PDA

View Full Version : Discontinuation of Motion Picture Film production



Ohayou
04-03-2013, 05:29 PM
As previously announced, Fujifilm has stopped production of the majority of Motion Picture Film products by March, 2013.
We would like to thank you very much for your patronage during the long history of manufacture, sales and marketing of these products which will continue to be available until the inventory is exhausted. Please contact our worldwide distributors for availability information.

Fujifilm will continue to provide products and services designed for digital workflow of motion picture production and exhibition such as Recording film for Digital Separation [ETERNA-RDS] for long-term archiving, Imaging processing system [IS-100], and high-performance Fujinon lens for digital motion picture camera and projectors.

With an expertise in optics, image processing, storage and archiving, Fujifilm will continue to provide new and innovative products and services to contribute to the creative entertainment and broadcast industry.

Products in discontinuation of manufacturing

Color Positive Film
Color Negative Film
B&W Positive and Negative Film
Intermediate Film
Sound Recording Film
High Contrast Panchromatic Films
Chemicals (Japan only)

http://www.fujifilm.com/news/n130402.html

:cry:

westofyou
04-03-2013, 05:36 PM
Booooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo

oneupper
04-04-2013, 06:53 PM
And Smith-Corona stopped manufacturing typewriters about ten years ago. We all have to keep up with the times, cause our business/industry could be next. Progress beats Nostalgia every time.

Ohayou
04-04-2013, 08:55 PM
And Smith-Corona stopped manufacturing typewriters about ten years ago. We all have to keep up with the times, cause our business/industry could be next. Progress beats Nostalgia every time.

There's something about shooting 35mm anamorphic I'm not sure digital can ever capture. Of course, I may be wrong.

KronoRed
04-04-2013, 09:07 PM
There's something about shooting 35mm anamorphic I'm not sure digital can ever capture. Of course, I may be wrong.

I agree, but like like still photography, it's become "good enough".

westofyou
04-04-2013, 09:16 PM
There's something about shooting 35mm anamorphic I'm not sure digital can ever capture. Of course, I may be wrong.

16 mm film destroys video, I imagine the warmth that film creates can not be recreated with video

It's different that typewriters/computers that doesn't change the output it just changes the input

Roy Tucker
04-06-2013, 12:22 PM
16 mm film destroys video, I imagine the warmth that film creates can not be recreated with video

It's different that typewriters/computers that doesn't change the output it just changes the input

Like vinyl LPs too.

Wonderful Monds
04-07-2013, 02:39 AM
Like vinyl LPs too.

Such is the nature of analog formats.

757690
04-07-2013, 05:28 AM
16 mm film destroys video, I imagine the warmth that film creates can not be recreated with video

It's different that typewriters/computers that doesn't change the output it just changes the input

That "warmth" is merely the flaws and imperfections that is inherent in film. We grew up on it, so we got used to it, but it is the result of imperfections that don't exist in digital media. Digital means we are now seeing closer to what the image actually is, it's a better, more accurate representation of reality.

Kids born now will look at film and wonder how we suffered through it and all it's flaws. They will see a movie as beautifully shot as Field of Dreams the same way we see old grainy black and white movies of the '40's, as dated and hard to watch.

I understand you like the way film looks, but my grandfather liked the way black and white moves looked, and hated color movies. That's what he grew up on and was used to, even though it was a lower quality. It's the same thing.

Btw, within a click of a mouse, you turn pretty much any digital media you watch into "film look." Basically, software exists that digitally mimics the imperfections of film, and puts them into digital media. Looks just like it was shot on film.

westofyou
04-07-2013, 09:37 AM
That "warmth" is merely the flaws and imperfections that is inherent in film. We grew up on it, so we got used to it, but it is the result of imperfections that don't exist in digital media. Digital means we are now seeing closer to what the image actually is, it's a better, more accurate representation of reality.

Kids born now will look at film and wonder how we suffered through it and all it's flaws. They will see a movie as beautifully shot as Field of Dreams the same way we see old grainy black and white movies of the '40's, as dated and hard to watch.

I understand you like the way film looks, but my grandfather liked the way black and white moves looked, and hated color movies. That's what he grew up on and was used to, even though it was a lower quality. It's the same thing.

Btw, within a click of a mouse, you turn pretty much any digital media you watch into "film look." Basically, software exists that digitally mimics the imperfections of film, and puts them into digital media. Looks just like it was shot on film.

No not really, I have a degree in Film/Video production, they are different technologies that produce a different result and no click of the mouse produces the exact replica

Just like mp3s are not analog there is a difference.

They can be close to some and not so much to others, btw BW is still an awesome medium

*BaseClogger*
04-07-2013, 07:35 PM
No not really, I have a degree in Film/Video production, they are different technologies that produce a different result and no click of the mouse produces the exact replica

Just like mp3s are not analog there is a difference.

They can be close to some and not so much to others, btw BW is still an awesome medium

Isn't mp3 inferior to traditional sound recording because it condenses the range? While digital video literally improves the picture?

westofyou
04-07-2013, 08:01 PM
Isn't mp3 inferior to traditional sound recording because it condenses the range? While digital video literally improves the picture?

My understanding is best described here from another board:


First, film has grain; Film is a strip of clear material with an emulsion on it. The emulsion is sensitive to light. When it is exposed, it contains a 'latent image'. Upon processing, the latent image becomes visible. The emulsion may produce colour or black-and-white images, depending on its composition. The thing about the emulsion is that it's made up of small particles that are uniformly but randomly dispersed on the base. That is, a particle may exist at coordinates X, Y on one frame, but an identical particle isn't in exactly the same position on the next frame. Multiply this millions of times (or however many times) across the frame, and the grains will seem to 'swim around' a bit. Larger grains are more sensitive to light than smaller ones, so 'fast' film will appear more grainy than 'slow' film and there will be more apparent movement or 'noise' (to use a video term).

Video pixels are arranged in a fixed matrix. Since there is no 'grain' in the film sense, you don't get the 'swimming' effect on the picture. This, I think, gives video a 'harder' look than film.

'Latitude' is the degree to which film can be over- or under-exposed and still get a good image. Film has greater latitude than video, so you can get richer contrasts with film.


This is seen a lot when the camera moves as well as the subject

Plus working with film in your hands is a true organic experience that video can't replace, but that us a true personal like

dougdirt
04-07-2013, 08:03 PM
It is all about costs. A "film" production camera costs so much more than a high end RED camera it isn't funny. Production companies are using RED and Alexa cinema cameras at fractions of the cost of the old technology. They are also able to use the same camera that I use (with better lenses than I use, but still, sub $5,000 lenses) for smaller clips in the movies/shows as well (my camera was used in The Avengers for certain scenes. You can get it brand new for $1300 right now for the body and then a cine lens for another few thousand). The digital cameras just make the production costs lower on gear and in turn, you can spend more on other things (locations, actors, special f/x, better editors, many other things). And the downgrade that does exist for some cameras is very minimal. The key is knowing what your camera you are using is capable of and adjusting to that.

westofyou
04-07-2013, 08:38 PM
It is all about costs. A "film" production camera costs so much more than a high end RED camera it isn't funny. Production companies are using RED and Alexa cinema cameras at fractions of the cost of the old technology. They are also able to use the same camera that I use (with better lenses than I use, but still, sub $5,000 lenses) for smaller clips in the movies/shows as well (my camera was used in The Avengers for certain scenes. You can get it brand new for $1300 right now for the body and then a cine lens for another few thousand). The digital cameras just make the production costs lower on gear and in turn, you can spend more on other things (locations, actors, special f/x, better editors, many other things). And the downgrade that does exist for some cameras is very minimal. The key is knowing what your camera you are using is capable of and adjusting to that.

Cost is a driver for sure, cost has stripped many things and driven many things

As far as aesthetics I'll take film for viewing and video for managing

757690
04-07-2013, 09:19 PM
It is all about costs. A "film" production camera costs so much more than a high end RED camera it isn't funny. Production companies are using RED and Alexa cinema cameras at fractions of the cost of the old technology. They are also able to use the same camera that I use (with better lenses than I use, but still, sub $5,000 lenses) for smaller clips in the movies/shows as well (my camera was used in The Avengers for certain scenes. You can get it brand new for $1300 right now for the body and then a cine lens for another few thousand). The digital cameras just make the production costs lower on gear and in turn, you can spend more on other things (locations, actors, special f/x, better editors, many other things). And the downgrade that does exist for some cameras is very minimal. The key is knowing what your camera you are using is capable of and adjusting to that.

Exactamundo!

Amd the real savings comes in the film itself. Film costs around $100 a minute, when you factor in raw cost, developing, transfers for editing, etc. Recording HD into an SD card costs around $20 an hour.

Basically, film costs alone on an independent movie were around $50-$75K. On HD, the SD cards are reusable, and immediately downloadable to a computer, so you can now replace the $50-75K cost for around $100.

That's why everyone is a flimkmaer these days.

757690
04-07-2013, 09:22 PM
Cost is a driver for sure, cost has stripped many things and driven many things

As far as aesthetics I'll take film for viewing and video for managing

It's completely a personal choice, and most people of our generation prefer film. But I doubt too many people born in the last ten years will.

dougdirt
04-07-2013, 10:38 PM
Cost is a driver for sure, cost has stripped many things and driven many things

As far as aesthetics I'll take film for viewing and video for managing

I think it really depends on the DP and what it is you are shooting.

In the end, I think this is best for production. People who could never dream of making their ideas happen because of costs now can spend $10,000 and make it happen. While it will certainly lead to a bunch of absolute trash, we will never see that stuff. But we will also get to see a bunch of great things that we never would have had a chance to see before.

I am curious though, what is it that you like from film that you can't get from digital (high end digital - RED/Alexa types, not lower end DSLR types)? What advantage do you see with film?

Rojo
04-09-2013, 02:14 PM
Say good-bye to everything between the ones and the zeros.

919191
06-20-2013, 05:06 AM
Wonder how many drive ins will be affected like this one.

http://www.wthitv.com/dpp/news/local/funds-could-force-drive-in-to-close#.UcK1pzvYfN0

dougdirt
06-28-2013, 01:40 AM
Wonder how many drive ins will be affected like this one.

http://www.wthitv.com/dpp/news/local/funds-could-force-drive-in-to-close#.UcK1pzvYfN0

Like any other business, you need to be able to adapt or go out of business. In that article they talk about how it may cost them $75,000 to upgrade. Sure, that seems like an awful lot of money for a small business, but it is also an upgrade that is going to last you for 10+ years. If you can't talk lendors into a loan like that, then your business wasn't very viable in the first place.

Chip R
06-28-2013, 11:47 AM
I believe the Holiday Drive In in Hamilton has recently gone digital.

KittyDuran
06-28-2013, 01:05 PM
I believe the Holiday Drive In in Hamilton has recently gone digital.

You're right... This year.

LoganBuck
06-28-2013, 07:14 PM
Our local theater is doing a kickstarter to fund the digital projector 3+ days to go. http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/70745954/be-a-digital-hero-save-the-elder-theatre

This is to raise the last $25k to get it done. They are going to spend $63k total if this gets done.

dougdirt
06-28-2013, 07:42 PM
Our local theater is doing a kickstarter to fund the digital projector 3+ days to go. http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/70745954/be-a-digital-hero-save-the-elder-theatre

This is to raise the last $25k to get it done. They are going to spend $63k total if this gets done.

Doing it the right way too. Great idea and I bet it gets funded. They are basically just selling advanced tickets in order to get a loan. Great business strategy.

LoganBuck
07-02-2013, 02:09 PM
Our local theater is doing a kickstarter to fund the digital projector 3+ days to go. http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/70745954/be-a-digital-hero-save-the-elder-theatre

This is to raise the last $25k to get it done. They are going to spend $63k total if this gets done.

They seem to have made it! A very small rural town was able to save their theater. The Kickstarter site allows you to click on a link to see who the backers are and there are many local people, and then there are people from all over the country and even the world with a guy from Dubai! Pretty cool stuff.