Something of an exaggeration; examples that spring immediately to mind are workable colour negatives and gold salt sensitization (Agfa patents) and VC papers (Ilford patents).
Going further back, Kodak (eventually) lost the lawsuit against the Rev. Hannibal Goodwin, whose patents on flexible film antedated Kodak's own efforts.
I would not decry Kodak's contributions for an instant, but they were as happy to steal others' ideas as others were to steal theirs.
What is really astonishing about Perez's quote is that his remarks can easily be interpreted as, "Film and medical imaging accounted for over half our revenues last year. By January 2008 I want to have destroyed all that."
Cheers,
R.
Aldevo;
BTW, Kodak is officially out of debt and has a small surplus. This is due to the sale of the "Health Imgaging Division" reported elsewhere on APUG.
In additiion, film sales are profitable and that is what is currently keeping Kodak's head above water and was paying off the debt. So, if the sale of that division balanced the debt and then some, it was a benefit. Now Kodak can realize more of the profit on the remaining film sales which are color film and the associated print paper. Motion Picture films are also profitable.
What is unprofitable? Kodachrome, E6 films and chemicals.
PE
If EK stock is any indication, back in 1997 stock over 90 per share, today trading at 24.60. The stock chart shows a strong downward trend. If it breaks 20, well, not good.
Kodak definitly does not have an edge on digital anything, let alone digital photography. What digital technology they have, they bought through aquisitions and is not the best.
The best digital cameras, both consumer and pro are not Kodak.
Cameras are a sore point for me.
It is another reason why I feel that LF cameras will probably be the Analog wave of the future. They can be maintained more easily due to their ruggedness and relative simplicity. And, the film does not have to be really fine grained and really sharp for good results.
As the more complex 35mm cameras fail, then repair parts vanish and repair eventually may become impossible. IDK.
Art;
I really don't see this as being that funny. It is serious stuff to me. Sorry.
All of the modern color processes are dependant on that R&D, and even the Kodachrome process was donated to the public domain by Kodak about 20 years ago.
Roger, My statement was a bit too broad (Everyone who followed after Kodak were just using or stealing Kodak's existing technology). There were many other companies that contributed to the research and advancement of photography, but Fuji is a company who benefited from Kodak's years of research. I think we can all agree Kodak was the main event in it's time. It's sad to see the mind set of someone like Mr. Perez, it's clear he doesn't have clear direction for this corporation. "But I still dance with the one that brought me".
Roger,
Kodak absoutely, 100%, loses money hand-over-fist with film.
Kodak is:
1) Too big to exist as a niche manufacturer of film (too much debt)
I won't challenge the last statement - but then I'm not a digital photographer. Are you?
You are absolutely 100% wrong, however, about Kodak merely "buying" digital technology. Their sensor technology - by the way - seems to be good enough for Sinar, Cambo, Olympus, and Leica who all use Kodak CCDs in one form or another...
Also, EK may have something to say in commercial digital photo finishing. Every analyst I've ever read strongly believes that the "hobbyist" inkjet printer market will simply go straight in the dustbin.
I have no idea whether EK will succeed. But let's at least give them their due.
I put things on ignore that irritate me (though nothiong on APUG irritates me to that point), not entertain me (threads like this one that contain pretty funny posts). Look, I'm just some schmuck who performs drive by posts. Best thing is to put me on ignore.Art for Arts sake, too bad you feel that way, why not just put this thread on ignore?
I won't challenge the last statement - but then I'm not a digital photographer. Are you?
You are absolutely 100% wrong, however, about Kodak merely "buying" digital technology. Their sensor technology - by the way - seems to be good enough for Sinar, Cambo, Olympus, and Leica who all use Kodak CCDs in one form or another...
Also, EK may have something to say in commercial digital photo finishing. Every analyst I've ever read strongly believes that the "hobbyist" inkjet printer market will simply go straight in the dustbin.
I have no idea whether EK will succeed. But let's at least give them their due.
I am interested in this as I had researched the history of colour films for a paper at our local community college. my understanding at the time was that Agfa's chromogenic coupling of large molecules to prevent dye migration was the underlyeing principle of all current colour negative films. And that the seizing of that for war reparations allowed the production of many competing colour films Anscocolor, Ferracolor, Gevcolor, Telcolor, Pakcolor, and Sakuracolor.
Kodak modified that to use water insoluble molecules as opposed to large molecules to prevent migration of dye, and developed the orange colour masks.
Was this the paradigm you were referring to. To further my understanding of the history, I would greatly appreciate your expanding your statement.
I sometimes wonder if the history of photography is not unduly influenced by Newhall and his connection to Kodak and American Photography.to the diminishment of the rest of the world's contribution.
Kodak is dead!
Cheers
André
Photo Engineer said:Indeed, Fisher developed the first coupler with a ballasted side chain containing a sulfonic acid.
Dear PE
You mixed something up:
(I like that pun…)
Rudolf FISCHER did not invent the ballasted coupler. He was not even affiliated to Agfa.
Back in time prior to his invention there was that invention of Du Hauron of 1862 of making a colour image by overlaying three transparent sheet images (Tripack). Each forming a separation image (resembling red, blue and green hues) dyed in the corresponding hues. Thus the idea of subtractive colour imaging. Though not as convenient as we now are used to.
Further there were the works of Homolka and others who described staining developers, whose oxidized forms, themselves or the couplings of those, formed a dye. (Primary Color Development).
Fischer invented in 1911 the coupling of the oxidation-product of an apt developer with a colorless `coupler´ and embedding these, forming apt hues, in three differently sensitized emulsion layers (ThreeLayer).
Thus he gained more freedom in creating dyes in contrast to using primary color development, and further changed Hauron’s loose tripack into a fixed trilayer. However, those couplers and even dyes turned out to be diffusing throughout the three layers, spoiling color image forming.
He was working for “Neue Photographische Gesellschaft” who used his ideas to market photographic printing papers which brought up mono(!)-chrome images.
There seem to have come up a dogma then that the Fischer-principle was a deadend to natural colour film.
Though not scoring, Fischer showed the principle for both!! the Agfacolor- as well as the Kodachrome- technique: `3-layer chromogenic´.
Now to the Agfacolor-Process:
It was invented by Schneider and Fröhlich/Kumetat
Schneider in 1934 was busy with fine-grain development. He was placed under the `D´ of the `R&D´ department of Agfa. Whereas the color-guys sat at (scientific) Research, and were then busy with `optical´ colour by means of the lens-grid-technique as well as silver dye-bleach and even the combination of both. Schneider thought that creating a dye-image with staining developers would lead to a lesser grain. (The later Agfa Vario-XL and other following chromogenic B&W films regained this idea.) When not scoring he thought that somehow! this dye-forming could lead to the simple natural-colour film. Staining developers did not show an outcome, but then he remembered Fischer’s ideas. He also remembered the technique of mordant dyes adhering somewhat to gelatine as he had tried two years before (antihalation) by means of certain functional groups known for mordant dying of cotton’s cellulose. Some outcome was to expect and though the struggle for the optical path was going on the CEO of the film plant decided to have the development department a go. The same days when Kodak announced their Kodachrome technique.
At this point Fröhlich from Research department and Kumetat had the idea to just add a fatty tail to the coupler as he was employing at another diffusion problem. (To my understanding a mechanic feature rather than applying non-valent forces, making it bulky in the solid gelatine) However these new couplers turned out to be merely soluble in the melted gelatine. Schneider on his turn had the idea of adding sulfo- or carboxylgroups, making the tail less `fatty´ but still keeping it bulky.
From the moment these two additions to the couplers did not interfere with their dye-forming capacity and fine adjusting and getting it mature for poduction the `New´ (in contrast to the old additive) Agfacolor-Film was born in 1936 with the work of fifty scientists involved. Though before there had been some uncertainty about whether going the reversal (as Kodak) or the neg/pos way.
Fischer tried in vain his part to be honoured by Agfa in the name giving of the new film. I guess at a memorial at the Agfa plant his name was engraved together with those three Agfa men, but am not sure about that.
The Agfacolor era ended in 1991 when after a ten year period of preparation the C-41-type Orwocolor QRS100 was brought to the market. Few months later all coatings at Wolfen were stopped and Orwo was going to be liquidated.
Now back to today. PE, let aside aspects of profitibility (change of process/coating difficulties), could a modern film based on the Agfacolor principle not yield higher resolution than a C-41 film with its oil-based couplers?
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?