Kodak's statement regarding its B/W film

[sanderx1]

You're just tied to film.... emotionally.... This is no different then any other company. Corporations don't exist to build loyalty. They exist to make profits.

Companies don't exist to make profits - they exist to increase shareholder value. Whetever they make many profits in the process is secondary, as they could do so by other means, for eaxmaple, capital gains. But it will be downright impossible for a company to do either without building loyalty.

 

[esanford]

Companies don't exist to make profits - they exist to increase shareholder value. Whetever they make many profits in the process is secondary, as they could do so by other means, for eaxmaple, capital gains. But it will be downright impossible for a company to do either without building loyalty.

Investing 101: Companies that make profits increase shareholder value. When companies don't make profits, shareholder value decreases. Don't split hairs with me on semantics. Loyalty lasts as long as the market buys the products. When the majority of the market shifts its buying patterns, loyalty shifts accordingly. See Edsel post above. See laser disk as described above. See phonograph records. See analog technology in communications. see dial-up internet connections. see 8 track tapes. see cassette tapes. Corporations are there to meet what the market wants. Investors buy stock in companies that have caught the wave of profitability. Stocks are sold when profits go down. None of this is rocket science and most of all, none of this is personal.....

 

[kunihiko]

Reading Andy K's comment "To be honest I think some, not all, photographers in the US have difficulty being objective when it comes to Kodak, because Kodak is their home company. I would probably be the same if Ilford were behaving as Kodak currently are." I realized that I have a difficulty too. It's not because how Kodak currently behave, but they have been. Kodak and Ilford aren't my home company, Fuji is.
I don't think I speak for somebody, but just for myself - a photographer in Japan. For me, Kodak has never been a friend, but an enemy. Many friends of mine are using Kodak stuff. Tri-X is loved very much, but on the other hand, some still have same feeling as mine.
I never forget this. I always see Kodak with the case in my mind.
Dead Link Removed
I did hate Kodak and I've been telling my friends that I'm boycotting, but I have never said not to buy Kodak stuff when somebody asked me what to buy. I just modestly recommend Fuji and Ilford.
However, I don't think I would like to take sides with one of them in this shrinking market. I am trying to stand neuter now. I bought a box of Endura paper last week. It was the first Kodak product which I've had in this 10 years.

Sorry for bringing an old story up again.

 

[roteague]

I don't think I speak for somebody, but just for myself - a photographer in Japan. For me, Kodak has never been a friend, but an enemy. Many friends of mine are using Kodak stuff. Tri-X is loved very much, but on the other hand, some still have same feeling as mine.
I never forget this. I always see Kodak with the case in my mind.
Dead Link Removed
I did hate Kodak and I've been telling my friends that I'm boycotting, but I have never said not to buy Kodak stuff when somebody asked me what to buy.

Keep in mind, that there are two sides to every story. A lot of Americans, including me, feel that Japanese companies with the help of the Japanese government, were dumping their products in our country at below market prices and not allowing American companies to enter the Japanese market. Seems the WTO felt the same way.

I does no good to harbor resentment, when it is not warranted. Live life, and forget about the petty differences between governments. FWIW, These days, I primarily use Fuji films, because I like their film - the very same reason I choose GM over Toyota. I buy what I like, and ignore what I don't.

 

[kunihiko]

Hi Robert
I understand. I'm trying to be matured, but just can't forget how I felt when the case popped up.
Just please remember, as documented in Fuji reports, we were and always have been able to buy Kodak films when we liked to. There was no reason for Kodak to claim like that.
I too buy products what I like, film to film, paper to paper. I don't buy/not to buy with politics unless the company attempt to attack their competitor with political power not with their product value and price.

I think US government is trying to protect US car manufactures. It makes sense, I don't blame for that. Japanese government protects Japanese rice farmers(most of the time japanese government seems to be a faithful servant for US, though).
I also think that Toyota is trying hard to lower the price and enhance value, unlike Kodak those days in Japan. I thought Toyota and Fuji have invested, built factories, manufactured, employed many in US, unlike Kodak in Japan.
Please imagine what you would feel when Fuji claimed that Fuji films can't be sold well in US market because Kodak is illegally protecting their market share. Kodak should be punished by JAPANESE LOW. Fuji also re-write the history of kodak's marketing in US to prove the illegality. What would you think? Is Fuji an honest company? Would you like to support Fuji?
Boycotting is the only way for a consumer like me to fight for the right which I believe in - fair play was the one in that case -. It's not like what the CEO said or something like that.

I still think that the WTO film case was different from others. What Kodak did was so childish and insulting. They might have thought that Fuji and Japanese government would give up soon like Minolta. Fuji was the first Japanese company which fought dead ahead against world big man in legal procedure.

But, again, I'm trying to stand neuter now.
Oh, I don't drive Toyota, and I love Bose speakers !!

 

[kunihiko]

I should have said what I wanted say more clearly.
What I meant is that even an anti-kodak guy like me started buying kodak stuff considering the current film market situations.
To be honest, I don't have to be anti-kodak any more, I think

 

[dancqu]

Show your support by buying the products you like.
I like some Kodak, Fuji, and Ilford products so I buy
them. I'm not one for brand loyalty.

When those Guys landed on Omaha Beach
cameras were ready, loaded with Kodak film.

When those Guys charged the trenches at Verdun
cameras were ready, loaded with Kodak film.

When the Rough Riders stormed San Juan Hill
cameras were ready, loaded with Kodak film.

Dan

 

[Soeren]

When those Guys landed on Omaha Beach
cameras were ready, loaded with Kodak film.

Dan

And those guys waiting had cameras ready, loaded with ADOX film
Regards Søren

 

[Ole]

And those guys waiting had cameras ready, loaded with ADOX film
Regards Søren

And AGFA film. And Perutz film and plates...

 

[firecracker]

I should have said what I wanted say more clearly.
What I meant is that even an anti-kodak guy like me started buying kodak stuff considering the current film market situations.
To be honest, I don't have to be anti-kodak any more, I think

Interesting. I have no sentiments over any of this, but my feeling is that Fuji dominates and controls too much in the Japanese market. There's no sense of free market in Japan. If there was, I believe we would see more products from different brands available with different prices and quality.

I remember when the market share was devided 9 to 1 between Kodak and Fuji in the U.S. years ago, but in Japan it was exactly the opposite. According to the article I read, that had a lot to do with the regulations set by the governments, and I can still see that happening now.

Sometimes I feel sorry for young photo students in Japan who are not really exposed to a variety of choices that they could have otherwise. They are the ones who will be affected the most but hold the least chance to have any creative input at this point. And this is not only about the photo supplies but also many other things.

 

[firecracker]

Japanese government protects Japanese rice farmers(most of the time japanese government seems to be a faithful servant for US, though).

No, they are not protecting the farmers. They (mostly the LDP guys) just give out useless subsidy money and gain political support, but not much else.

What they are doing is obstructing the flow of the market.

 

[Bob F.]

When those Guys landed on Omaha Beach
cameras were ready, loaded with Kodak film.

When those Guys charged the trenches at Verdun
cameras were ready, loaded with Kodak film.

When the Rough Riders stormed San Juan Hill
cameras were ready, loaded with Kodak film.

Dan

Not sure why German troops would be using Kodak film in 1916... Verdun was a French entrenched position - it was the Germans that were doing the charging of the French trenches. The French eventually took them back IIRC - after the obligatory hundreds of thousands of dead young men that was such a feature of WWI...

Sorry for the history lesson but I think it's worth remembering the sickening, pointless slaughter for what it was.


Bob.

 

[firecracker]

Lately I see made-in-China Kodak color film. Now, is it a common occurence in any particular region or throughout the world?

 

[Photo Engineer]

Not sure why German troops would be using Kodak film in 1916... Verdun was a French entrenched position - it was the Germans that were doing the charging of the French trenches. The French eventually took them back IIRC - after the obligatory hundreds of thousands of dead young men that was such a feature of WWI...

Sorry for the history lesson but I think it's worth remembering the sickening, pointless slaughter for what it was.


Bob.

Kodak had an old plant in Europe that was 'nationalized' during WWI IIRC, just as Ansco was the Agfa plant in the US that was nationalized during WWII.

This might be the reason that Kodak products were available on both sides as were Agfa products.

In fact, one old Kodak coating facility is still in use in Europe IIRC.

PE

 

[Photo Engineer]

Lately I see made-in-China Kodak color film. Now, is it a common occurence in any particular region or throughout the world?

A portion of Kodak's consumer films are made in China under license. The last I heard, these films were of the previous generation of consumer films. For example, a formula used in China in the mid 90s was more similar to one I worked on in the early 80s. This was a Gold 400 film.

The gap in formula generations is narrowing as R&D spins down in Rochester.

PE

 

[firecracker]

A portion of Kodak's consumer films are made in China under license. The last I heard, these films were of the previous generation of consumer films. For example, a formula used in China in the mid 90s was more similar to one I worked on in the early 80s. This was a Gold 400 film.

The gap in formula generations is narrowing as R&D spins down in Rochester.

PE

Thanks for the reply. Yes, it was the Gold 400 film I picked up recently. It's a bargain film right now in Japan. For a general use, I like it very much.

 

[Photo Engineer]

A recent trade report that was quoted here said that the Chinese variety was slightly more grainy than the Kodak variety.

PE

 

[firecracker]

A recent trade report that was quoted here said that the Chinese variety was slightly more grainy than the Kodak variety.

PE

I shot with my old Nikkor non-Ai lens, and that produced really nice filmy quality. So, for me, a grainy look even helps.

 

[Photo Engineer]

I am really disappointed that no reply has been made to this post. I am one of the 'technicians' on this list. Not one damned artistic bone in my body. I would have suspected that Steve had the data to back up his words. Until SA sees fit to reply with how his 'research and testing' led him to his conclusions, I will have to consider this an unfounded rant. I am truly interested in the results of testing. This is not a troll. Steve, if you are putting together a response, that is fine. Just let us know.

Thanks

Outofoptions;

Now here I agree with you totally. When one makes an absolute statement, it should be backed up with data!

I have used both Ilford and Kodak films, as posted previously. I find both to be quite good, but seem to end up with more Ilford than Kodak B&W film. I guess I like something about it, but I wouldn't go so far as to say that Kodak film is inferior. I would have to run side-by-side tests before making such a statement.

PE

 

[ChrisW]

Rudimentary testing shows TMax to be a larger grained film. Under high magnification, it is quite clear Acros is finer. Kodak has abandoned the B&W market as far as I'm concerned. Fuji, Ilford, and even Rollei show solid effort in their continuous innovation and commitment. Clearly Kodak won't announce the killing of a product line until film base inventory is low enough to write off. Remember Technical Pan base production stopped many years before they saw fit to inform their loyal revenue source that they had no intention of offering it after current inventory was exhausted. Less than nine months, and it was gone. Like an idiot, I shot 70% TP. Fortunately, I was forced to dig deep and experiment with other fine grain films. I still miss the tonal quality of TP. I will never use a Kodak product again. They are history.

 

[roteague]

I've been looking to see what Kodak is going to introduce at PMA, but haven't found anything yet. Perhaps, I haven't looked at the right place. I notice however that Fuji has upgraded two of their films, one of their printing papers, and offered a new set of B&W chemicals. Hopefully, Kodak will take notice.

 

[Brac]

A portion of Kodak's consumer films are made in China under license. The last I heard, these films were of the previous generation of consumer films. For example, a formula used in China in the mid 90s was more similar to one I worked on in the early 80s. This was a Gold 400 film.

The gap in formula generations is narrowing as R&D spins down in Rochester.

PE

I think this needs some clarification. Kodak have apparently shared some technology with Lucky in which they have a minority financial stake, so this may well be the "previous generation" colour films but they are marketed and branded as Lucky. Quite separately Kodak have their own huge film manufacturing plant in China called Kodak China Company which the film boxes say is in Xiamen, Fujian, China. The films being turned out by this factory are Kodak films, not licensed films, and they are marked as Kodak. Therefore if someone has a Kodak Gold 400 Film made in China, it came from here not from someone making it under licence and it would be a current generation technology film. Lucky & Kodak & Fuji are all in fierce competition in the colour film market in China.

As far as Firecracker's questions are concerned, the box of Kodak Gold 200 in front of me as I write is marked GB, F & TR and it comes from the Kodak China factory. So clearly this film is for distribution in the UK, France & Turkey. Probably for elsewhere as well as it also has writing in a different script, possibly Arabic or an Indian language. At one point this film was I believe made in the UK but presumably no more. The only other Kodak film from China I have seen so far is Kodak Colour Plus 200. This was previously made in the recently closed France plant and is an "economy line" often dolled out with "free film with your prints" offers and very likely is an earlier generation. No doubt we shall be seeing more & more Kodak emulsions from China but better that (in my view) than that they disappear completely if that were the alternative.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Brac;

You are right.

I hasten to add though that even Kodak films made in England and France were not exactly the same as film made in the USA. Among other things, all 3 products I just mentioned had different aim curves and therefore slightly different formulas. This was due to the fact that the plants at Harrow and Chalon insisted that the average European customer had different ''tastes" in film characteristics than the USA customer. In addition, the films reflected the difference in process chemistry in use in Europe and the differences in printing equipment.

This yielded different grain and sharpness as well.

So, there is a whole spectrum of answers to give to just this one subject. Maybe there is enough for a full thread on it someday when I have time.

The bottom line is that this is not a simple yes-no answer.

We did try to keep our products in-line with each other and had a cross comparison study group, but the requirement for different aims for the same product in different markets often offset all of the efforts at standarization.

PE

 

[roteague]

Among other things, all 3 products I just mentioned had different aim curves and therefore slightly different formulas. This was due to the fact that the plants at Harrow and Chalon insisted that the average European customer had different ''tastes" in film characteristics than the USA customer.

I've heard that as well. I know that Fuji has two transparency films that are not sold in the US - Fortia SP and Fortia 50 - mostly because they are grossly saturated and not deemed to be suitable for American "tastes". I'm sure the Chinese are no different.

Different cultures have different ideas about color. For example, in Korea, white is often associated with death, which is what we tend to associate black with.

 

[Larry L]

Robert,

If you try the E100VS again, shoot it at ISO 80 and process normally, which is what I do and I have been far happier with the saturation and evenness of the exposure.

Dave

Hi:

One note of caution about underexposing VS. I shot a lot of it in Alaska in late August - it is very quick to shift to a red/magenta cast at 1/2 to 1 stop under. Be sure you know how it relates to your light meter before going too far.

Larry