An amusing thing happened on my way to this forum!

Tōrō

H
Tōrō

  • 3
  • 0
  • 21
Signs & fragments

A
Signs & fragments

  • 5
  • 0
  • 61
Summer corn, summer storm

D
Summer corn, summer storm

  • 2
  • 2
  • 60
Horizon, summer rain

D
Horizon, summer rain

  • 0
  • 0
  • 59

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
198,822
Messages
2,781,403
Members
99,718
Latest member
nesunoio
Recent bookmarks
0

aldevo

Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Messages
949
Location
Cambridge, M
Format
Multi Format
Kentmere products have a good presence in the US.

They were also sold here under other than their brand name. Luminos comes to mind.

PE

Luminos used to be Kentmere's importer. I believe they were based in CA, USA and went belly-up around 2004 at which time they licensed the "Luminos" trademark to a German art paper company. My memory's sort of sketchy...

They used to carry Luminos at my local CalumetPhoto. I never tried it in those days because it was obvious the inventory had been sitting for some time...

I don't believe that Kentmere "offically" sold its papers under its own brand name until early 2005. They do have a USA web site.


http://www.kentmereusa.com/kt_main.php?p=ak

Apparently, they opened a new coating line in 2004 with the aim of achieving greater efficiency and superior operating economics.

Nice to have that luxury in this day and age...I hope this is money well spent because I'm taking a liking to the VC FinePrint FB.

Anyhow, it can be found at both Freestyle (also under the "Arista" label) and B&H Photo. So it may not be "The Best-Kept Secret in Black and White" any more...
 

Michael W

Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2005
Messages
1,594
Location
Sydney
Format
Multi Format
12. Two electron sensitization applied to B&W, which will take several years and millions to complete.

13. ISO 25,000 speed direct positive thermal film.
PE

Fascinating list, Ron.
I'm thinking the two electron B&W would be the most likely to see production. That is a product I would be interested to use & I think would have commercial viability.

The 25,000 ISO film is the one that has intrigued me since you first mentioned it a while back. I think you said it is also fine grain? I'm not sure what the narket for it would be, but that is a film I would love to play with.
 

patrickjames

Member
Joined
Mar 25, 2005
Messages
742
Format
Multi Format
Since Agfa's and Forte's departure Kentmere has become my product of choice (so far). I used to use the Luminos papers back in the mid/late 90's. They had that annual printmakers guild contest which supplied me each year with enough paper to make it to the next one. I guess it is no surprise that I have taken a liking to Kentmere products. They seem to have a really good momentum, but that is just my impression.

I don't think we will see the end of kodak film products for a very long time. I do know a lot of professionals are sick of digital since it was supposed to make things easier, but in the end for some photographers it has made things more time consuming. Film is here to stay in one form or another for many years to come.


Patrick
 

Struan Gray

Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2004
Messages
914
Location
Lund, Sweden
Format
Multi Format
16. Mixed packet color with a single layer producing all colors of todays color papers. This had many problems yet to be solved, but was killed by slide coating and curtain coating. It would still be a big advance.

I have always been surprised (well, disappointed) that Kodak has not leveraged its experience in what everybody else these days calls nanotechnology. Perhaps those are the products that are going forward, and that is why we don't hear about them, but from my armchair viewpoint Kodak seem simply never to have realised that their skills in reliable bulk production of nanocrystals might be applicable elsewhere.

No. 16 is an example. If that trick can be pulled off there are a wealth of possible applications in optoelectronics. But not - yet - on the huge scale and in the traditional imaging markets that Kodak seems to cling to like a comfort blanket.

IBM has found ways to make money from its pure science research, even as its core business moved away from using that research in its own products. It would be good to see Kodak emulating that, both freeing up niche products from the dead hands of its accountants and putting fun new tools into the market.
 

AgX

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
29,973
Location
Germany
Format
Multi Format
4. High stability dyes (in early stages, a new chelating agent was needed) Dye stability surpassed anything seen in any product today except pigment type dyes. It may have surpassed them.


PE,

are you comparing to dye transfer dyes or silver dye-bleach dyes (if there should be any difference at all) or even to other dyes?
 

AgX

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
29,973
Location
Germany
Format
Multi Format
I have always been surprised (well, disappointed) that Kodak has not leveraged its experience in what everybody else these days calls nanotechnology.


There is a Cologne based `start-up´ company founded by former Agfa people willing to transfer coating techniques up to now only employed in multilayer precision coating of photo materials into totally different spheres. Thus still there are people around knowing the value of `classic´ techniques.

Furthermore I don't understand, as most of us outside the industry, why a major player should not license developments which not seem profitable to them in the foreseeable future to small players which could be able to profitable employ them in small scale productions for a niche market. A small refund would still be better than just keeping things on the shelf (whichever shelf one would consider). Could it be that majors are just too selfcentered?
 
OP
OP
Photo Engineer

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
Well, considering the remarks here today, I can just add that I cannot discuss any of these in detail in any way. And, if other companies are interested in them they should contact Kodak. OTOH, the patents on mixed packets has expired, so in some cases, I can say that no permission is required.

I should add that since the patents on mixed packets has expired, I would be able to discuss it, but I know little about it as the last coating was being evaluated in the month I was hired at Kodak, and I only saw the results, and never learned the formulas.

PE
 

jstraw

Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
2,699
Location
Topeka, Kans
Format
Multi Format
I'm really not sure what sort of remarks you were expecting or why the remarks here surprise you. The implication seems to be that our reaction is a disappointment to you. By and large we're consumers with a concern for the future. There's a disconnect between your expectations (which remain opaque to me) and the very predictable, obvious and understandable comments and questions that have been posted.

This sort of cognitive dissonance is very frustrating to me. It would help me if you could help us understand what sort of interaction on this subject you had in mind.
 
OP
OP
Photo Engineer

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
Only the early remarks in which people thought an on-the-shelf research item could be zipped into production surprised me. That, as I said earlier was due to my poor phrasing of the OP, and I now understand it in that light and that particular thing has damped out due to our several responses.

The main intent was to show that although Kodak has much information within the research labs, a lot of it will find no home in products due to the gradual demise of analog products as the money and market are not available for the transfer of the technology.

It is serving a purpose as seen in AgX's post indicating other companies interest in Kodak technology if Kodak cannot use it. This may be of value to everyone, so in this regard my OP may have been of some benefit all around.

So, you can consider it (apart from bad wording) an alert to everyone not to expect too much new from Kodak even though a lot of new technology exists and to alert some interested parties to the fact that they might want to see if Kodak has anything of use to them.

In fact, this comment by Jim Weaver was taken totally out of context of a much longer 'paragraph' in his talk. I have only mentioned that part that may be of interest or use here.

PE
 

mjs

Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2005
Messages
1,123
Location
Elkhart, Ind
Format
Multi Format
We may regret not having "pollution-free" processes as environmental concerns grow. My greatest worry about traditional chemical photography is that the chemicals will become unavailable or prohibitively expensive (for example, being declared hazardous waste.) Either the ones I use or what goes into the manufacturing processes.

Maybe I'm just being Chicken Little out of ignorance (what I know about chemistry could be printed on my forehead in poster sized type!) In any case, it was interesting to see the sorts of things a major research lab was looking into. Thanks!

Mike
 

AgX

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
29,973
Location
Germany
Format
Multi Format
It is serving a purpose as seen in AgX's post indicating other companies interest in Kodak technology if Kodak cannot use it. This may be of value to everyone, so in this regard my OP may have been of some benefit all around.

Well, in case of misunderstanding I must say I don’t really know any such company. (It would be nice if I myself had one of those niche ideas…) But following postings on Apug and having an eye on what is going on in the photographic world, I got the impression that those wannabe niche companies are out there. But as always, it takes two to tango and it could also be that those minors/micros not even dare to knock at the majors doors to inform about such ideas PE hinted at.
But aside from doomsday talk, this change of times in the industry is interesting and I am curious what new ideas it will bring up aside from mainstream techniques.
 
OP
OP
Photo Engineer

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
Apparently, no one is knocking on Kodak's door.

These things I post are only the most superficial of product ideas or even trade trialed items. I could add a lot more.

PE
 

aldevo

Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Messages
949
Location
Cambridge, M
Format
Multi Format
Well, considering the remarks here today, I can just add that I cannot discuss any of these in detail in any way. And, if other companies are interested in them they should contact Kodak.

<snip>
PE

Are you sure that there weren't any stock analysts wearing fake glasses and moustaches at your get-together yesterday? I see EK went up 9% today on 5x the normal volume and not a buyout rumor to be found! :wink:

Ahh, if only the sort of stuff you mentioned WERE the sorts of things that would get analysts excited...all our fears would be baseless.

I appreciate your posts on these sorts of subjects, though. Analog photography has been around for perhaps 175 years and yet more useful developments might be feasible if people would just stay interested...
 

aldevo

Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Messages
949
Location
Cambridge, M
Format
Multi Format
Apparently, no one is knocking on Kodak's door.

These things I post are only the most superficial of product ideas or even trade trialed items. I could add a lot more.

PE

Well, I think it would be accurate to say that EK DOES have emerging technology that others want to purchase...but not on the analog side of the house.

On the plus side...I did read an article today that predicted digital camera sales have just about peaked and could tail off rather dramatically after 2010. They cited super-saturation of markets and imminent loss of customer excitement as the factors. An increased tendency towards ennui in the digital age...wow, who could have predicted that?:rolleyes:

A "Second Coming of Film" may be too much to ask for, but perhaps it may yet survive as a commerically-supported entity. We will just have to wait and see I guess and keep shooting in the meantime.
 

jstraw

Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
2,699
Location
Topeka, Kans
Format
Multi Format
On the plus side...I did read an article today that predicted digital camera sales have just about peaked and could tail off rather dramatically after 2010. They cited super-saturation of markets and imminent loss of customer excitement as the factors.

This makes a lot of sense. The wave of initial adoption for d****** point and shoots must be tailing off, as must the wave of upgrades for early adopters that bought in when image resolutions were much lower. Resolutions are no longer advancing by leaps and bounds in either the consumer or pro products. Dropping price points for higher resolutions can spur a certain amount of upgrading but not really fuel booming sales.
 

aldevo

Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Messages
949
Location
Cambridge, M
Format
Multi Format
Adelvo that is a pretty cool post.

Thanks, though I do have to post one correction.

Apparently, there IS a rumor that EK will be bought and that's what sent the stock up in a hurry.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=an8VHmaYEK5E

Rumors are just that. I mean, what company ISN'T the subject of a buy-out or merger right now? Private Equity has its hands in all pies by the look of things.

I'm entirely neutral on what this would mean for Consumer & Professional Still Picture Photography products. I've speculated before...but I'm not going there other than to say that my best prediction is:

In time, any possible outcome can happen for any reason be it anticipated or otherwise.:tongue:

And I won't commit to anything more than that!
 

jovo

Membership Council
Subscriber
Joined
Feb 8, 2004
Messages
4,120
Location
Jacksonville
Format
Multi Format
All this begs the question: Is EK sitting on some significant digichnology that may have a major market impact? I can barely spell business, but I'd be curious to see what PE might be able to share on that front. The traditional r&d is impressive, if sadly unavailable, but how strong is that department in the d*****l domain? Will that market reach saturation as mentioned above, and taper off to incremental advances, or is there a tsunami of whammo innovation in the offing.
 

aldevo

Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Messages
949
Location
Cambridge, M
Format
Multi Format
This makes a lot of sense. The wave of initial adoption for d****** point and shoots must be tailing off, as must the wave of upgrades for early adopters that bought in when image resolutions were much lower. Resolutions are no longer advancing by leaps and bounds in either the consumer or pro products. Dropping price points for higher resolutions can spur a certain amount of upgrading but not really fuel booming sales.

Agreed, we've seen this before.

Personal Computers in the 80s were a status symbol. They aren't now because most households have been through several cycles of purchasing them and the only people excited over them these days can be, justifiably, labeled as dorks.:wink:

Look at the trends in analog SLR camera manufacture.

- There was stagnation in the early 70s and then suddenly SLR manufacturers went to electronically-controlled shutters and automated exposure.

- The was stagnation again in the early-mid 80s and then suddenly auto-focus was brought to market.

- I believe there was also another period in the early-mid 90s when there was a slowdown. First we got APS, then we got digital.

Whoop-de-doo. The market is mature and we've got players dropping out of camera manufacture one after the other. DSLRs do well, but the point-and-shoot market is already past peak.

I think I have a fair idea of what will come during the next slowdown, but I won't go there. If I'm right - Canon, Nikon, Olympus, and Pentax won't like it.

I've already posted at-length about the challenges I think analog photography products face in remaining commercially-available. Hopefully, we are apporaching a point where the rate (percentage-wise) of the decline is leveling off. What happens after that, I think, will depend on whether educators can be convinced that analog is still relevant and whether manufacturers can exist in a niche market-place.
 

jstraw

Member
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
2,699
Location
Topeka, Kans
Format
Multi Format
I think I have a fair idea of what will come during the next slowdown, but I won't go there. If I'm right - Canon, Nikon, Olympus, and Pentax won't like it.

You think there's a technological innovation being held in reserve for that market-moment? And that it doesn't serve the interests of companies that come at this from the photographic side of things? It's not the "convergence" snake oil...so I'll guess that who it will make happy is the likes of Sony, Panasonic, Sanyo, Samsung, Toshiba, etc.

Am I warm? :wink:
 

aldevo

Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Messages
949
Location
Cambridge, M
Format
Multi Format
You think there's a technological innovation being held in reserve for that market-moment? And that it doesn't serve the interests of companies that come at this from the photographic side of things? It's not the "convergence" snake oil...so I'll guess that who it will make happy is the likes of Sony, Panasonic, Sanyo, Samsung, Toshiba, etc.

Am I warm? :wink:

IMO, very, though I might have chosen a couple different names.
 

Moopheus

Member
Joined
Dec 31, 2006
Messages
1,219
Location
Cambridge MA
Format
Medium Format
Agreed, we've seen this before.

Personal Computers in the 80s were a status symbol. They aren't now because most households have been through several cycles of purchasing them and the only people excited over them these days can be, justifiably, labeled as dorks.:wink:

If you had one in the 70s, you were also labeled a dork. Or a geek, or worse.

A slowdown in digital camera sales as the market matures should hardly be a surprise to anyone; that's how markets work. The technology is getting to the point where it's "good enough" for most casual users, and they aren't going to really get any benefit out of further improvements unless there's a significant breakthrough on the "ease of use" front. I don't see that it necessarily means anything one way or the other as far as future film use goes.
 

bobherbst

Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2006
Messages
79
Location
Aurora, OH
Format
ULarge Format
Kodak Analog Products

PE,

All very interesting yet extremely esoteric products. I do understand what it takes to bring a product to market from my day job so you do not need to convince me otherwise. I have done dozens of return on investment analyses for the very reason you describe - is developing the product worth the company's investment? While products such as these might be interesting to play with, most would do insignificant commercial volume in my estimation to provide an ROI. I would be perfectly happy with Kodak simply continuing to cut TMAX400 in ULF sizes. To that end, if you are able and willing to PM me with the contact info of whom at Kodak I may contact to express that sentiment, I would be most appreciative. You can also easily find my public contact info with a simple web search if you prefer a different mode of communication.

I am but one voice, but one who has used Kodak film and other products for 40 years. My uncle and cousin both retired from the Findlay, OH processing facility and I still have the nitrocellulose Kodak film negatives my grandfather took for family pictures from 1902-1920 - properly stored, of course.

Bob

1. Direct reversal, 3 step "R" paper like Radiance.

2. 3000 speed in-camera instant product. (blocked by Polaroid suit) This was close to release.

3. Peel apart Polaroid like film. (blocked by Polaroid suit) This was close to release.

4. High stability dyes (in early stages, a new chelating agent was needed) Dye stability surpassed anything seen in any product today except pigment type dyes. It may have surpassed them.

5. Colorless prints that bloomed into full color under UV.

6. 3D color prints. These were spectacular and needed no glasses to view. Kodak used a sample of this on the Annual report cover about 20 years ago.

7. Instant color heat processed film (blocked by Polaroid suit and digital)

8. Copper based photographic systems

9. Polymeric gelatin and coupler substitutes (they take a LOT more work) Improves grain dramatically.

10. An ISO 400 Kodachrome, finished in 1988 but rejected by customers during trade trial. Used T-Grains. (In trade trial in 1988)

11. T-Grain Kodachrome in other speeds (ditto above).

12. Two electron sensitization applied to B&W, which will take several years and millions to complete.

13. ISO 25,000 speed direct positive thermal film.

14. Pollution free film and paper process. (too expensive at the time)

15. High activity organic fixing agents with low pollution.

16. Mixed packet color with a single layer producing all colors of todays color papers. This had many problems yet to be solved, but was killed by slide coating and curtain coating. It would still be a big advance.


I have alluded to these in a number of posts. Here are some of them all in one list.

Enjoy. There are probably hundreds more that I could mention but won't, and hundreds more I don't know about.

PE
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom