Kodak Alaris finally sold to chinese?

Pricing can vary between suppliers, but the Kodak C-41 chemistry is available "off the shelf" here in the UK.

I'm sure no one here knows the answer to this question. Who owns the "recipe" to the still films produced by The Eastman Kodak Co.? If Alaris owns the exclusive global distribution rights, do they have detailed documentation on how to produce the traditional Kodak still films at a site of their choosing?

In spite of the problems when the Rochester works outsourced 120 backing paper, the equation for me, in a very personal way, would change if Kodak branded films were not made by the team in Rochester, NY, USA.

I love Ilford and Foma products so I wouldn't have a problem with black and white, I have shot Fujichrome films for years before the demise of Kodak's reversal films, (I have been shooting the new Ektachrome in 120 and 35mm, an outstanding film). TMY has been my standard film for years, I have started shooting more FP4 Plus, which is a wonderful film.

I love Portra and Ektar color negative films, I don't shoot a lot of color negative, when I do I print it on Fuji Crystal Archive paper, with Kodak chemistry.

Bottom line is Eastman Kodak obligated to share details of the formulas and the production process of making film to Alaris or their successors?

I hope I have worded this right, I've been a customer of Kodak since I was a child. When someone says it's a good thing that the Kodak Harrow plant is gone and the product and production moved to China, it's hard for me to understand.

I'm not trying to start a discussion that gets moved to the Soapbox, not looking for a political argument at all. I would just like to know what's what?

ludwighagelstein said:

GFH in Munich sell it, though I think B2B only. http://gfh-foto.de/shop/labor/fotopapier/kodak-colorpapier-display-material.html If in doubt, just give them a call, they are super helpful and I doubt they wouldn´t sell you paper if you asked.

Click to expand...

Yes, I think I found their website when searching for it in the past. But as you say B2B. Two years ago when I needed some starter another member here got in touch with me and we could both get our chemicals through a commercial photographer friend of his. I didn't know they are in Munich. Perhaps I will call when I will need more supply in the future. At the moment I still have quite some.

Tom Kershaw said:

Pricing can vary between suppliers, but the Kodak C-41 chemistry is available "off the shelf" here in the UK.

Click to expand...

That is where I got my chemicals and my roll of Kodak Endura Premier from. Ag-Photographic, I believe. Super helpful staff, when I had a problem with an order, once. But this route may effectively become shut, now. Especially for chemicals, which are potentially more trouble than other goods when shipping international.

Ag-Photographic, as an example, would have to register for VAT in an EU country if they wanted to collect VAT in advance. And prepare the customs paper work. It can be done, however, if they don't want to or it's not worthwhile for them, it means I have to deal with customs on this end. Including the likelihood of having to go to a regional customs office, when I'm supposed to be at work, to open it, calculate VAT and pay.

One of the big three analog online shops here actually offers these kind of 'commercial' grade products. But only Fuji. They used to offer Kodak paper, even sheets cut by them. But since the Tetenal crisis even Kodak paper rolls disappeard from their website. So I may switch to Fuji once all Kodak is used up. Fuji even has the advantage of offering a high replenishment rate C41 developer (the opposite of LORR) for low film throughput. Ideal for an amateur like me. But I'd still like to be able to buy the Kodak paper. I still have a lot left on my roll, but perhaps GFH will be flexible when the time comes...

mshchem said:

Bottom line is Eastman Kodak obligated to share details of the formulas and the production process of making film to Alaris or their successors?

Click to expand...

No - except to the extent that they affect marketing.
But they did work together closely when they brought back Ektachrome, because many of the issues that had to be dealt with related to the current practicalities for distribution - issues like storage and packaging and shipping.
And Kodak Alaris is, of course, the conduit for distributor feedback, which itself is a conduit for retailer and end user feedback.

and as we have been saying for years now. Kodak Knows how to make Tri-X in Building 38. even if someone else had all the documentation, they would not be able to make Tri-x if they did not have Building 38 or an exact duplicate.

the worrying part is of course that some future owner of the rights might start selling some other film, made elsewhere and CALL it Tri-x.

cmacd123 said:

and as we have been saying for years now. Kodak Knows how to make Tri-X in Building 38. even if someone else had all the documentation, they would not be able to make Tri-x if they did not have Building 38 or an exact duplicate.

the worrying part is of course that some future owner of the rights might start selling some other film, made elsewhere and CALL it Tri-x.

Click to expand...

They would need the people who run Building 38 too.
Eastman Kodak still owns the Tri-X trade-mark, so.....

mshchem said:

...Bottom line is Eastman Kodak obligated to share details of the formulas and the production process of making film to Alaris or their successors?...

Click to expand...

MattKing said:

No - except to the extent that they affect marketing...

Click to expand...

MattKing said:

...Eastman Kodak still owns the Tri-X trade-mark...

Click to expand...

But what rights to use that trademark were assigned to Kodak Alaris?

In this type of discussion I often post that "those who know aren't talking and those who are talking don't know." Matt, the certainty exhibited in your responses is surprising. Are you violating an NDA? Did someone else violate an NDA by sharing these things with you? Inquiring alleged mind wants to know.

MattKing said:

They would need the people who run Building 38 too.
Eastman Kodak still owns the Tri-X trade-mark, so.....

Click to expand...

Thanks for the info. And yes the magic that happens in Building 38, and the supporting suppliers, is not necessarily transferable.
Look at the attempts at recreating Polaroid, it's clearly not even close. (Isn't the Fuji Instax a derivative of Kodak's instant film program???)
Today I received a Propack of Portra 160 135-36 and I continue to see the prominent Kodak logo, and labeled Eastman Kodak Company, the web address in fine print is Kodakalaris.com

I can't help but worry about Eastman Kodak and our precious still films.

Sal Santamaura said:

But what rights to use that trademark were assigned to Kodak Alaris?

In this type of discussion I often post that "those who know aren't talking and those who are talking don't know." Matt, the certainty exhibited in your responses is surprising. Are you violating an NDA? Did someone else violate an NDA by sharing these things with you? Inquiring alleged mind wants to know.

Click to expand...

NDA, didn't a certain Playboy model have one of those? I've signed NDA's most of the information is public now.

MattKing said:

They would need the people who run Building 38 too.
Eastman Kodak still owns the Tri-X trade-mark, so.....

Click to expand...

Not sure on the trademark, Alaris has the rights to market the film, and the exclusive rights to use the trademark. depending on how clever the Kodak lawyers were, they may or may not be able to "recall" the trademark if the business was sold. Remember the sad case of "Agfa Photo"

Sal Santamaura said:

Matt, the certainty exhibited in your responses is surprising. Are you violating an NDA? Did someone else violate an NDA by sharing these things with you? Inquiring alleged mind wants to know

Click to expand...

I don't think there are any violations here.
The nature of the arrangement between the two entities is quite public, because it had to go through the bankruptcy courts.
The day to day arrangements are confidential.
Remember that all of the film, chemicals and colour paper marketing resources owned by Eastman Kodak and its international subsidiaries - by that I mean mainly the employees - were either let go or, in most cases, hired by Kodak Alaris.
Kodak Alaris licences the trademarks for the products that they market from Eastman Kodak, who retain ownership of those trade marks.

MattKing said:

I don't think there are any violations here.
The nature of the arrangement between the two entities is quite public, because it had to go through the bankruptcy courts.
The day to day arrangements are confidential.
Remember that all of the film, chemicals and colour paper marketing resources owned by Eastman Kodak and its international subsidiaries - by that I mean mainly the employees - were either let go or, in most cases, hired by Kodak Alaris.
Kodak Alaris licences the trademarks for the products that they market from Eastman Kodak, who retain ownership of those trade marks.

Click to expand...

In the end, the issue with trademarks etc. is a non issue, really. EKC make the film and will continue to do so. Alaris distribute it because KPP1 (now KPP2) bought EKC´s FPP business (Document and Personal Imaging back then) 2013 for a laughably low price as part of an agreement that got EKC rid of almost 2.5 billion Dollars in EU Kodak Pensions. While EKC and Alaris are two seperate companies they cooperate very closely and have a good relationship and supply etc. are contractually secured. Worrying about things like trademarks or someonelese making TriX or Portra is just wasted brain capacity. There is no imminent threat to supply and neither is there a reason to assume so for the forseeable future, quite to the contrary, actually.

mshchem said:

I'm sure no one here knows the answer to this question. Who owns the "recipe" to the still films produced by The Eastman Kodak Co.? If Alaris owns the exclusive global distribution rights, do they have detailed documentation on how to produce the traditional Kodak still films at a site of their choosing? In spite of the problems when the Rochester works outsourced 120 backing paper, the equation for me, in a very personal way, would change if Kodak branded films were not made by the team in Rochester, NY, USA.I love Ilford and Foma products so I wouldn't have a problem with black and white, I have shot Fujichrome films for years before the demise of Kodak's reversal films, (I have been shooting the new Ektachrome in 120 and 35mm, an outstanding film). TMY has been my standard film for years, I have started shooting more FP4 Plus, which is a wonderful film.I love Portra and Ektar color negative films, I don't shoot a lot of color negative, when I do I print it on Fuji Crystal Archive paper, with Kodak chemistry.
Bottom line is Eastman Kodak obligated to share details of the formulas and the production process of making film to Alaris or their successors? I hope I have worded this right, I've been a customer of Kodak since I was a child. When someone says it's a good thing that the Kodak Harrow plant is gone and the product and production moved to China, it's hard for me to understand.I'm not trying to start a discussion that gets moved to the Soapbox, not looking for a political argument at all. I would just like to know what's what?

Click to expand...

You worry about the wrong things. EKC produce the film and because the complexity involved in making the emulsions and coating them to the current standard, simply licencing production away is impossible without a huge investment in time, money and manpower. It would neither make sense, nor be feasible. Even if someone like Innoviscoat had the exact recipe, or even premade Emulsion, it would still be extremely complicated to just coat it in a different plant on a different machine with different personell. EKC have invested heavily in updating equipment recently and while I cant go into detail, in the long run this will make it a lot easier for everone involved.

The real threat to color negative film is the cinema industry. Should they decide to stop using film in the longrun, it´s game over, because cinefilm production subsidizes still film production to an extent, or to put it in better terms, creates the necessary volumes to keep the machines running efficiently and thus create an environment where still CN and CR film can be coated and converted in an economically viable manner. But even there I see no imminent threat, since again, contracts are in place ensuring supply and prodcution for years to come. Even if EKC should fail as a business, someone else will acquire the film coating business because it´s profitable. To some extent, that may even be a good thing, because another company could operate the business free of the enormous rat´s tail still left by the EKC chapter 11 in 2012.

The bottom line is: Don´t worry about the mechanisms behind it, they´re in place and that for a reason.

To answer the China issue: I didn´t say Harrow being gone is a good thing. Harrow had to close because Fuji monopolized the market through extremely agressive business policies and Harrow being the largest silver halide paper production line ever built could not keep operating for that reason. The paper business being operated by Sino now bears the chance, that without the constraints Kodak Alaris has due to the KPP obligations, they can actually compete against Fuji in the paper market again, because there is real money to be made. That´s the good thing. Silverhalide is a viable and profitable business. Again, as I said in another post, EKC manufacture all exposable materials sold under the Kodak name. Distribution and sales are another thing. Just because two stores sell eggs, they´re the same eggs provided they come from the same hen and thus taste the same.

It´s my job to have an overview about these things and write about it, and I have both professional and personal relationships with the people involved. I communicate what I feel should be communicated, that can´t necessarily be communicated by the people directly involved, but I cant say much more in the end than "don´t worry and wait, because good things come to those who do."

ludwighagelstein said:

The real threat to color negative film is the cinema industry. Should they decide to stop using film in the longrun, it´s game over, because cinefilm production subsidizes still film production to an extent, or to put it in better terms, creates the necessary volumes to keep the machines running efficiently and thus create an environment where still CN and CR film can be coated and converted in an economically viable manner. But even there I see no imminent threat, since again, contracts are in place ensuring supply and prodcution for years to come. Even if EKC should fail as a business, someone else will acquire the film coating business because it´s profitable. To some extent, that may even be a good thing, because another company could operate the business free of the enormous rat´s tail still left by the EKC chapter 11 in 2012.

Click to expand...

This is, IMHO, a very important, and totally ignored, topic of our times. The fact that people (and most importantly politicians) tend to panic when it comes to bankruptcies. Be it Banks, large corps or Kodak. It is an important economic revitalisation process in a market economy. Companies go away, their assets/business not necessarily. They can be passed on and flourish without the deadweight of old debt. It's not automatically so, but it can be done and is being done.

Sadly for us, when Kodak went into Chapter 11 back then I guess the film business might not have been saved (bought out) upon a complete liquidation and wind down. It was scaled for a huge volume and that market was gone. And worse, everyone not just assumed, but 'knew' that film is dead. And from the (economic) point of view of the 'golden days' it is. But at this point it is very viable again, and I'm sure someone would want those assets in case Kodak went belly up. Otherwise money were to be left on the table.

Your note about the importance of cine film should be obvious to everyone here. And I think it is the same with Fuji and Instax. And still I've read pessimistic comments about Fuji and the economic security of their coating facility. Even that they supposedly made large final runs of various emulsions and are only finishing and selling frozen stock. Maybe that happened to a few emulsions if they had had multiple coating facilities and wound them down to what ever is left now, making the current portfolio. I'm sure the current facility is 'paid' for by Instax production alone. As a benefit Fuji can afford their little hobby of continuing to coat their other films.

Just like at Kodak, the only limiting factor is most likely the minimum quantity of a coating event. Say if they had to coat 2x the amount of Velvia 50 master rolls than they will sell before it is degraded we'd have to buy one roll but pay for two. I'd say Fujicolor C200 is safe, at the very least.

mshchem said:

....Bottom line is Eastman Kodak obligated to share details of the formulas and the production process of making film to Alaris or their successors?...

Click to expand...

MattKing said:

No - except to the extent that they affect marketing...

Click to expand...

MattKing said:

...Eastman Kodak still owns the Tri-X trade-mark, so.....

Click to expand...

Sal Santamaura said:

But what rights to use that trademark were assigned to Kodak Alaris?

In this type of discussion I often post that "those who know aren't talking and those who are talking don't know." Matt, the certainty exhibited in your responses is surprising. Are you violating an NDA? Did someone else violate an NDA by sharing these things with you? Inquiring alleged mind wants to know.

Click to expand...

MattKing said:

...The nature of the arrangement between the two entities is quite public, because it had to go through the bankruptcy courts.
The day to day arrangements are confidential...

Click to expand...

We've all read about the general nature of Kodak Alaris' agreement with Eastman Kodak. However, questions about the specifics have always been met by complete silence.

MattKing said:

...Remember that all of the film, chemicals and colour paper marketing resources owned by Eastman Kodak and its international subsidiaries - by that I mean mainly the employees - were either let go or, in most cases, hired by Kodak Alaris...

Click to expand...

Yes, that much was clear from publicly available information.

MattKing said:

...Kodak Alaris licences the trademarks for the products that they market from Eastman Kodak, who retain ownership of those trade marks.

Click to expand...

Have you performed a detailed review of the bankruptcy documents to establish that? I haven't and don't know for sure.

None of this reveals what happens if Eastman Kodak goes bankrupt again, files under Chapter 7 and liquidates. Does its agreement with Kodak Alaris grant a first right of refusal to purchase Bldg. 38, the film manufacturing IP and related items? If so, is completing such a purchase viable for Alaris? Or any other entity? In this situation, do the trademarks revert to Alaris or must they be sold to Alaris at a specified price as part of the agreement? If Alaris obtains rights to the tradmarks, and Eastman Kodak liquidates, is Alaris free to source film from another manufacturer (Lucky? ), label it "TRI-X" and carry on with "the Kodak tradition?" Mike's inquiry about whether Eastman Kodak is obligated to share details of the formulas and the production process of making film, much less Bldg. 38's physical plant, might be completely moot.

Those are just some unknowns about the Eastman Kodak - Kodak Alaris agreement that are hidden from anyone not involved in it.

If Eastman Kodak goes under and the Building 38 production isn't retained in something close to its current incarnation, it won't matter who has the right to use the name Kodak or Tri-X - the film products will be no more.
Any replacements, no matter how labelled, will be different.
And those replacements, no matter how labelled, will need to be evaluated on their own terms.
A more interesting question is whether Eastman Kodak and Kodak Alaris can continue to modernize the production and products in a way to decouple their survival from the survival of the cine film market. That requires an evolution.
Eastman Kodak and its subsidiaries used to be able to make smaller quantities of product in multiple locations and make profits. Can those smaller production runs return?

Sounds like Alaris is having a couple of new products coming- won't say what they are (one relaunch, one new product). What it is not is Plus-X (nor Kodak Gold 120).

Listening to this: Analog Photography - Fireside Chat #1 (SilverGrain Classics)
Andrew Church Kodak Alaris EMEA (plus other guests)

markjwyatt said:

Sounds like Alaris is having a couple of new products coming- won't say what they are (one relaunch, one new product). What it is not is Plus-X (nor Kodak Gold 120).

Click to expand...

Panatomic-X ?

markjwyatt said:

Sounds like Alaris is having a couple of new products coming- won't say what they are (one relaunch, one new product). What it is not is Plus-X (nor Kodak Gold 120).

Listening to this: Analog Photography - Fireside Chat #1 (SilverGrain Classics)
Andrew Church Kodak Alaris EMEA (plus other guests)

Click to expand...

B&W paper?

markjwyatt said:

Sounds like Alaris is having a couple of new products coming- won't say what they are (one relaunch, one new product). What it is not is Plus-X (nor Kodak Gold 120).

Listening to this: Analog Photography - Fireside Chat #1 (SilverGrain Classics)
Andrew Church Kodak Alaris EMEA (plus other guests)

Click to expand...

Does anyone know if the "chat" will be archived or transcribed? I can't have it on at the moment.

miha said:

B&W paper?

Click to expand...

Wouldn't that be Sino Promise now? He would not give any other clues. I excluded Plus-X and Kodacolor 200 because he said no to other questions regarding that. He said he could not rule out Plus-X for the future, but put forth TMax 100...

MattKing said:

Does anyone know if the "chat" will be archived or transcribed? I can't have it on at the moment.

Click to expand...

I do not know, but I noticed it was being recorded.

markjwyatt said:

Wouldn't that be Sino Promise now? He would not give any other clues. I excluded Plus-X and Kodacolor 200 because he said no to other questions regarding that. He said he could not rule out Plus-X for the future, but put forth TMax 100...

Click to expand...

Thanks!

MattKing said:

If Eastman Kodak goes under and the Building 38 production isn't retained in something close to its current incarnation, it won't matter who has the right to use the name Kodak or Tri-X - the film products will be no more.
Any replacements, no matter how labelled, will be different.
And those replacements, no matter how labelled, will need to be evaluated on their own terms.
A more interesting question is whether Eastman Kodak and Kodak Alaris can continue to modernize the production and products in a way to decouple their survival from the survival of the cine film market. That requires an evolution.
Eastman Kodak and its subsidiaries used to be able to make smaller quantities of product in multiple locations and make profits. Can those smaller production runs return?

Click to expand...

Thank you Matt! This is the FACT. If you start out with the same raw materials, doesn't mean you can make a Stradivarius. Without the Stadivari there to make the magic happen you might end up with a ukulele!
We see how well Germany under the thumb of the Soviet Union performed.
I find myself wanting to stray into an argument. So I wish everyone happy new year.

markjwyatt said:

Wouldn't that be Sino Promise now? He would not give any other clues. I excluded Plus-X and Kodacolor 200 because he said no to other questions regarding that. He said he could not rule out Plus-X for the future, but put forth TMax 100...

Click to expand...

HIE,
Ain't speculation grand?
But while in no way certain, it isn't idle speculation.

The zoom meeting did not really off anything other than what is said on this website. As the pandemic winds down and we get more certainty the content will hopefully get better.