FujiFilm Commits to stay with films....

[gr82bart]

Art, perhaps you forget the other positive signals Fuji have made recently like the new Fuji/Cosina/Voigtlander 667 camera. In comparison Kodak showed a marked inability to launch it's much heralded new 35mm SLR, having to scrap the project.

Posting accolades to Fuji is fine and encouraged. But, pairing it with disses against Kodak gives doubt to the intentions of the posters.

Kodak blow hot & cold giving very contrary signals, that must make the stock markets nervous as well as committed film photographers.

See? This is what I mean. Fuji doesn't do this? Please. Some time ago we had posters say things like Fuji's website is easier to navigate and find film products than Kodak's etc... these types of posts just exasperate me and continue to perpetuate the bias against Kodak on APUG. I don't get it.

Look the anti-Kodak bashers on APUG aren't new. Maybe we should just have an area for you guys where they can demonize Kodak willy nilly as it seems to be their joy?

Regards, Art.

 

[railwayman3]

I don't think that anyone wants to diss Kodak for the sake of it...the last thing we APUG users want is the failure or withdrawal of another supplier from the market. And rumours, even ones which later prove correct, are no help at all. I recently commented that a particular posting about alleged Kodak product discontinuance gave no source.....the OP responded asking what was wrong with me!

However, I was one of those who did remark that it seemed easier to find information on film on the Fuji website than on Kodak's. But I can only write-as-I- find as an ordinary user. IMHO Ilford's site is undoubtedly better than either in information and encouragement in its support of analogue.

I have a small website for my own business, and am always interested to have any comments or feedback, good or bad, from users. I'm sure that Kodak follows a similar policy?

 

[Tom Kershaw]

www.kodak.com is probably the most comprehensive site of the three major manufacturers. e.g., the 'XTOL' pdf is very comprehensive, as is their documentation on the RA-4 chemicals. Other suppliers or manufacturers can sometimes leave one without much in the way of product information apart from the 'dilute 1+9, use between 18 and 24ºC variety'.

Tom

 

[Ian Grant]

Art is missing the point that it is difficult to find & get film information etc now on the Kodak website, yes it's there but not easy to access.

Then there's the question of availability, I now find it near impossible to buy Kodak B&W films off the shelf, while I buy most of my film online from an APUG sponsor I also need the ability to buy more of the same films at short notice. I can find Ilford, Fuji & Foma films quite easily but not Kodak, so despite using Tmax since it's launch I've switched back to Ilford films. When I'm in the UK my local store has Ilford & an odd roll of Fuji so this makes sense.

None of us are criticising Kodak's Film division and the excellent product they supply but rather the poor Advertising, Marketing, PR and Distribution of film (other than c41 consumer colour negative), all of which is down to Senior management.

If I can't find Kodak film, I can't buy it other than by post, it's that simple.

Ian

 

[Anon Ymous]

Art is missing the point that it is difficult to find & get film information etc now on the Kodak website, yes it's there but not easy to access...

IMHO, it's a case of unclear navigation. You need to go to the "All Kodak Products & Services" menu, click "Pro photographer/Lab", then click on "Professional products". Once you go there, everything is clear and the site is loaded with information. Ilford on the other hand has a much clearer website.

 

[AgX]

But for a company that founded on film and still offers it, it is a shame.
Motion picture products are easier to find. By the way, that part of their site is really great.

Please, don't see this as any general Kodak bashing attitude, but this aspect puzzles me for quite some time.

 

[DLawson]

IMHO, it's a case of unclear navigation. You need to go to the "All Kodak Products & Services" menu, click "Pro photographer/Lab", then click on "Professional products". Once you go there, everything is clear and the site is loaded with information.

Hiding it that deeply is why I conclude that Kodak has given up on film as a future thing. Film is nearly invisible on any part of the site that a consumer would have reason to look at. No newcomers today guarantees no users tomorrow.

They don't even list 120 anywhere (that I can find) in the consumer section, that despite the fact that the Lomo/Holga/etc. thing is the most talked about trend in the consumer film world.

They seem to sell film as if they are prohibited from canceling it, like some legacy support contract.

Maybe their interaction with professional film photography is more enthusiastic. I can't say, as that isn't my world.

 

[Bosaiya]

I got the following from a FujiFilm USA rep a while back when trying to find out if it was possible to do a special run of Neopan in sheet film sizes. Not that it is directly related to this discussion, but just as an informational post that is perhaps a bit more on topic than who will be the last man standing.

"We will not be making NEO 400 4x5. That’s an easy one – we do not do special requests for film like this in the USA. You would have to source it from some international source and see if it even exists as an export item….there are several large format clubs who know where to buy from.

Good luck with the quest to get that one – but know we DO have Acros 100 4x5."

 

[Anon Ymous]

Hiding it that deeply is why I conclude that Kodak has given up on film as a future thing. Film is nearly invisible on any part of the site that a consumer would have reason to look at. No newcomers today guarantees no users tomorrow.

I find it hard to believe that a company that has released Ektar 100 and TMY2 doesn't believe in film. It is rather irksome though that you have to dig that deep.

They don't even list 120 anywhere (that I can find) in the consumer section, that despite the fact that the Lomo/Holga/etc. thing is the most talked about trend in the consumer film world.

They don't have any consumer films in 120, so why list any? And please, the Lomo/Holga thing is way too overrated.

They seem to sell film as if they are prohibited from canceling it, like some legacy support contract.

They sell film because they make money from it, just like any other manufacturer. As long as it's profitable, they'll do it.

Maybe their interaction with professional film photography is more enthusiastic. I can't say, as that isn't my world.

Do you use any Tri-X? It's regarded "Pro" film by Kodak. Unless you only use the Gold/Superia kind of films, you certainly use some "pro" film.

 

[DLawson]

Do you use any Tri-X? It's regarded "Pro" film by Kodak. Unless you only use the Gold/Superia kind of films, you certainly use some "pro" film.

Nope. Haven't used Tri-X in about 30 years.

I used Kodak B&W paper, but they stopped selling it. I've used Kodak chemistry almost exclusively, but they just discontinued my current developer.

See, the *marketing* thing is that Kodak (judging by the web site) only wants to sell their films to people who self-identify as professional. I am not a professional. I just play with some things that professionals use. When I was shooting Tri-X, I bought it at a drug store -- professional only, give me a break.

The Ilford/Harmon site doesn't send the message, "If you are professional, come buy our stuff." It says, "Here's what we have for you to use." I'm disappointed that Kodak doesn't say the same.

In the warm, fuzzy, historical parts of my mind, Kodak *is* photography.
But their marketing suggests that they see themselves as inkjet printers.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Equal opportunities marketing? I don't think it is beyond reason to browse over to the "professional" section of the Kodak website. There is no prohibition against buying a 20-pack brick of Kodak Portra 400VC, you don't have to show your invoices...


Tom

 

[bill schwab]

Kodak blow hot & cold giving very contrary signals, that must make the stock markets nervous as well as committed film photographers.

I'd like to think I'm as committed as the next film shooter and go through a lot of film per year. Nothing but Tri-X. Am I nervous? Not a bit. Worrying about "signals" from companies and false, alarmist statements from the self proclaimed only gets in the way of shooting the stuff IMO.

 

[Ian Grant]

I'd like to think I'm as committed as the next film shooter and go through a lot of film per year. Nothing but Tri-X. Am I nervous? Not a bit. Worrying about "signals" from companies and false, alarmist statements from the self proclaimed only gets in the way of shooting the stuff IMO.

If I was in the US or Canada I'm sure I'd still be using Tmax films. In my case it's a matter of perspective from a different part of the world where Kodak seem to be disappearing faster while Ilford remain and Foma has come from relative obscurity.

In fact the shareholders got nervous a long time ago and Kodak shares are at a very low level. It's not the committed photographers like you, me and many others here on APUG who read the wrong signals. It's the wavers and to some extent some dealers/photo shops.

Some things very wrong in the whole photo market place when I can walk into a studio/lab with a TLR and get asked if 120 film is still available.

It's little things like film not being found easily on the Kodak website that add up to give others the wrong impressions, and yet Kodak have handled the withdrawal of Kodachrome extremely well, and introduced new films, and support ULF.

It's not just Kodak, there's a need for a push across the whole industry to say film's here to stay. In some countries it's almost gone already, the saving grace is the internet which makes buying from abroad so much easier.

We as film users, printers etc have to play a part in reviving interest regardless of whether it's in Kodak, Ilford, Fuji, Foma or Fotoimpex (Adox) materials

Ian

 

[BrianShaw]

...that despite the fact that the Lomo/Holga/etc. thing is the most talked about trend in the consumer film world.

... and all this time I thought "street" was the big trend in the consumer film world, and as the Unknown Greek might say... "street", too, is over-rated.

 

[DLawson]

... and all this time I thought "street" was the big trend in the consumer film world, and as the Unknown Greek might say... "street", too, is over-rated.

Since that's been used twice now, I'll ask, "over-rated" how?
Is a sale not a sale?

Kodak only seems to want to sell film to current film customers. Typically, that is a "ramping down" behavior. If that isn't what they intend, then they have a PR/marketing problem.

 

[BrianShaw]

Since that's been used twice now, I'll ask, "over-rated" how?
Is a sale not a sale?

Kodak only seems to want to sell film to current film customers. Typically, that is a "ramping down" behavior. If that isn't what they intend, then they have a PR/marketing problem.

I can only address one instance of the use of the term "over-rated" and will let Anon speak for his/her usage of that term. What I mean is that I don't find most street or lomo photography to be visually appealing. Call me a bore, but I can't get into either of them very much.

In terms of sales... I don't know that there are a significant amount of either lomo or street photography sales, but it is very true that a sale is a sale.

Unfortunately I totally agree with your assessment of Kodak. That is unfortunate only because I wish it were not true, not because you said it!

 

[Anon Ymous]

Since that's been used twice now, I'll ask, "over-rated" how?
Is a sale not a sale?

Kodak only seems to want to sell film to current film customers. Typically, that is a "ramping down" behavior. If that isn't what they intend, then they have a PR/marketing problem.

(it's getting off-topic, but what the hell...)

I find "lomography" overrated because:
a) I don't find it appealing either. Maybe I'm a bore too
b) I have the impression that they're a rather noisy minority compared to regular users.
c) For every photograph I have seen that was shot with a Lomo/Holga there are probably 3 or more times more that were shot with whatever d*****l camera and tweaked in PS. All that cliché vignetting, blur, weird colors etc...

Anyway, since you mentioned sales, don't forget that Kodak promoted film by sending free expired stuff recently. Why should they bother doing so if they didn't believe in selling it?

 

[Tom Kershaw]

If someone is interested in film I'd have thought that they can work out how to buy it unless they are incredibly ditzy. For example, even if they're not familiar with an analogue specialist like Freestyle in the USA or Silverprint here in the UK, places like Calumet and B&H have reasonable general visibility from what I can make out.

Tom

 

[bill schwab]

Some things very wrong in the whole photo market place when I can walk into a studio/lab with a TLR and get asked if 120 film is still available.

This does not surprise me, nor would I take it as a sign of doom. I used to work in labs and in some I could count on one finger those that had any real knowledge of photography, films or their availability beyond how it impacted their specific task. Today much of the lab tasks anywhere are digital and I wouldn't expect the 20 year-old person working in them to have any real knowledge of film at all. Sad, but I am a realist.

However, I can still buy all the film I need to do the job I need to do. Can I walk into the corner drugstore to do so? No. But then again, I never could. I've always had to go to specialty stores or mail order for that and I've had film shipped to locations all over the map without a problem.

It's little things like film not being found easily on the Kodak website that add up to give others the wrong impressions...

I don't know, I would think it easy for anyone with a knowledge of computers and website navagation to find it. Go to www.kodak.com -> click on "All Kodak Products and Services" and follow alphabetical order to "Pro Photographer/Lab" and voilà! I was there in 5 seconds.

If you ask me I think a lot of the wrong impression problem comes from armchair experts contributing to the illusion that Kodak is somehow forgetting about film. Turning threads devoted to what's good about one company into what is "bad" about another doesn't help and it seems some talk only to be heard and not from facts. I'm sorry, but it seems there is a lot of this thing going on around here and it is taking away from the experience for me. Maybe it has all along and I too should be doing and not talking. Perhaps I'm just busy these days, but I find it amazing that people can spend so much time going on and on about minutia in here, when they should really be out there shooting film. That, above all is what is going to keep these companies supplying us. Film photography is never going to be what it once was. Get over it and get on with it.

We as film users, printers etc have to play a part in reviving interest....

Bravo... then get out there and do it.

Anyway... Good on Fuji!

 

[PeteZ8]

Kodak only seems to want to sell film to current film customers. Typically, that is a "ramping down" behavior. If that isn't what they intend, then they have a PR/marketing problem.

Sadly, that is exactly how I have viewed their website recently as well.

Kind of like, "Yeah, we have it, you will find it if you are looking for it, but don't tell anybody".

And I don't particularly see the release of two new films as anything special. They have killed a few recently as well, in case nobody noticed. The new films have probably been in the pipe for some time anyway. Having been in manufacturing as long as I have, I have a pretty good understanding of how product cycles do not always relate to the future actions of a company.

I'm not a doom and gloomer but a realist. I don't see Kodak maintaining a huge commitment to film in the future, and for obvious market driven reasons. Companies like Ilford, who are smaller and more capable of working within a niche market, will continue the legacy for some time. And Fuji will hopefully be there as well as they currently fill several important voids. I don't think Kodak is going to abandon their chemical herritage completely but it will be a small, and very market driven, section of their business.

Smaller niche markets are the terratory of small, agile, lean, singularly focused companies (Ilford, etc) that can quickly respond and adapt to changing conditions, not megacorps like Kodak who have their hands in everything and tend to only focus on core products. Fuji may be an exception to some degree however. I've found Japanese companies are very good at micromanaging smaller sections of their brands.

 

[wogster]

I don't know, I would think it easy for anyone with a knowledge of computers and website navagation to find it. Go to www.kodak.com -> click on "All Kodak Products and Services" and follow alphabetical order to "Pro Photographer/Lab" and voilà! I was there in 5 seconds.

Personally I wonder why they don't under Consumer film have at least a link to the Professional B&W film products. The key in website design is to make it easy to find ALL your products, without needing to really know anything about the site itself.

The largest market for B&W products is probably the hobby photographer and the artist, neither of which is often a professional photographer. What is interesting though is that Professional BW400CN is listed under consumer 35mm print films.

 

[dynachrome]

I stocked up on Ilford powdered chemistry a few years ago when they had their last near death experience. I like Microphen for several films but if it is used full strength and discarded, it's an expensive developer. In the US we can get Clayton F60 and NACCO SUper 76 (at least I think we can still get the NACCO products). These are liquid concentrates which are economical to use and which give results similar to what I get from Microphen. There is also still HC-110. A few years ago I used a quart of Microphen to develop quite a few rolls. Rather than dilute it and extend the times for one shot use I used it undiluted and the reused it, increasing the time for each roll. The results were very good and I think I may try it again. At this point I am tempted to stockpile some Microdol-X before none is available. Now that the leaves have mostly fallen off the trees I think I will concentrate on b&w for a while, at least in 120.