On Wed, 21 Jul 2004, William Robb wrote: > Ilford has been producing film since well before it became a niche > market.
Agreed. But their plant is all modern so they have spent money to continue development as it became a niche market would you agree? > You are saying that some hitherto unknown player is going to spend a > pile of money to buy a coating facility and spend another pile of > money on R&D to service an almost non existent market. > And that they are going to profit by this foolishness. No, not necessarily. I am actually suggesting that it's easily possible that an existing company such as Ilford will move into a niche market if they see it. They already have the coating facilities. I've picked on Ilford because they are local to me and I know them, but it could be someone from the asia or the eastern block? > The trend at the moment will, if it continues as it has been, will > probably make colour print film a smaller niche than black and white > is now. > It is losing it's consumer base to a new technology, it is losing > it's professional base to a higher end of that technology, and new > consumers and professionals aren't even considering film, if the > sales numbers that Herb has been quoting are correct (I expect they > are, he isn't one to post bullshit). Now this is the crux of where we diverge I think. You're saying it'll die out and I am saying it won't die out. Is that right? I obviously agree that film will reduce in importance over time, (which may be short!), but I think we just don't see eye-to-eye on the level or rate at which it will do so. I don't feel able to predict to WHAT level film use will fall, only that should I wish to be able to keep using film cameras I will be able to do so for many years to come. Incidentally by film I mean all film not just colour negative. I do agree that colour neg is bearing the brunt of the digital onslaught though and will be the worst hit. Chris
