Pro film dropping faster then consumer

The sales of pro film are dropping faster then consumer film, at least
in Canada.
There was a 34% decline in the sales of film,
a 40% decline in professional color reversal film
and a 44% decline in professional color negative film.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...echnology/home

I don't have numbers for world wide film sales and it is likely that
the drop in film sales world wide is a big slower then in Canada, but I
expect the trend for the pro films dropping fastest is pretty
consistence world wide.

There is a feeling amongst some people that it is only the point and
shot photographers that are moving to digital, the evidence would seem
to say this is not the case. It is also interesting to note that the
percent of film sold that is ISO 400-800 is slowly growing each year.

So for pro films two bad things seem to be happening at the same time,
the over sales of film is continuing to drop fast and the percentage of
film being sold that is pro is dropping as well. At some point you
have to figure that the return on the sales of pro film will be too low
to justify producing it. I am expecting that in two to three years we
will see the selection of pro films thinning out. Sadly I suspect that
we will see the production of ISO 400 and 800 print film out last just
about everything else.

Scott

Should be the Opposite, I would have thougt, most consumers are
dropping there film camreras for inferior digital models, Pro are less
likely to this or at least they are less likely to replace there film
camera with somthing equally as inferior.

Oh is it me or is that not quite as steep of a drop as it was last
year, I think it was more like 50% last year no?

wrote:
Should be the Opposite, I would have thougt, most consumers are
dropping there film camreras for inferior digital models, Pro are less
likely to this or at least they are less likely to replace there film
camera with somthing equally as inferior.
It is a common feeling amongst some film shooters that it is the low
even of photography that is moving to digital. I believe this is based
more on wishful thinking then reality. The truth would appear to be
that it is the low end of shooter who are mostly staying with film.
It is the disposable film cameras that are not losing sales as fast as
the rest of the film market. It is the high ISO print films that are
drop in sales the slowest and the slow pro films that are dropping the
fastest.

When people talk about how poor digital photos are compared to film I
have to think that these people have not seen a print from a good
digital camera.

Scott

writes:

Should be the Opposite, I would have thougt, most consumers are
dropping there film camreras for inferior digital models, Pro are less
likely to this or at least they are less likely to replace there film
camera with somthing equally as inferior.

Most pros went digital years ago. Lab costs plus workflow advantages
made it a no-brainer for nearly all pros working in 35mm.

Consumers are now following suit -- since the digital cameras are very
superior to film cameras *especially* for casual snapshot use.
--
David Dyer-Bennet, , http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/
RKBA: http://noguns-nomoney.com/ http://www.dd-b.net/carry/
Pics: http://dd-b.lighthunters.net/ http://www.dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/
Dragaera/Steven Brust: http://dragaera.info/

Think you need your eyes testing! Its been common knowledge for a long
time that there is a much bigger gap between 35mm P&S cameras and
digital P&S cameras than there is between 35mm SLRs and DSLRs for a
long time.
35mm P&S cameras especially the cameras with prime lenses are far
better than just about any compact digital of equiverlent size.
How ever this advatage is often negated by either, increably slow zooms
(but only really in dull lighting) or crap film.
It is because of there sensor size I have a 6MP P&S I would bet any
money that 4MP D2H would nock my Litlle cameras socks off. The
differecne between a 1-1/8"th sensor and 35mm is greater than the
difference than 35mm and LF, Now I know a digital sensor will out do a
1-1/8th peice of film, but at that sort of difference it doesnt need
to. The sensor size also means that portraits nearly always have the BG
in focus.
I know most (but not all) Enthuisiats are getting DSLRs and not little
compacts, when I said people where ditching there cameras for cameras
that are inferior I was refering to the P&S crowed not the enthusiats
crowd. FWIW BTW My first camera was a digital, I got into film because
I wanted an SLR and Could not afford a DSLR.

There are all sorts of different types of pro, Some shoot all digital,
some all film, some both might depend what there client wants.

wrote:

Oh is it me or is that not quite as steep of a drop as it was last
year, I think it was more like 50% last year no?

Sounds about right. I expect the rate of decline in film use is slowing
simply because there are relatively few film users left. What we're
seeing is the slope flattening out as the line approaches the bottom of
the graph.


--
Mark Roberts
Photography and writing
www.robertstech.com

It will probably hover somwhere just above the bottom, at least I hope
it will.

Sounds about right. I expect the rate of decline in film use is slowing
simply because there are relatively few film users left. What we're
seeing is the slope flattening out as the line approaches the bottom of
the graph.
__________________________________________________ ____________________

Yes, and then about ten years from now when someone who was into digital
photography but dropped out of the hobby, decides to get back into it they
will take out their old CD's that they copied their baby daughters pictures
to, and find out the CD's are unreadable. Then they will go down to the
camera store and purchase the only film camera still made, a Chinaflex which
looks a lot like an old Yashica Electro X. Then more and more people will
find that their CD's are shot and will start buying film cameras. A little
film company called Kodak, that is operating out of an old McDonald's
building will start getting large orders for film. Then real photography
will make a comeback. Ric.

wrote:
Think you need your eyes testing! Its been common knowledge for a long
time that there is a much bigger gap between 35mm P&S cameras and
digital P&S cameras than there is between 35mm SLRs and DSLRs for a
long time.
35mm P&S cameras especially the cameras with prime lenses are far
better than just about any compact digital of equiverlent size.
How ever this advatage is often negated by either, increably slow zooms
(but only really in dull lighting) or crap film.
It is because of there sensor size I have a 6MP P&S I would bet any
money that 4MP D2H would nock my Litlle cameras socks off. The
differecne between a 1-1/8"th sensor and 35mm is greater than the
difference than 35mm and LF, Now I know a digital sensor will out do a
1-1/8th peice of film, but at that sort of difference it doesnt need
to. The sensor size also means that portraits nearly always have the BG
in focus.
I know most (but not all) Enthuisiats are getting DSLRs and not little
compacts, when I said people where ditching there cameras for cameras
that are inferior I was refering to the P&S crowed not the enthusiats
crowd. FWIW BTW My first camera was a digital, I got into film because
I wanted an SLR and Could not afford a DSLR.

There are all sorts of different types of pro, Some shoot all digital,
some all film, some both might depend what there client wants.

I would say that most of the people who where shooting any large amount
of a film like Velvia are now using a DSLR. There are of course some
who are still using Velvia but the majority of shots that were being
done with Velvia are not done with a DSLR. The people who were
shooting 35mm print film are going to get much better looking prints
shooting even a digital point & shoot then what they would get with a
print film dropped off at the mini-lab.

There are a lot of DSLRs being sold and whereas the growth of sales of
digital cameras is slowing down overall DSLR sales are growing at a
high rate.

Scott