Afraid I have to concure with the sentiment here expressed. It is a pity to see any supplier leave the market but when they do, support those who are still in it.
Originally Posted by kjsphoto
Possibly it is more of a problem for you in the states than here in the UK. There was and still is plenty of alternatives to Kodak products here, personaly I seldom used Kodak products prefering Fuji, Ilford,Fotospeed, Kentmere and Tetanal, there are of course others.
Look at the sponsors of this forum, they are showing a comitment to our hobbie, they deseve our support, Kodak is not amoungst them.
The suits at Kodak have made there minds up and no matter how we lament the loss of their products we will not change their minds. We have to live with it and move on.
I use Fuji and Ilford because I like their products more, but the point made about the limited manufacturers of colour film is one I'd never thought about. Black and White is more of a basic product, but to lose a large supplier of colour materials, including all their knowledge on it's production, will be a big hit. As long as Fuji remains committed I'll be happy - and in light of less competition, they probably will.
I don't see this as a smart business move by Kodak though, they're basically getting rid of everyone who's known and supported them in favor of a largely indifferent digital crowd. Kodak just isn't known for their cameras in recent years.
Yes, color is part of the equation. Most everyone on APUG seems to be B&W centered, but color is important and is paying for both Kodak and Fuji to stay in B&W.
If Kodak leaves color film production behind, that will mean that there is little market left and where does that leave Fuji. Fuji's production is still less than Kodak's and even with all of the griping out there, Kodak has a larger market share regarding color film.
That will leave only the Chinese manufacturers of color film, most likely. They are using older Kodak formulas.
I want to clear one item up please. Kodak has NOT stopped making color film stocks. They still make them in both reversal (E-6), color negative (C-41) and still offer Kodachrome 64. In an earlier post, I was just drawing attention to the very limited number of manufacturers of color film stocks.
Originally Posted by Fleath
WOW! WHAT AN ATTITUDE YOU HAVE. I am certainly not happy with Kodak either, but I think you trash a lot of dedicated people who put many years of hard work into research into traditional photography. If Kodak didn't do it, none of us would have enjoyed the films and products we have used for many years. Everyone who followed after Kodak were just using or stealing Kodak's existing technology. And when it comes to quality control, nobody can even come close to Kodak. Yeah, I wish they would dedicate products for us fine arts black and white photographers. If they would bring out a good fiber based paper along with their existing film and chemistry would be a dream come true, but I am not holding my breath.
Originally Posted by kjsphoto
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Something of an exaggeration; examples that spring immediately to mind are workable colour negatives and gold salt sensitization (Agfa patents) and VC papers (Ilford patents).
Originally Posted by lightranger
Going further back, Kodak (eventually) lost the lawsuit against the Rev. Hannibal Goodwin, whose patents on flexible film antedated Kodak's own efforts.
I would not decry Kodak's contributions for an instant, but they were as happy to steal others' ideas as others were to steal theirs.
What is really astonishing about Perez's quote is that his remarks can easily be interpreted as, "Film and medical imaging accounted for over half our revenues last year. By January 2008 I want to have destroyed all that."
Not at all. Kodak trashed us, so as far as I am concerned screw em. Why would anyone support a company that is destroying our art medium trying to convert everyone to digital. They don't care about me or my photography so I could care less about them.
Yes I feel sorry for the pawns at Kodak but the corporate upper management as far as I am concerned should not be rewarded with our money period.
Kodak could be gone tomorrow and do you think they give one ounce of care if it affect you or I? Please...
Not true at all as someone else would have done it. It is business, if their is a buck someone does it.
If Kodak didn't do it, none of us would have enjoyed the films and products
As far as I see it I care about ILFORD, FUJI, FOMA, KENTMERE and the others that back traditional photography. So I want to give to those CEOs and corporate executives my money to help them realize they are doing the right thing by keeping film and papers alive.
And personally I am grateful to them, more than you could ever realize.
Thank again to the companies that care and put their necks on the line to restructure and keep what we love alive.
Whatever support I can give that will keep Tri-X and Plus-X in my camera and dektol and selectol soft in my trays, then I will do it and do it gladly. I'm supporting Ilford for my paper. It does me no good to take it so personally----I'm going to continue using the products that I know and know well until I have to use something else.
I think Perez' statement is aimed at perception as a mainly digital company. I doubt if they have any intent of getting rid of film production when its paying the freight. It will continue to decline as a percentage of their business, but if enought people keep using film (from all manufacturers), that usage will probably plateau at some level, perhaps within the nest couple of years. I say that because possibly by this point most people that are going to switch from film to digital already have. If that level is enough to remain profitable for Kodak and Fuji they will possibly continue in that business. If they don't, it's more business for the other manufacturers.
However, I repeat my concern for color film production. Black & white is manufactured by many manufacturers, but not color. I don't really think Fuji is any more committed to film production than Kodak is - they will both look at the bottom line. We need a smaller manufacturer such as Adox (who by the way did make color film, or at least market it with their name on it, years ago) to start color film production. Maybe if one of the big players gets out, someone smaller will get in. You know, I have been buying 35mm color film from Kroger/ Ralphs of all places, at $5 for 4 boxes. This film is made in Italy and is not bad stuff. I wonder who actually makes it?
Originally Posted by Roger Hicks
There are a lot of other inventions that were not Kodak inventions either, but a lot that were.
DIR couplers, colored couplers, muli component color films with 14 or more layers, a host of color developers, antioxidant stabilzers, Kodachrome, and some of the items are just improvements on others, such as t-grains and selenium sensitization (never used due to toxicity). Along with that goes 2 electron sensitization and a host of other things that make todays films more stable and with better reciprocity including Iridium stabilzation.
Color negative was developed at about the same time by both Kodak and Agfa. The Kodak film paradigm still lasts and the Agfa one died as everyone making color products converted to the Kodak method due to superior quality and coatability.
So, whatever their management was like, R&D was about 20 years ahead of the rest of the pack except for a few notable exceptions. In the 20s to the 50s there were Agfa, Dupont, Haloid, Dynachrome and a few smaller companies. All of them fell by the wayside due to Kodak's superior quality and leading technology.
Later, 3M and others went on to try (And BTW, Ferrania in Italy makes color film and was once part of 3M. AFAIK, it is in bankruptcy but is still operational due to outside support.). The old 3M plant in the midwest was finally 'bought by Kodak'.
And, IIRC, Dupont invented the variable contrast paper and it was called Varigam. At least it was the first on the market here that I remember.
So, there was and is good and bad at Kodak, but the people tried hard and a lot of my friends are now out looking for a job. They went from about 80,000 here in Rochester to about 20,000 (approximate round numbers) since the 90s. Thats a lot of unemployment in one small city.