Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,776   Posts: 1,516,690   Online: 1199
      
Page 5 of 53 FirstFirst 123456789101115 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 524
  1. #41

    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Live Free or Die
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,332
    Images
    87
    sigh.
    I guess we'll see what happens, looks like a recipe for disaster though.

  2. #42
    Richard Sintchak (rich815)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    San Francisco area
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,813
    Images
    1
    If they are keeping movie film them we can still get Double X (5222)!
    -----------------------

    "Well, my photos are actually much better than they look..."

    Richard S.
    Albany, CA (San Francisco bay area)

    My Flickr River of photographs
    http://flickriver.com/photos/rich815...r-interesting/

    My Photography Website
    http://www.lightshadowandtone.com

  3. #43

    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    655
    Quote Originally Posted by markbarendt View Post
    I'd bet they could but they already have the all tools they need to make film.

    The only value I see for Fujifilm in buying Kodak's film division is to own the color film market outright.

    It seems to me that at least for color film that could easily become a reality, even if they didn't buy Kodak.
    For B&W, what then? When Kodak "sells its film business" what does that mean? Are they selling the formulas, the coating machinery, the license to the name of e.g. "Tri-X"? If people are loyal to Tri-X because it has a different look than HP5 could not Harmon buy the formula/process for Tri-X and produce an emulsion that is a complement to HP5? If they owned it Tri-X would no longer be a competitor. In this scenario Harmon wants to make money. If they can net more money by owning and producing a onetime Kodak emulsion, why not? They already own the means of production and I bet it's not running at its full capacity.

    It feels like there's an assumption afoot that if "Kodak film" dies then Tri-X (or Plus-X (or Panatomic-X (or Double X))) must die as well. That is not, by necessity, the case. It all hinges on ownership, demand, and cost of production. For all the grousing going on here about this or that film going away you must remember this: It is not outside the realm of possibility that Kodak's death is the key to having again everything you lost.

    But then, I'm talking through my hat here.

    s-yeah, I hoard Tri-X-a
    I photograph things to see what things look like photographed.
    - Garry Winogrand

  4. #44
    Brian C. Miller's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Everett, WA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    495
    Blog Entries
    2
    Images
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by semi-ambivalent View Post
    It feels like there's an assumption afoot that if "Kodak film" dies then Tri-X (or Plus-X (or Panatomic-X (or Double X))) must die as well. That is not, by necessity, the case. It all hinges on ownership, demand, and cost of production. For all the grousing going on here about this or that film going away you must remember this: It is not outside the realm of possibility that Kodak's death is the key to having again everything you lost.

    But then, I'm talking through my hat here.

    s-yeah, I hoard Tri-X-a
    It all still comes down to supply and demand. The last stats I heard about Kodak film was that the commercial side (movie film) is 95% of the business, and the consumer side (everything else) is 5% of the business. They dropped their entire E-6 product line. (I am not hoarding Tri-X, yet. I'm going after the remaining E100G and E100VS!) Kodak will be supplying film for the movie industry through 2015. And then what?

    What shape will the movie industry be in three years down the road? How many theater complexes will be all digital in 2015? (The local cinemas are mostly digital, big exception for Pacific Science Center IMAX)

    The real question is, how long will we have Tri-X?

  5. #45

    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    65
    Desperate plans for desperate times I suppose. But film is the one thing Kodak has made better than anybody in the world for 120 years. McDonald's might as well sell off their hamburger division.

  6. #46

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Shanghai, China
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,711
    Images
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by IloveTLRs View Post
    How and why do people see salvation in Fujifilm?
    Because they are not in bankruptcy. Because Fujifilm has publicly stated they still believe in film photography.

  7. #47
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,565
    Quote Originally Posted by RattyMouse View Post
    Because Fujifilm has publicly stated they still believe in film photography.
    Yes, their film.
    They don't need more capacity than they have already, and they either have or have discontinued their own competition to Kodak's films.

    I don't see it making economic sense for Fuji, and that must be their primary consideration.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  8. #48
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,747
    Sounds like potential good news to me. Many of us have said for a long time that one way Kodak film could survive would be as a smaller operation sold off to someone who will do it right and hopefully not be under all the legacy debt. This is the first step. I used to contact for a company that supplied IT services to Eastman Chemical (I'm from northeast TN.) They're doing well. I know the film business isn't the chemical business but they've successfully spun off divisions before. Hopefully we will see it again.

    And to those asking who cares, large format color negative shooters, for one. Fuji color neg is not readily available in this country in sheets. (Plus Fuji just doesn't have a negative film like Ektar, and arguably not as good as the Portras, in any size.)

  9. #49
    Steve Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ryde, Isle of Wight
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    8,532
    Images
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by kb3lms View Post
    I'm talking about hospital imaging, not dental office stuff.
    My dentist uses X ray film and has no intention of changing to digital. There's no point when what you have already works fine.


    Steve.

  10. #50
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,747
    My dentist is all digital. One of my long time friends is an x-ray technician at a regional hospital and has been since the 80s. He says it's been years since he developed film. All 100% digital.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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