Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,566   Posts: 1,545,404   Online: 1061
      
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 41 to 50 of 50
  1. #41

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    719
    Quote Originally Posted by Sirius Glass View Post
    You will not learn about Kodak's or any company's internal management from Google.

    Exactly what do you not trust? If they are losing money on a product line, you do not trust that they will shut it down? If they are making money on a product line, you do not trust that they will keep it running? When Kodak shut down Kodachrome, HIE, and Ektachrome there was at least six months supply available, did you miss the announcement and therefore do not trust Kodak?

    If you think that you can run Kodak better than it is run now, how about sending your resume to them?

    Well, you surely know-it-all, eh? Why don't you run kodak? Maybe are you too busy making millions elsewhere?

    Me, as a simple consumer, I don't trust that company anymore. Please don't lose too much energy and smartassness trying to prove me that it's a fine company and all that stuff. My mind set.

  2. #42
    Ken Nadvornick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Monroe, WA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,296
    Images
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by NB23 View Post
    Are you guys serious? Or are you guys really, really, really wanting me to trust that company?

    I don't get this argumentation.
    I don't think they are asking you to trust Kodak. I think they are asking you to not trust everything you might read on the Intenet about Kodak.

    Very good advice, that. Always remember, the Internet is not a peer-reviewed resource.

    Ken
    "They are the proof that something was there and no longer is. Like a stain. And the stillness of them is boggling. You can turn away but when you come back they’ll still be there looking at you."

    — Diane Arbus, March 15, 1971, in response to a request for a brief statement about photographs

  3. #43
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,127
    Well said Ken. The drift of the thread has been in that direction. I guess that sometimes it needs to be clearly stated.
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  4. #44
    PDH
    PDH is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    502
    CNN reported on Firday that Fox will stop distubting film by the end of 2013, the other studios are expected to follow. Wounder how this will impact Kodak?

  5. #45

    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    127.0.0.1
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    604
    Probably Kodak already knows this, and that might be why they contracted with Hollywood to supply motion picture film only through 2015.

  6. #46
    PDH
    PDH is offline

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    502
    Quote Originally Posted by SkipA View Post
    Probably Kodak already knows this, and that might be why they contracted with Hollywood to supply motion picture film only through 2015.
    At which point all Kodak color film may cease production, I dont know if Kodak can keep coating film without motion picture film. A lot of small towns are going to lose their theaters as the owners may have trouble affording digital projectors. And I wounder about 2nd and 3rd world markets.

  7. #47

    Join Date
    May 2012
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    428
    Quote Originally Posted by PDH View Post
    At which point all Kodak color film may cease production, I dont know if Kodak can keep coating film without motion picture film. A lot of small towns are going to lose their theaters as the owners may have trouble affording digital projectors. And I wounder about 2nd and 3rd world markets.
    I think we are far from that point, it'll take more than two years to change an old reliable standard worldwide. But in a longer perspective, yes, it wont last forever.
    Last edited by Felinik; 09-11-2012 at 05:20 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    http://street-photos.net/ | http://felinik.com/ | http://www.facebook.com/jf.felinik

    "The one with the most stuff when he dies wins"

  8. #48
    RalphLambrecht's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Central florida,USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,546
    Images
    1
    and never,ever let Tmax die. it is the best film ever
    Regards

    Ralph W. Lambrecht
    www.darkroomagic.comrorrlambrec@ymail.com[/URL]
    www.waybeyondmonochrome.com

  9. #49
    Brac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    625
    As I understand it, film is still required to archive digital movies, as the studios recognise this is a prudent course. Also there are various institutions using film to archive films originally made on nitrate stock, so presumably movie film, both colour & black & white, is still going to be needed for all this activity?

  10. #50
    Diapositivo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,844
    Quote Originally Posted by Brac View Post
    As I understand it, film is still required to archive digital movies, as the studios recognise this is a prudent course. Also there are various institutions using film to archive films originally made on nitrate stock, so presumably movie film, both colour & black & white, is still going to be needed for all this activity?
    Yes, the problem, as outlined in other threads, is whether this small amount of film coating will be enough to sustain film production especially at Kodak where film coating machines only coat film IIRC. Fujifilm uses the same machines to coat film and paper and that makes the issue less bad.

    Archiving requires only a few copies for each movie. The entire analogue movie production requires a lot of film for the capture (which is much more than what if mounted in the final cut), and especially a lot of film for the duplication of the many hundreds of copies which are required for the distribution to analogue movie theatres. If you export the film and this has to be translated in another language (or needs superimposition of subtitles) you have to make new copies for each market. In the old days, there would also be some conversion into 16mm movie to rent for home theatre projections or similar.

    The advent of digital movie theatres risks to reduce film consumption to maybe the capture phase, and then maybe the backup copy phase, which is much less film produced and consumed than what used to be.
    Fabrizio Ruggeri fine art photography site: http://fabrizio-ruggeri.artistwebsites.com
    Stock images at Imagebroker: http://www.imagebroker.com/#/search/ib_fbr

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin