesing is propped up by some intellectual property issues.

What I'm wondering is whether egineers and manufacturers in China and India are capable of back engineering and producing film stock in quality close to that of Kodak. This may seem far fetched, but what provokes the idea is the fact that already we have very small companies in China that are capable of developing, prototyping and producing product for very small volume output, and making a proffit. In this sense (their viability relative to their prices and scale) they are doing things that just could not be done in the USA or Europe.

So I wonder if there may be a period after the collapse of Kodak, Fuji where artisan (indie) film makers and artists working with the medium, are able to source film stock at quite reasonable prices. But we may have to ship for processing etc.

I've only been a sporadic visitor to this forum, but I'm guessing you have had lots of debate over film vs digital media. I followed a link from the cinematography forum the other day and read some interesting ideas that were comments following the recent article on the demise of film by (film die hards) Speilberg, Scorceise etc. I will find a link if desired.

Some experiments were made measuring brain wave activity for pople watching film vs digital motion pictures.

Film watchers had higher alpha waves. These waves are normaly associuated with subjective experience, like meditation, maybe some contemplative experience. I think there was some speculation about the function of the alternation between the complete projected film frame and the black screen with the closed shutter. Do we fall into a subjective state, transcend, between the film frames? To me this is analogous to how experience itself can be described.

Digital watchers showed an increase in beta waves, the waves associated with active experience objective experience. These styles of experience, the objective vs subjective, may not be simultaneously compatible.

So my imediate thiught was that digital media as an unstoppable modern trend is part of the movement to a more objective and particular world. It's a world where subtlety, subjectivity and wholenes are harder to find. It's a world populated by increasingly discrete and separated looking things, that have an increasingly hard time finding connection or relationship or a comfortable sense of context or belonging.

The fact that this modern trend is expressed everywhere or is unstoppable does not mean that it is good.

So will some artists enjoy the then exstinct film medium. I think so. Maybe I can suggest that artists are of two kinds. There are those who sense or anticipate the coming changes in the world, and even if those changes are destructive, offer a facinating portal or intuit insights into the future qualities of experience.

There is another kind of artist, at least in theory, who's function is to remind us of our nature, whether it's emotional, spiritual, or basic sense of identity as human beings.

Cheers
Gregg.

trevordeanm 06-08-2012 02:37 PM

35mm stock short ends .08cent per ft. comtel pro media.
Why film will be just fine:
Digital audio has been ahead of digital video by several years, Vinyl records and Analogue recording studios are doing just fine.
Vinyl records have been rising in sales for a decade with 2.8million sales last year. CD's have been dying with 25% less sales last year.

The reason film would not die is because of the demand. I will always shoot film because it looks like the imagination, it's tangible and it last' for hundreds of years plus you can transfer it to digital every time digital advances.

Kids aren't gonna know about professional formats in video, film, music or anything else unless they take a professional interest. . "Back in the day" non professionals were forced to use it... To the negative, all things are negative but to the positive all things are positive.

trevordeanm 06-08-2012 02:48 PM

The head of sales at Arriflex told me the reason they're not making film cameras is because the market is saturated. 50 year old film cameras still work and produce the same image as new cameras.
This means that shooting on film can easily be the cheapest way to make a movie. With cutting edge digital renting for $1,500 per day and 100 minutes of 35mm 2perf costing only $5,000 for purchase, develop and transfer to hard drive it's a win, win, win to shoot film now.

Morris 06-08-2012 05:33 PM

Most of the theatres are going digital so there is the added expense of going from film to digital. Before you had to go from digital to a 35mm print. It is a lot cheaper to make errors and do many takes on digital compared to film.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:47 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.