Kodak Alaris responses and dispatches

RattyMouse · May 22, 2014

Roger Cole said:
Ok, touche. But I remember when they didn't have that either, so I guess I wasn't thinking of it.

Ilford makes a very good one though, and it's available in 120. Love me some Delta 3200 and I shoot a LOT of it.

I've got a brick of Delta 3200 and a liter of DD-X and priority number 1 is getting to know this film developer combination.

RattyMouse · May 22, 2014

PeterB said:
KA's claims of wanting to be innovative are contradicted by their claim that "no improvements are necessary" (to the existing film portfolio)

Here are the details:

RG: Appreciate the question, Peter. My passions include driving long-term growth by way of innovation, empowerment, and accountability. And those passions are behind everything I want to do for Kodak Alaris and our customers to enable success for all.

Samuel Davis: Is research and development into new/improved emulsions continuing, or is Kodak Alaris sticking to the emulsions it already has?

RG:Our current product portfolio delivers the very best films available in the world today. In fact, these are the best films that the company has ever produced. No improvements are necessary.

That's a case where the "truth" slipped out. I bet he wishes he could recall that line. KA has no interest in promoting film for the future.

eclarke · May 22, 2014

Film companies, camera companies and camera retailers all missed opportunities by jumping on the digital bandwagon. Selling digital stuff was easy. The entire industry decided to take a stand and promote only digital. Selling digital stuff was easy. The internet came along and now digital prevails, customers no longer need to visit the store to buy film, have it developed, buy prints or browse the other merchandise while they're there. Kodak is no longer one of the thirty DJI companies. Film and digital photography could have been actively promoted at the same time, much like sporting goods stores promote golf and softball at the same time. Many many people are interested in both at the same time.

removed account4 · May 22, 2014

NedL said:
I haven't noticed a Kodak representative here interacting with APUG members.

they are undercover and don't reveal themselves

removed account4 · May 22, 2014

Michael R 1974 said:
Sorry, I really don't understand the constant repetition of this "Kodak needs to be on APUG" thing. To what end? What exactly will that do? Get 2 more people already using film to try some Tri-X, and then say it sucks because they developed it in urinol and used 20 year old fixer? Or are you expecting it to help Kodak when the wackjobs start bugging them for special orders and other idiot ideas?

Enough of this. They currently offer a selection of the finest films and chemicals. Just use them if you like them.

michael

dude,
thats PEEro, not urniol ...

urinol would give excessive fog due to the chelating agents
PEEro doesn't have as many chelating agents but usually
there are other additives .. it also depends on the quantity and quality of DHMO
it is being used with, and what the user had for breakfast

:munch:

pen s · May 22, 2014

Just went to B&H site and see that Tri-X in 100ft. bulk has increased to $100 and at this moment is more expensive than buying 20 rolls of TX-135-36

I suppose this won't last long and the pre-spooled TX will go up in price soon. It seems to me that film will eventually just be priced into oblivion. There may be a fairly large community of film users, even those who came to photography in the digital age. But I am feeling the pinch and cannot be the only one on these forums in that situtation.

omaha · May 22, 2014

PeterB said:
KA's claims of wanting to be innovative are contradicted by their claim that "no improvements are necessary" (to the existing film portfolio)

Yep.

When they talk about innovation, they aren't talking about film.

For color films, we are at the end of history. Maybe the current formulations survive, maybe they don't. But I don't see any chance that any company makes the decision to invest in the research to come up with something new and innovative from here.

Personally, I suppose I can live with that. Portra and Ektar do what I need them to do. I'll continue to build up my freezer stock while I can (the next few years?) and go from there.

Makes me think about the Seinfeld "spongeworthy" episode. I suppose the day is coming when I'll be deciding if a particular shoot is "filmworthy".

And honestly, this whole situation makes me wonder what the hell I was thinking when I re-engaged with film last year. Alas. The answer, if there is one, is that shooting film is so much more engaging for me, and the results are so much more satisfying. There is just so much more to think about and plan and understand. Even if I stopped shooting film tomorrow, this past year has really made me better...knocking the rust off of 20 and 30 year old skills.

The one tangible thing I've started doing is to shoot film for at least one scene for each client. It puts a lot of pressure on me, since inevitably the client is going to think "hmmm....this must be something special" for the film shots. My purpose is partly selfish (I just enjoy it more) and partly evangelical (I want people to know that film still exists and is still being used), but mostly artistic: I like the result better.

Who knows if that is accomplishing anything, but I enjoy it.

RattyMouse · May 22, 2014

Michael R 1974 said:
Sorry, I really don't understand the constant repetition of this "Kodak needs to be on APUG" thing. To what end? What exactly will that do? Get 2 more people already using film to try some Tri-X, and then say it sucks because they developed it in urinol and used 20 year old fixer? Or are you expecting it to help Kodak when the wackjobs start bugging them for special orders and other idiot ideas?

Enough of this. They currently offer a selection of the finest films and chemicals. Just use them if you like them.

Seems pretty clear to me. Kodak continually disappoints their customers, Ilford does not. Simple.

Xmas · May 22, 2014

Michael R 1974 said:
How does Kodak disappoint their customers, exactly? By not wasting time on APUG entertaining brilliant ideas like a special order of triangular shaped sheets of cine film?

They've never disappointed me. Not even close. They sell me top quality products like TMX, TMY-2, XTOL, Dektol etc. I can't say that about many companies these days, photographic or otherwise. Ilford also makes excellent products which I use alongside Kodak.

What the hell do you people expect?

Hi Michael

Bulk Trix same price as bulk HP5+ would be nice otherwise no sale a factor of x2 (in UK) seems outlandish.

If KA want to sell film they don't need to be on APUG they need to be in resellers shops monitoring/promoting sales?

But don't worry I've never bought Trix cept in 220 when it was last man standing.

I've still about 50 rolls left. Just another 400 ISO film to me.

Noel

pentaxuser · May 22, 2014

What intrigues me is how Ilford's "emotional attachment" to film somehow appears to free it from normal commercial considerations compared to Kodak Alaris. It is almost as if Kodak Alaris is strictly governed by its hard-nosed approach to business and deserves to be treated accordingly by we film users but Ilford's "kindness/ folksiness/ empathy with our need to feel loved" deserves our support.

Ilford is a fine company, looks after its customers and produces a great range of films but let's not imagine it does this out of the kindness of its heart. It cannot afford to.

It is governed by the same considerations as any other commercial establishment. It had to downsize a few years ago by, I think, about 80 employees following the post 2008 economic downturn.

I am sure it didn't want to and was sorry to have to dismiss those employees but it did it nonetheless because it had to.

It is almost as if Ilford has the monopoly on all the nice, folksy genes and somehow Kodak was at the back of the queue when such genes were given out

Isn't that the way the world works in Disney films only?

pentaxuser

pdeeh · May 22, 2014

Does that make Perez Cruella Deville, Gerbershagen Jafar and Simon R. Galley Simba ?

Wallendo · May 22, 2014

The take-home point for me is that "Kodak Alaris" is not "Kodak". KA is company that has the exclusive rights to resell Eastman Kodak films, and has the right to use Kodak's Trademarks. In this sense, KA has more in common with Freestyle and its Arista brand, than Ilford. KA is not a film research and manufacturing company.

Eastman Kodak will continue to manufacture film as long as anyone will buy it at profitable prices. IF EK could make money manufacturing Kodachrome. they would do so.

There will be no new "Kodak" films, but I am not aware of any new Fuji formulations, either. In fact, Fuji seems to just be quietly and slowly fading into the sunset.

Is Ilford introducing new films? They seem to have a fairly broad established line-up as it is.

Film will survive, at least in black and white, for a long time. The winners will be those companies that can produce modest amounts of film at reasonable cost. I don't think EK or Fuji is equipped to make small runs profitably in the long run.

It would be nice if KA would be able to have film manufactured by others of EK's formulas and standards after EK stops production. But, I'm not holding my breath.

Snapshot · May 22, 2014

Michael R 1974 said:
How does Kodak disappoint their customers, exactly? By not wasting time on APUG entertaining brilliant ideas like a special order of triangular shaped sheets of cine film?

They've never disappointed me. Not even close. They sell me top quality products like TMX, TMY-2, XTOL, Dektol etc. I can't say that about many companies these days, photographic or otherwise. Ilford also makes excellent products which I use alongside Kodak.

What the hell do you people expect?

I think people are looking for a firmer commitment to the future of film. The CEO of Alaris has gone on record saying...

We will continue the film business as long as there's a profitable market out there. Film is still in demand. We're happy to provide this ... as long as it makes sense for us. And at the moment it makes sense for us.

No exacting inspiring or reassuring and certainly doesn't motivate customers to invest time and money into their products. Consequently, this sort of stance disconnects the confidence or loyalty client may have in the product lines. Simply providing a technically superior product at the moment isn't enough.

Snapshot · May 22, 2014

pentaxuser said:
What intrigues me is how Ilford's "emotional attachment" to film somehow appears to free it from normal commercial considerations compared to Kodak Alaris. It is almost as if Kodak Alaris is strictly governed by its hard-nosed approach to business and deserves to be treated accordingly by we film users but Ilford's "kindness/ folksiness/ empathy with our need to feel loved" deserves our support.

Ilford is a fine company, looks after its customers and produces a great range of films but let's not imagine it does this out of the kindness of its heart. It cannot afford to.

Business is about relationships. If you want to have a strictly indifferent mercantile approach to your client base, that's fine. However, successful companies generally engage their client base and, in effect, make evangelists of them. Given a choice between two comparable companies, give me the one that makes me feel good about doing business with them. Technical competence isn't enough, you must have relationship competence as well if you want to differentiate yourself. You may win my business but you won't win my loyalty.

fotch · May 22, 2014

Consumers dropped film, big time. Not all consumers, just most of them. I don't see it as it is (Kodak) their fault. Probably, long term, one should start thinking of being able to make their own film. That may mean sheet vs roll film. Its just the way it is. Progress!

Hatchetman · May 22, 2014

Snapshot said:
Business is about relationships.

Such a universal concept among people in business, yet judging from many comments here it seems that many customers don't care about a relationship.

"Just buy it, it's good film!!"

Snapshot · May 22, 2014

Hatchetman said:
Such a universal concept among people in business, yet judging from many comments here it seems that many customers don't care about a relationship.

"Just buy it, it's good film!!"

You raise a good point. It is good film and reciprosity in relationships are important. However, if as a business you appear to be indifferent to a client's long term needs, customers won't be apt to buy or support your product. I bet most of the people here at APUG are enthusiasts and if given a little allegiance, they will respond in kind.

AgX · May 22, 2014

It takes two to tango.

kb3lms · May 22, 2014

Well, KA may want to make film as long as it makes sense for them, but if the current price of bulk Tri-X is any hint of their intentions, then it doesn't make much sense for me to buy it!

MattKing · May 22, 2014

Kodak Alaris does manufacture (or contract for manufacture) product - photographic paper and all those kiosks and the office scanners and such.

That is where they can offer innovation, and I expect we will see it.

Unless and until they control the source of film, I don't expect them to offer anything more than they already have.

If Eastman Kodak is their only source for manufacturing, and they don't have an enforceable long term supply commitment from EK, they really cannot promise what may not be in their control.

There may very well be discussions/plans/projects that will change that situation for the better. I don't expect to see a change in Kodak Alaris' responses unless that change happens.

MattKing · May 22, 2014

kb3lms said:
Well, KA may want to make film as long as it makes sense for them, but if the current price of bulk Tri-X is any hint of their intentions, then it doesn't make much sense for me to buy it!

As there are distributors between KA and the retailers, who knows whether it is KA's actions that are causing these price changes.

kb3lms · May 22, 2014

As there are distributors between KA and the retailers, who knows whether it is KA's actions that are causing these price changes.

Does it matter?

Xmas · May 22, 2014

kb3lms said:
Does it matter?

No when you at the cash till HP5+ bulk is cheaper than Trix bulk similar technology so...

If you make a large purchase of 5222 400 foot cans the 400 foot is only a little bit dearer than the 100 foot and is delivered to front door next day so...

KA is asleep?

But if film is only a small % of their bottom line and shrinking they either may not care or may not have staff to monitor.

Jim Taylor · May 22, 2014

“No improvements are necessary.”

To my mind this comment says it all - the mistakes of the past are sure to be repeated...

pentaxuser · May 22, 2014

Snapshot said:
I think people are looking for a firmer commitment to the future of film. The CEO of Alaris has gone on record saying...

We will continue the film business as long as there's a profitable market out there. Film is still in demand. We're happy to provide this ... as long as it makes sense for us. And at the moment it makes sense for us.

In a commercial world where profits have to be generated to continue production then surely this describes Ilford's position as well?

pentaxuser

Kodak Alaris responses and dispatches

RattyMouse

RattyMouse

eclarke

removed account4

removed account4

pen s

omaha

RattyMouse

Xmas

pentaxuser

pdeeh

Wallendo

Snapshot

Snapshot

fotch

Hatchetman

Snapshot

AgX

kb3lms

MattKing

Moderator

MattKing

Moderator

kb3lms

Xmas

Jim Taylor

pentaxuser

Kodak Alaris responses and dispatches

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency