Kodak going bankrupt? Where will our film come from?
I had a nice get together today with famed photographer Douglas Kirkland and Local 600 President (Director of Photography union) and ASC member Steven Poster. As we were about to part ways, discussion turned to the potential demise of Kodak.
Earlier today I also happen to have read a great article about Emmanuel "Chivo" Lubezki ASC and Terrence Mallick’s "Rules" or "dogma" as they called it, for shooting during their collaboration on "The Tree of Life." The article described how film is still unparralled relative to digital in terms of dynamic range and how they were able to push the boundaries of what can be captured by any camera available to us today.
Ironically earlier in the week I found myself grading a piece I had directed with one of the colorist who had graded "Tree of Life" and we found ourselves in an interesting discussion about film vs digital – and all of the cameras out there.
He argued that he would only shoot film with his still photographs, yet that he felt very comfortable with what could be done in post with digital cinema files and how digital capture has distinct advantages to film in certain specific circumstances.
I pointed out to him, that while I worked my way up through black and white, color, and E-6 labs and learned to shoot everything on film – including sporting events on color-reversal film – that I had come to embrace digital whether it was with still images or cinema / live action footage. If anything I found that cinema film stock offered more noticeable advantages in the motion picture world over digital cinema sensors – than in the still world for example.
We came to agree that ultimately – each camera out there (whether a Nikon or a Canon, or an Alexa vs an Epic) had very distinct characteristics – pros and cons. Trying to pick "one" ultimate camera or stocks – was somewhat of a fool’s task.
As we see Kodak being threatened these days – and the potential for motion picture film to disappear in the upcoming years (something that I would NOT be a fan of of course!) - I think we came to an interesting conclusion together.
Each digital camera out there, each sensor – will effectively become our future film stocks… The RED Epic reacts to light differently than the Arri Alexa does – or the Sony F3, Panasonic AF100 or of course the Canon 5DMKII. Each has its distinct pros and cons – whether due to image quality, dynamic range, sharpness, resolution, RAW codec or weight and size (not to mention price.)
What I do think is important is for all of us to work with all of the digital still and cinema cameras out there – and to treat them the same way we would different Kodak or Fuji film stocks.
I love film as much as anyone out there. And there is no question that it’s dynamic range - especially in the highlights – has yet to be met with digital cameras. Yet the Zacuto Shootout tests showed that digital cameras have an uncanny ability to dig into those shadows in a very impressive manner- in ways that film cannot.
Therefore, while it may be nice to wax poetic about the inherent merits of film – especially motion picture film, it would probably behoove us to spend our time mastering these new digital sensors and post workflows. As time, and Kodak’s potential bankruptcy, may ultimately end up forcing all of us in the direction of purely digital capture regardless of what we yearn to shoot on…
While there is no question that losing motion picture film altogether would be a huge loss – it seems to be an unfortunate reality in the next decade if not less. (I’m betting it will be around a lot longer than most people expect…) I think we should do our best to discover some of the new ways of shooting that these new digital sensors will allow us to. I can tell you that shooting into the dark shadows or in very low light can be extremely fun – as many of these new camera can now literally see more than the human eye can see in the dark…
Interestingly the problem with film for Kodak is less shooting film and more distributing film. Imagine on a major film just how many more feet of film are used to dup, then print a major feature – than are ever used to film it, even with a very high shooting ratio . It is film distribution converting to digital projection that is at the heart of the problem.
Nice piece BTW
thanks
Reply
I’ve heard that NFL Films is actually the largest consumer of motion picture film. They shoot every NFL game with several hi-speed Super 16 cameras, and they even have their own film lab. The founder, Ed Sabol, is apparently a film lover. Once they switch over to digital, Kodak will lose something like 30% of sales.
Reply
Vincent Laforet Reply:
October 12th, 2011 at 10:12 pm
This is not corroborated – but I heard NFL films ordered more than a dozen RED Epic cameras this year…
Reply
@Vincent Laforet, I heard that also. Honestly for the NFL I think its a great move. Kodak, not so much =)
CreativeCow posted a pretty lengthy article about this same topic. I haven’t checked out the whole thing, but so far its a pretty interesting read.
http://magazine.creativecow.net/article/film-fading-to-black
Reply
I suggest you all this nice post from the A.V. club.
Title:
“The Malick-ing of the mainstream: Is technology making it too easy for cinema and TV to look beautiful? ”
http://www.avclub.com/articles/the-malicking-of-the-mainstream-is-technology-maki,63252/?utm_medium=RSS&utm_campaign=feeds&utm_source=avclub_rss_daily
Reply
My workflow has become so entrenched in digital that frankly it would be a disruptive to shoot film today. Most jobs I work on these days, I just don’t have the time for a first light, the logging, and then doing another best light. Clients expect to work faster now.
Not to mention all the time you save on set. And I don’t miss the old school “tap” for playback either.
But maybe if I were making art on the same budget and timeline of Malick, rather than the typical run and gun commercial/corporate job my viewpoint would be a lot different.
Reply
Interesting, sad to here about Kodak. I hope they can change there paridym to increast there digital products but keep the film side of the business even if its scaled down. I have shot digital since 200. I started with point and shoot and kept shooting film in my slr cameras. I bought my first digital slr in 2007 and haven’t shot filn since. The big reason for me is the control I have with digital processing on my laptop. if I had a dark room or access to one I would probably shoot more film.
Reply
Kodak actually makes some of the best digital sensors in the world used by Leica, Hasselblad and NASA amongst others. I’m sure they will survive as a sensor company not a film company.
Reply
Vincent Laforet Reply:
October 13th, 2011 at 10:09 am
For sure – and they own an endless amount of patents as well…
Reply
All good points. While sensors may have their own unique characteriscs and rendering, the cost of owning multiple camera systems is beyond most people. A lot easier and cheaper to decide if you put a roll of Velvia or Provia or Tri-x or TMax in the camera.
Reply
Vincent Laforet Reply:
October 13th, 2011 at 11:44 am
Very good point. But to counter – keep in mind most of the video/motion picture industry RENTS cameras – and they in effect get to choose that way on a “per-job” basis…
Reply
Interesting topic. I purchase quite a bit of super 8 film from kodak for its vintage nostalgic look. It would be a shame if someday I was forced to replicate it’s look in post. I spend enough time behind the computer as it is.
Archival and storage is a concern as well. I had a huge video file from a film transfer get corrupted on me while I was backing it up. Recovery service worked, but otherwise at least I would have had the option to re-transfer the film. But to be fare film has it’s own battles.
Reply
@Vincent Laforet, yaah, damn sure.
@Rick, many production houses rent cameras and all the other equipment for for each job, so they always chooses what to use.
Reply
@Rick, Another trend we are seeing is modularity. It’s not a big leap to imagine a camera that allows for a quick swap between sensors the way we swap lenses or filters now. Imagine the joy of a hybrid camera that can effortlessly switch between a color sensor, B &W, IR, UV, high ISO, or any other ‘stock’ that manufacturers can imagine.
Reply
I agree. Its like learning an old friend is no longer around having known them from years before. I grew up with Kodak cameras as
a young kid from my very first instamatic through to being really excited asan 8 year old at getting my very first 35mm film camera and of course it had to be Kodak film. Cannot remember its name but I believe it was a German make.
Anyway as sensors on these cameras continue to evolve and emulate the look of film is it not also true that Camera len’s too have a certain look about them.
Reply
The article on Lubezki and Mallick was extremely inciteful. I have to say that I hope there is a way for Kodak to survive, I’m just adding motion to the bag of skills and would love to shoot film for a project. Albeit I will be using digital for the first documentary. I imGine there are a lot of eyes watching Kodak.
Reply
I’ve worked in the film industry for 20 years now, and even 10 years ago everyone was saying film is dead.
Kodak’s commercial realities aside, so long as film makers like Chris Nolan and Wally Pfister continue to push the film envelope by shooting in formats like Imax which digital cant even get close to, then I very much doubt that film will disappear.
True, this year has seen a huge amount of films go digital but the bulk of the impetus has come from the demands of 3D.
On the subject of Kodak’s financial problems, this is not unusual in the film industry. Panavision went backrupt 2 years ago and got bailed out by a parent company. Arri in the uk is being currently propped up by Arri Germany.
There’s too much for everyone to loose creatively to let these companies go under, so I wouldnt be the least bit suprised if someone buys out the film making arm of Kodak and continues it as a high profile loss leader.
Until digital sensors can truly see colour in the unique way film does there will always be a demand from the artists who work in feature films to have their work recorded on such a beautiful and sympathetic palette.
Reply
This might be the real reason the NFL would purchase digital cameras: They may have been tipped by ARRI and Aaton that they’re not making film cameras, anymore. So now, they’re buying Epics to test them out. Source: http://magazine.creativecow.net/article/film-fading-to-black
Reply
I find the statement ‘there is no question that it’s dynamic range – especially in the highlights – has yet to be met with digital cameras. Yet the Zacuto Shootout tests showed that digital cameras have an uncanny ability to dig into those shadows in a very impressive manner- in ways that film cannot’ quite illogical. Surely, if this is the case, then simply unerexpose the image a digital camera is capturing (i.e by stopping down the lens or increasing ND) and then boost the image in post production. You will then recover highlight detail at the expense of slightly noisier (dare I say film like?) shadows.
Reply
Vincent Laforet Reply:
October 20th, 2011 at 12:12 am
Yes – you got it. It’s not illogical. You are on the same page. Ideally – we should not have to DIG into those shadows… as you say: there will be more noise as a result. The problem is: film noise is beautiful. Digital noise: not always… therein lies the “catch.” (That being said: Alexa has VERY filmic noise…)
Reply
In the spirit of addressing your concerns, let us assure you that, Kodak has no intention of filing for bankruptcy. We believe that film is a first choice for many, many filmmakers and will continue to be so, even though there are more options coming into view. You can check out our publication, In Camera, online here: http://motion.kodak.com/motion/Publications/In_Camera/index.htm and read dozens of reasons why story tellers still choose film. And here’s what some filmmakers, like Spielberg and Scorsese, have to say:http://www.guardian.co.uk/ In spite of a more complex landscape, Kodak remains committed to serving our customers.
Reply
Vincent Laforet Reply:
October 24th, 2011 at 11:33 pm
Awesome news and thanks for posting!
Reply
[...] http://blog.vincentlaforet.com/2011/10/12/kodak-going-bankrupt-where-will-our-film-come-from/ Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like this post. [...]
Well, what now? Kodak has officially filed for bankruptcy protection. Let us all now pray that someone will purchase their film division, which hold incredible brand power and good will, and will continue to produce their wonderful film products.
I’m worried as film becomes increasingly overshadowed by digital, that prices will increase for these rare film products. This unfortunate price hike could trickle down to effect mostly those of us who don’t have the financial backing of a major studio, or any studio at all.
Digital has clearly opened a wonderful door to inexpensive filmmaking for the independent artist. Look at what Ed Burns has been able to do, such as his new film “Newlyweds”, filmed entirely on a 5D Mark ii.
But are the days of independent “films” coming to an end?
Reply
Unfortunately, the six major studios are unwinding live-action and hand-, computer- and stop motion-animated films and short films immediately following more than 100-plus years of filmed entertainment financing, production and releasing, distribution and
global sales. Sony Pictures Entertainment – or S.P.E. as they are known – will throw in the towel on theatrical film production and distribution following their decision to drop Kodak as their longtime supplier for the past 89 years.
What will happen to motion pictures shot on film remains unclear.
Theatrical feature film production is about to be discontinued… and
I wish to thank the entertainment and technology industries for their
generous contribution to the making of animated and live-action filmed entertainment. Therefore, the movies I will attend at my favorite multiplex motion picture theater will no longer be developed
or financed beyond 2013.
Sadly, feature filmmaking will be no more.
Motion pictures writers, producers, directors and production crews,
bye-bye! Theatrical films, R.I.P. Motion picture film, godspeed.
Reply
Fuji stopped their film production. Kodak is the only one left. Don’t fall.
Reply