Jump to content


Photo

Fujifilm to cease making Motion Picture Film


  • Please log in to reply
55 replies to this topic

#1 Stuart Brereton

Stuart Brereton
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3070 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles

Posted 07 September 2012 - 07:45 PM

Deadline is reporting that Fuji intends to be out of the MP film game by the end of the year.

Story here

Fuji aren't confirming or denying.
  • 0

#2 Tom Jensen

Tom Jensen
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1234 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • Dallas, TX

Posted 07 September 2012 - 08:10 PM

Sad. The end is nearer.
  • 0

#3 Geoff Howell

Geoff Howell
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 168 posts
  • Other

Posted 08 September 2012 - 07:15 AM

Bloody hell!
where did that come from?!!???!!??!?
  • 0

#4 Marcus Joseph

Marcus Joseph
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 404 posts
  • Other
  • Sydney, Australia

Posted 08 September 2012 - 07:17 AM

Right in time for the Mayan 2012, we also have The Hobbit arriving at cinemas the day before...
  • 0

#5 Mei Lewis

Mei Lewis
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 348 posts
  • Other
  • UK

Posted 08 September 2012 - 10:32 AM

Come on, it's just the end of one form of one capture medium. That's progress. You'll get over it.
  • 0

#6 Freya Black

Freya Black
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4161 posts
  • Other
  • Went over the edge... Central Europe

Posted 08 September 2012 - 10:57 AM

Come on, it's just the end of one form of one capture medium. That's progress. You'll get over it.


Hmmm, more like the end of cinema...

Well it's not really what most people would call progress but it's possibly the future.

love

Freya
  • 0

#7 Bill DiPietra

Bill DiPietra
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2339 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York City

Posted 08 September 2012 - 01:24 PM

Come on, it's just the end of one form of one capture medium. That's progress. You'll get over it.


No, it's not. And when people make that kind of argument, it really burns me up because that tells me that that's all you see film as. A capture medium. Can we get any more technical?

You can call it romantic, but film has, is and will always be magical to me. You start out with a film negative that has no mage on it. You expose it to light through a lens. The image which orginated in your mind gets imprinted on the negative. The negative goes through a chemical process to make the image visible to the eye on a positive print which appears as a series of still images. Finally, those still image are projected onto a screen to create motion.

Film is organic. It goes through chemical processes just like we do. And I find that magical.

Not every step forward is always progess. That is very narrow-minded. While I agree that digital has made amazing stides, it would be a mistake to completely do away with film. There is rich history there and a lot for people to learn. Not to mention that eliminating film as an option for artists would be utterly wrong.
  • 0

#8 James Compton

James Compton
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 311 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 08 September 2012 - 02:05 PM

Deadline is reporting that Fuji intends to be out of the MP film game by the end of the year.

Story here

Fuji aren't confirming or denying.


There will be some company that makes FUJI an offer for their Motion Picture division. It will not perish, but yet bought and run by another comapny.
  • 0

#9 Francisco Martins

Francisco Martins
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 70 posts
  • Other

Posted 08 September 2012 - 06:27 PM

There will be some company that makes FUJI an offer for their Motion Picture division. It will not perish, but yet bought and run by another comapny.


God I hope so!
  • 0

#10 Richard Tuohy

Richard Tuohy
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 482 posts
  • Other
  • Daylesford, Australia

Posted 08 September 2012 - 07:23 PM

There will be some company that makes FUJI an offer for their Motion Picture division. It will not perish, but yet bought and run by another comapny.

Nice if you are right about that, but I think that is wishful thinking.
  • 0

#11 Charles MacDonald

Charles MacDonald
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1157 posts
  • Other
  • Stittsville Ontario Canada

Posted 08 September 2012 - 08:06 PM

The phase out of Film prints makes for a lot less volume of Film produced. That volume (even though it is of the lowest cost stock) covers a lot of costs to keep Camera, Lab and even still Film viable.

On the still side Fuji has cancelled a number of popular items like Neopan 400 in roll film. If this story is true, it may mean that fuji will stop making all film. I understand that the same infrastructure is used to make materials for TV sets, but Japanese televison set production is also under pressure.
  • 0

#12 Damien Andre

Damien Andre
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 65 posts
  • Student
  • New Joisey

Posted 09 September 2012 - 12:08 AM

i dont think anyone would argue that less choices for artists is ever a good thing. yes, film does have a certain nice something to it that digital can never recreate and yes it's terrible that soon there will be no more film manufactured. it will be a sad day when the last stock manufacturer closes its doors, but its not that much were loosing, take any great classic film and subtract the "magic" quality of film; the grain, the jitter, the characteristic color rendition, etc; you still have a great film. those qualities aren't in themselves cinema.

The loss of film sucks BIG time, but life goes on.

Edited by Damien Andre, 09 September 2012 - 12:09 AM.

  • 0

#13 Freya Black

Freya Black
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4161 posts
  • Other
  • Went over the edge... Central Europe

Posted 09 September 2012 - 03:22 AM

it will be a sad day when the last stock manufacturer closes its doors, but its not that much were loosing, take any great classic film and subtract the "magic" quality of film; the grain, the jitter, the characteristic color rendition, etc; you still have a great film. those qualities aren't in themselves cinema.


Flicker (and probaly a lot of works by Tony Conrad), virtually any film by Stan brakhage, (comingled containers and dog man star spring to mind as possible exceptions although they would probably be a bit unrecognisable shot on video), the work of len lye..., everything by Harry Smith, etc etc etc. If you removed film from our history none of these films would exist AT ALL!

subtract the "magic" quality of film; the grain, the jitter, the characteristic color rendition, etc


I wouldn't consider ANY of those things to be the "magic" quality of film. Those are all quantifiable aspects of film (and mostly not even the most important ones)

Plus-x for instance was an amazing and magical stock and it didn't have any colour rendition at all!
Double-X is not a magical stock for the most part and you have to work a LOT harder to get nice results from it.

The magic stuff was available in different stocks to varying degrees. If it was easily quantified then the scientists at Kodak and Fuji would be able to reproduce it to a great extent across all their stocks but they never could.

those qualities aren't in themselves cinema.


No because those qualities are strange random things you have chosen.
To be honest with you I would say the end of film prints and the rise of video projection is in itself the end of cinema. The end of film origination is something even more that will ripple out through the world of moving image production generally.

It will be a massive and fundamental shift. When talkies arrived, many people said it was the end of cinema. To be fair to those people they were basically right. "Silent" cinema was a very different thing to what we might call cinema now. The shift to digital will also be a change on the same kind of scale.

Strangely tho, you are more spot on with what you say than you may realise.
Things will go on. They will fundamentally change because of the aspects that are being removed from the equation. The changes have been happening for a long while and they will now magnify and become far greater.

Interesting times.

love

Freya
  • 0

#14 Pavan Deep

Pavan Deep
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 317 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • UK

Posted 09 September 2012 - 04:40 AM

People have expressed all kinds of views regarding the news the Fuji will cease manufacturing its motion picture stock. In many ways I can’t believe we buying into this as a genuine news piece. How do we know that this ‘news’ is real? Do we believe it just because it’s printed? Do we just believe things without evidence? There is no evidence in the article, instead it’s speculative and as far as I know only one source has printed this story. Do they have insider knowledge? Who are they? Are we believing this because we are used to making assumptions based on our own personal knowledge of what we see as the realities in the filmmaking world, where we are regularly told that film is used less particularly for HD television and low budget work.



If there is truth in this news then it really is very, very sad news as it limits the creative choices for filmmakers, as someone’s pointed out film is not just a capture medium. But until other news agencies report this and there’s more substance to the story and until Fuji makes a statement this is not really news, it’s a rumour, some of it, or all of it may become true, but then it may not. We are in the middle of September and stopping manufacture by the end of the year seems far to soon,. If they were stopping manufacture a more realistic approach would be to cease manufacture in six months time. But if the rumour has any truth behind it and Fuji do stop manufacture of motion picture film by the end of the year, surely there would be plenty of stock made to last until 2014 even 2015.

P

  • 0

#15 Freya Black

Freya Black
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4161 posts
  • Other
  • Went over the edge... Central Europe

Posted 09 September 2012 - 06:01 AM

People have expressed all kinds of views regarding the news the Fuji will cease manufacturing its motion picture stock. In many ways I can’t believe we buying into this as a genuine news piece. How do we know that this ‘news’ is real? Do we believe it just because it’s printed? Do we just believe things without evidence? There is no evidence in the article, instead it’s speculative and as far as I know only one source has printed this story. Do they have insider knowledge? Who are they? Are we believing this because we are used to making assumptions based on our own personal knowledge of what we see as the realities in the filmmaking world, where we are regularly told that film is used less particularly for HD television and low budget work.


Ironically I wouldn't believe it at this point coming from even very large news organisations. It was after all ABC news that reported that Tony Scott had been suffering with brain cancer, which seemed far more likely than the initial news that he had jumped off a bridge, which I straight out told a friend was a lie without even needing to look into it further, because I knew it was clearly nonsense.

We just can't believe anything these days because generally the standard of journalism is soooooo low. However Deadline is a slightly more reliable source sadly. What's worse is John seems to think it's true, and I trust his judgement on the matter for all kinds of reasons. He is also not the kind of person to state it as a matter of fact unless he was very sure and I called him on it and he said definitely, so sadly I think it is the case.

Sorry. :(

love

Freya
  • 0

#16 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7117 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 09 September 2012 - 09:04 AM

Even if Fuji does go the way of the DoDo on their film production, are we all fogetting the big K? Granted, they are re-organizing, but I have gotten e mails (as a shareholder) from them that they are still committed to making film for the long haul. Granted, Fuji may go, and I will be sad to see the loss of Eterna, and regret never having shot on Vivid, if this story is true (which is questionable at best) but that doesn't mean instantly that all film will run dry. Companies come and go, yet, if there is a realizable demand for a product, it often finds its way to market. The sky may not be falling just yet.
  • 0

#17 Pavan Deep

Pavan Deep
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 317 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • UK

Posted 09 September 2012 - 10:07 AM

Things change we all know that, nothing stays constant. To assume that all manufacturers will keep producing the vast range of motion picture film is idyllic, but not realistic. Lets not get swept away by rumours, rather than speculating I think we should use as much film as we can while it’s still here.



P


  • 0

#18 Bill DiPietra

Bill DiPietra
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2339 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York City

Posted 09 September 2012 - 10:55 AM

Flicker (and probaly a lot of works by Tony Conrad), virtually any film by Stan brakhage, (comingled containers and dog man star spring to mind as possible exceptions although they would probably be a bit unrecognisable shot on video), the work of len lye..., everything by Harry Smith, etc etc etc. If you removed film from our history none of these films would exist AT ALL!


EXACTLY!!! Thanks, Freya. I was waiting for someone to point this out.

Experimental filmmaking would be hit hardest if film were to suddenly disappear completely. My last short was an experimental film. Think of all the films of Maya Deren, Stan Brakhage, Kenneth Anger and so many others made that are embedded in our film consciouness...all the way back to The Man with the Movie Camera. Much of their work was done in-camera, not to mention Brakhage's painting on the frames.

For those of us who still shoot on 16mm (a much grainer format than 35mm) like they did, these kinds of effects are impossible to reproduce on digital no matter how much you want to argue that you can use After Effects or some other program to "fix it in post." It just doesn't look the same.

This is why I continue to argue that until digital can do EVERYTHING that celluloid has been able to do over 120 years, it would be wrong to completely eliminate it as a choice. Adobe Illustrator and Photoshop didn't eliminate oil painting. Digital should not eliminate celluloid.
  • 0

#19 Bill DiPietra

Bill DiPietra
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2339 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York City

Posted 09 September 2012 - 11:05 AM

Things change we all know that, nothing stays constant. To assume that all manufacturers will keep producing the vast range of motion picture film is idyllic, but not realistic. Lets not get swept away by rumours, rather than speculating I think we should use as much film as we can while it’s still here.



P


I agree. And no one has forgotten about Kodak. I was thinking that if Fuji were to stop making film, that would once again make Kodak the only game in town which might be a positive thing for them (provided they come out of this.)

I personally feel that there needs to be a groundswell of people like myself and everyone else who does not want to see film go away. I honestly have no idea of how to go about this, but I believe if enough people WANT FILM TO STAY, we will find a way. And this would take way more than just a petition or a (I'm sure a bunch of you remember that I organized a petition a few years ago when Kodak announced the elimination of Plus-X :)) I could be wrong, but I think there are more film lovers/makers outside of the Hollywood circle who prefer to shoot on film nowadays.

Anyone have any ideas as to how to push this issue beyond a forum rant? This is one I'd be VERY committed to...

Edited by Bill DiPietra, 09 September 2012 - 11:06 AM.

  • 0

#20 Adrian Sierkowski

Adrian Sierkowski
  • Sustaining Members
  • 7117 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • Los Angeles, Ca

Posted 09 September 2012 - 11:13 AM

I would say the best way to push it beyond a forum is to continue to shoot film, to get other people to shoot film, and when you shoot film to make sure it's the best damned look and story you can muster.
  • 0


The Slider

Willys Widgets

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Wooden Camera

Abel Cine

rebotnix Technologies

Tai Audio

Metropolis Post

Glidecam

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Aerial Filmworks

Paralinx LLC

Opal

CineLab

CineTape

Ritter Battery

Technodolly

FJS International, LLC

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Visual Products

Rig Wheels Passport

Abel Cine

CineTape

rebotnix Technologies

Paralinx LLC

Glidecam

Visual Products

Willys Widgets

The Slider

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Ritter Battery

FJS International, LLC

CineLab

Tai Audio

Technodolly

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Aerial Filmworks

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Wooden Camera

Opal

Rig Wheels Passport

Metropolis Post