Bad news...but it was not the digital revolution -although Kodak made the wrong decisions there- it was most likely stupid management that caused all this. Digi came up....but then downsizing a top heavy management layer is well nigh impossible. It is the blight of our world today. A pity Kodak is not a bank as in that case the tax payer would have been forced to pay for its shaky survival. Let's buy our film and chemicals and paper from companies that know the present-day market and are interested in their products and in their customers.
Hans
Actually, film *is* the segment that may go away.
Actually film is one of the areas in which Kodak makes money. While the Kodak board is perhaps the worst corporate board in the known world, if they were to drop one of the products that actually brought money into the company they would deserve an evil fate.
Kodak has some issues with the direction they have chosen--- from a film/camera company to a printer company. There are many divisions within Kodak that are still profitable, among them is the film and chemical groups. A restructuring of Kodak that may spin off these parts for us, users of the film and chemistry from Kodak would be the best thing. Kodak also possesses a patent portfolio worth an estimated 3 billion dollars. Spinning this off and selling it is going to produce a one time cash infusion that can keep the rest of the company going through any restructuring--- Just because a company goes through bankruptcy does not mean the products it sells are not going to be available.
Remember For Kodak, the film is the part that WON'T be going away...
Apparently Kodak should have long ago ceded the printer market to Epson and focused on their strengths - film, chemistry and paper and continued their digital sensor and camera technology work.
Instead, it appears that they became obsessed with unseating Epson as the printer king and continued to head butt a brick wall. Not a smart move.
Kodak is now paying for their poor decision making. Poor decision making pretty much equals poor management, or lack of strategic vision and planning at the very minimum.
Going to war with a company who is the world leader in a given market segment in an attempt to steal a chunk of their cash cow looks to be a fool's errand. Common sense should tell a corporation to follow the money - their own money, not another company's money.
JMHO.
I can understand the widespread denial here but film has been circling the drain for a decade and the spin is dizzying now. Crappy E6 service used to be easy to find around Toronto; now any type of E6 service, especially quality work, is restricted to a couple, maybe 1 lab. Consumer film has all but vanished aside from a few forlorn rolls of Fuji Superia 400. Cheap 35mm C41 processing is dead.There's insufficient demand to prompt pro photo stores to stock much more than what fits inside a small bar fridge.
There's no apparent evidence to suggest b&w has a long-term future--wishful thinking notwithstanding. Harmon/Ilford will probably be the last man standing in b&w but only if demand holds and grows. Some miracle may save Kodak's film production but its dealer/consumer unfriendliness will have to shift to an embrace of a small niche market that loves its products. Who knows?
I hope you're right, of course...and I'm sure that B&W will still be available for many years. I'm not so optimistic about color film, particularly transparency and the availability of reasonable quick and affordable processing for E6.
(And I'm not sure that recording tape and cassettes are a totally comparable product...thin film coating on plastic, etc., is a mature technology and relatively simple(thinking of sticky tape, etc.!), but photo film demands further complex stages in the production of the different types and speeds of emulsions, plus the specialist chemicals needed, coating and cutting in a controlled dark environment, and all the complications of packing and distribution to a small market.)
I remember also when there was a vast range of cassette tapes to suit every need...the only ones now seem to be the basic ferric setting of just one length...
But that's the problem.
Their shareholder value was tied up in a revenue stream from film that had been obliterated. Sensors are now dominated by CMOS and by electronics companies: Sony, Canon, Samsung, and Panasonic. Kodak clings to some CCD processes, but with tiny volume. Public companies and sometimes their entire product line can disappear along with share prices.
Film might be profitable if it avoids competition with digital, but the real issue is investor capital. It's vanishing. When it goes, the expertise goes, the technical knowledge, etc. One can hardly blame the management for going digital as that's where the consumer went and 99.99% of the market. Kodak customers overwhelmingly have gone digital. Even for B&W survival of mass manufactured film depends on end product demand. This demand can, in the short term, be met through legacy cameras, but with no new film cameras being made en masse, who will recapitalize a film factory? Hollywood/Bollywood?
I scan tech portfolios looking for any interest in film and camera manufacture and there is no investment interest anywhere. No new cameras in volume = no new film in volume.
Hoffy, there is a boatload of new film cameras being made. You won't find them in Harvey Norman though
Where are they? Other than craptastic Holgas, Dianas etc. and some pinhole models, there are maybe one or two 35mm SLRs, some disposable cameras still made I think and...what else?
But, with the Internet especially, if you're going to send it out it matters little whether it's across town or across the country, as long as you aren't in a hurry. If I were in a real hurry I would shoot digital, or black and white and run home and to the darkroom.
Where are they? Other than craptastic Holgas, Dianas etc. and some pinhole models, there are maybe one or two 35mm SLRs, some disposable cameras still made I think and...what else?
Look at quarterly reports over the past several years, and you will see that any profit was on the film side. Digital has been a consistent money loser.How Kodak internally cost-shifts and subsidizes is referenced in analyst concerns.
I think Tomalophicon may have stumbled upon a rare oasis of film availability but as a fellow Aussie I have seen very little evidence of widespread availability of these products. I live in a Qld town of about 13000 and I've just checked out the local supermarkets. We have both Coles (they carry no film) and Woolies have 5 single packs of Fuji Superia200/24 plus a few disposables. No pharmacy in town still keeps film. The one remaining minilab has Kodacolor 200 and 400 as well as disposables and a few rolls of that horrible C41 black & white film that Kodak currently makes. The minlab develops C41 one day a week. This is not a town in decline either - it has increased its population by 20% in the past 5 years.
I can think of only one outlet within 100km of me where I might be able to buy a roll of pro film such as Portra or any Ilford product and only about three places in the state capital Brisbane. Sad fact is almost nobody wants it anymore and that is not likely to change. I think we'll be able to buy B&W materials for a long time yet as long as we are prepared to pay the price but I equally think colour film is a goner. But, if things really become desperate, remember it must be a hell of a lot easier to coat B&W on the kitchen table than trying to make Kodachrome in the garden shed! OzJohn
...
I use Dwaynes too but it usually takes a couple of WEEKS and I'm not much farther than you. I mailed some on Sunday so they went out on Monday morning, one package of 35mm E6 and one of 120 C41. I will try to remember to check in here when they arrive.
I don't mind the delay but many people with modern (i.e. short) attention spans often do.
...
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?