Rumor so far.... Kodak is killing off all B+W paper products.

[laser]

Competition is good for the purchaser. Kodak's exit will certainly reduce competition. This in turn will create a short term volume growth opportunity for others and give more pricing strength to the manufacturers. Thus prices will increase significantly. This should not be a problem for serious photographers, materials are not the majority of costs. The value of their time, cost of equipment etc. are significant. They will pay a lot more for materials but they have few alternatives so they will pay the increased material costs.

If you want an example in the photographic business look at photographic chemical specialty prices. Their specialty items that were once made by large manufacturers are priced far higher than they were when there was competition for these items.

The next crisis for fiber-based BW paper will be the supply of baryta-coated paper support. There are very few manufacturers. The ones that exist run very large scale paper facilities that make a variety of modern paper products. The baryta coated paper is a very minor, perhaps insignificant, portion of their business. How much longer will they be providing baryta-coated paper? If they exit perhaps a specialty company will make the support. Again a price increase and probably poorer technology.

This isn't doom-and-gloom, it is reality. We will be able to make black-and-white fiber based prints but it will be more difficult.

 

[Paul Howell]

I stoped by my local shop to pick up some polycontrast and taked to the person who keeps track of the dark room and film inventories. She feels that many people are still using film then scanning for prints. I hope that film and chemistry will be around for another few years.

 

[Rlibersky]

Has there been a official announcement yet?

I seem to have answered my own question. Looks official.

http://www.businessweek.com/ap/financialnews/D8AO836O1.htm?campaign_id=apn_home_down

 

[avandesande]

I would use industro in a heartbeat over azo. It seemed to be easier to control, and had this wonderful gritty texture (very hard to describe) that made it nice to work with, when it was wet it was like holding a piece of cloth. It seemed to be ever-so-slightly sharper than azo and was easier to get a cooler color.
The box i had was never opened, and dated 1958, the year Weston died.

Aaron Van de Sande bought a cache of Haloid Industro, made a few beautiful prints, and decided he needed to set aside 8x10" for a while and sold it. Maybe if he has a record of the purchaser we could track it down.

 

[photobackpacker]

I was under the impression that Kodak made their paper in Brazil. Regardless, if their formula is truly worthwhile, it cannot be kept a secret; corporate espionage thrives as the epitome of capitalism. One only has to change it in the smallest way to reproduce the product.

Kodak's leaving the field makes the smaller, more nimble, private companies stronger. I am confident our needs will be fulfilled.

Don't forget - they will be cutting all of the people loose as well. There is a sudden glut of people who understand photographic emulsions.

 

[Flotsam]

I just saw the death of Kodak paper announced on MSNBCs "Market Wrap" show. Seeing it in the general media really brings it home.

Kodabromide... Polycontrast... Polymax... Ah, 35 years of good memories.
The end of an era.
I guess I'll pour myself a drink and croak out a chorus of that dreadful, incipid Kodak theme song:

"Goodmorning yesterday.
You wake up, and time has slipped away.
And suddenly it's hard to find,
The memories you left behind.

Do you remember the times of your life?"
[Sniffle, sniffle]

 

[L Gebhardt]

Don't forget - they will be cutting all of the people loose as well. There is a sudden glut of people who understand photographic emulsions.

In general I think this just represents a whole lot of lost knowledge as most of these people won't go back into the same field.

 

[Sean]

Let's say in a few years Kodak decides to drop film. I have seen people like Michael A. Smith stock discontinued film in a large freezer. I'd probably just get a normal sized chest freezer and fill it up with 8x10 tri-x. What kind of lifespan would the film have kept frozen? 5-10-20 years? From what I gather it is cosmic rays that can fog the film over time? I see NASA is developing an electromagnetic field device which repels these rays but unfortunately it will be out of our grasp..

 

[ann]

at one time Kodak had more scientist on payroll than NASA. In the late 70's they stopped all RD with B&W products. the last "new" product was Xtol.

they have been going down this road for a long time

 

[Jorge]

Let's say in a few years Kodak decides to drop film. I have seen people like Michael A. Smith stock discontinued film in a large freezer. I'd probably just get a normal sized chest freezer and fill it up with 8x10 tri-x. What kind of lifespan would the film have kept frozen? 5-10-20 years? From what I gather it is cosmic rays that can fog the film over time? I see NASA is developing an electromagnetic field device which repels these rays but unfortunately it will be out of our grasp..

Yep, I am going to start stocking on Tmx 400 and buy a box every chance I get.
My guess is that we have 7 years at the most. I dont know Canadian tax laws, but I am guessing they will try to depreciate the new plant in 10 years (3 of which have gone by) and then they will shut it down. In the mean time, it is time to start learning how to make film or glass plates...

 

[MattCarey]

Yep, I am going to start stocking on Tmx 400 and buy a box every chance I get.
My guess is that we have 7 years at the most. I dont know Canadian tax laws, but I am guessing they will try to depreciate the new plant in 10 years (3 of which have gone by) and then they will shut it down. In the mean time, it is time to start learning how to make film or glass plates...

I don't have an MBA or anything, but I think that the tax advantages come before the depreciation is over. If they scrap an item (or whole plant) that still has some book-value, they can claim that as a loss, I believe.

Not that I am suggesting that this is in Kodak's plan.

Matt

 

[aldevo]

If Kodak is making a buck a box I agree, they are too stupid to exist.
Take 'em away Darwin... Book 'em, incompetence One.
Best of luck in the digital shark pool.

Where does that leave Agfa and Ilford who *lost* a buck a box?

Clearly they must have done that or worse.

 

[aldevo]

I would not hold out much hope about Kodak selling any of its proprietary formulas or product lines. Once Kodak completely seprates itself from film, film cameras and film become the enemy. Once they are totally digital every film camera sale, every wet print made at home and every roll of film sold regardless of mfg takes away potential revenue. Any company that is concentrating on digital wants to see the total extinction of film and film cameras.

The timing of things such as this announcement are usually tied to upcoming earnings reports (to help cushion fallout from a bad report) or to demonstrate that a new CEO is aggresive in his strategic outlook.

I think one reason we have not read about discontinuing of film is that they need to save that announcement for when they need to pump up the stock price.
Cutting jobs, closing factories and dropping marginal product lines is music to the ears of the institutional investors who probably control most Kodak stock in various mutual funds and large holding companies.

I think that you're right on a couple points. Kodak's bond rating took a hit at the same time Antonio Perez was named the successor to Carp. A bone had to get thrown, it seems.

I don't think Kodak is getting out of film yet, though. My guess is that they got whacked over the head by their auditors over the depreciation valuation of the stuff in Brazil...plus, they were already planning to write off their paper base-producing facility. Their market positions in film and chemicals is stronger than in paper.

I have heard, incidentally, that Kodak was having difficulties getting their new German supplier to provide material for the plant in Brazil. No idea whether it's true and I doubt we'll ever know.

 

[aldevo]

I don't have an MBA or anything, but I think that the tax advantages come before the depreciation is over. If they scrap an item (or whole plant) that still has some book-value, they can claim that as a loss, I believe.

Not that I am suggesting that this is in Kodak's plan.

Matt

I think you hit the nail on the head!

Kodak's film operations may be becoming last profitable, but they can still claim healthy deprecation which is added back to their cash flow. And it's cash flow that determines bond rating.

I suspect that the Brazil facilities residual value was questioned and they threw in the towel. All speculation but it seems otherwise strange they would close the facility a mere 16 months or so after moving all B&W paper production there.

 

[aldevo]

I disagree. If (and of course they do) their fomulae have monetary value, they'll absolutely sell them. It would be irresponsible not to. There is a legal compulsion to generate the greatest return to investors as a condition of incorporation as a publically traded company. Besides...since Kodak has determined that the/their future is digital...what difference would the miniscule fine art black and white printing paper market make to them anyhow? Enemy?... Hardly.

(On the other hand, everything I just said makes sense, at least to me. So to assume that logic will rule the corporate mind requires an enormous leap of faith and a large dose of naivete. I could be quite wrong ;-))

I wish you were right, but I don't think so.

If Kodak wants to write down the investment then they can't be getting licensing fees from them. There auditors (or the people who audit the auditors!) would raise a hue and cry.

I suspect there aren't many parties out there who could/would give them enough in license revenue to inspire them to forego the write-off.

 

[Michael A. Smith]

I spoke with Kodak today. Here is the quick version of my report:

There is plenty of Azo on hand. No one needs to panic.

A few years ago Paula and I saved Azo from extinction. We didn't do this just to get everyone excited about silver chloride paper and then leave them in the lurch. So we are having silver chloride paper made elsewhere. There will be silver chloride paper available as long as we are around.

 

[snaggs]

Support Ilford.. most management buy-outs fail after a few years, and they're the only ship in town which wants to produce analog products. If they go under again, then you are guaranteed to see the loss of film within 5 years.

Kodak is just saying they'll keep making film since logistically they can only close so many things at once. Remember, CEO's dont get bonuses for achieving things in 15 years.. his bonus will be to rid Kodak of film inside 5 years.

Daniel.

 

[Phillip P. Dimor]

I had to break the news to an older photographer today.. I visited his darkroom and noticed atleast three to four dozen boxes of 8x10 250sht. polymax.. The man had yellow-kodak box everything.. He is about 78 and loves what he knows best, Kodak paper.

I broke his poor heart.

 

[snaggs]

Shame , I think the yellow father was killed by his greedy son for a quick succession years ago. Now he wants to kill of any supporters of the old regime.

 

[Jorge]

I don't have an MBA or anything, but I think that the tax advantages come before the depreciation is over. If they scrap an item (or whole plant) that still has some book-value, they can claim that as a loss, I believe.

Not that I am suggesting that this is in Kodak's plan.

Matt

You might be right, I dont know either, but either way I am thinking Kodak's film making days are numbered.....

 

[aldevo]

Support Ilford.. most management buy-outs fail after a few years, and they're the only ship in town which wants to produce analog products. If they go under again, then you are guaranteed to see the loss of film within 5 years.

Kodak is just saying they'll keep making film since logistically they can only close so many things at once. Remember, CEO's dont get bonuses for achieving things in 15 years.. his bonus will be to rid Kodak of film inside 5 years.

Daniel.

Nothing is guaranteed Daniel.

Myself? I'd stake a claim that Oriental and a couple of the East European marques will still be in business when Ilford gets snuffed.

I didn't like Ilford matierals before and I like them less when they've gotten more expensive. They aren't likely to see my business any time soon.

 

[snaggs]

I never had the chance to use AZO or Polymax... I'm just in the process of setting up my first darkroom right now!! (picked a great time, have I been foolish?).

Out of interest, Kodak here in Western Australia owned a chain of photo shops (minilabs) called "Kevron", they just closed them all down last week!

Daniel.

PS. Even if you use Seagull papers, dont you need chemicals and film?

 

[gnashings]

There seems to be a huge sentiment here from those involved in professional aspects of photography which stipulates that the amateur, hobbyist doesn't even deserve to voice their opinion on this issue. Which is annoying and very near sighted. I'm sorry, I can't afford 100 rolls of film a week. I guess I should be shunned, or at best, pointed to some digital forum to learn my place.

The fact is, I realize that my money is not going to make or break Kodak. And I realize that if I really, really like Trix, and stop using it in protest, I am just shooting myself in the foot and not denting Kodak any, BUT:

It leaves a bad taste in my mouth to spend what little moeny I have on a product marketed by a company that, in its very mission statement, excludes little, unimportant, ME!
More than excludes, really... ignores and goes out of its way to show how little it thinks of the likes of me. Kodak is like a land developer that can't wait for that sweet littleold lady to get a horrible disease and die already, so it can tear her house down and build a strip mall. We are the old lady, guys!

Also, I fail to really see their leadership role in anything other than VOLUME.

Trix is their only film worth using, unless you want to photograph surgical equipment and convey its full sterility and lack of life. I could care less for D76 - its not the be all and end all, just another developer that can easily be substituted. Its not like its Rodinal or something
I don't really know if their paper is any good - I don't ever see anough of it in the stores I go to... so, why would I? I have stacks of AGFA and Ilford looking me in the face, and some shrink wrapped package of 25 sheets of paper and a roll or two of Trix with a little brochure attached...
I use Dektol. I am sure I can find a suitable substitute from Ilford. At least their mission statement doesn't stop short of calling me an antiquated, annoying little prick who chooses to be difficult with his silly B&W film.

I have very little money. Kodak is a huge multinational corporation. The least I can do is say "Fine, be like that", childish as it may seem, I am tired of everyone in this industry treating me like a waiter would a fussy eater with an attitude.

I'm beginning to think that Kodak would make pie or women's underwear if they could figure out how to make money there. I don't expect any loyalty fromthem - and they should expect none from me. Even if that has NO impact on them, it will make me feel better.

 

[Jennifer]

Right on Gnashings. In the past I was a 101% Kodak person. It's not the products, but the mission their on. Don't buy a freezer, and stock pile paper
which when you run out....then what ?. They stated it's a 3 year plan. Film will go bye, bye. Lets wave bye, bye NOW. Someone grab a shovel and bury the yellow whale !. Spend your money on products from a company interested in B&W, and not give it to a company that will use it to further non-silver based imaging products. Scanning negatives to print on a printer can't possibly help matters either.

Jennifer

 

[Mongo]

I guess I'm lucky...with the exception of Azo there wasn't a Kodak paper that I really gave a hoot about. If I have to live without Azo (and it seems that Michael Smith is doing everything he can to make sure someone is producing a comparable product), then so be it.

As to film, I do shoot TMY, but only because I got a fantastic deal on some out-of-date 4x5 film...I've never really been hooked on a Kodak film so when the inevitable happens I won't have too mcuh to worry about. I've found Efke 100, Fomapan 200, and HP5+ to be a combination that works for me. (I do worry about Foma now that they're selling their film to FreeStyle for very low prices...the last companies that did that ended up in receivership/bankruptcy...hopefully Foma know what they're doing.)

I really do believe that "boutique" manufacturers are the wave of the future, and that the prices we're seeing today for Efke products are the prices that will keep those companies in business. I have a feeling that Kodak will milk TMX and TMY for as long as they can, but I don't see those lasting another decade. They'll write off the "new" plant as soon as it's economically feasible to do so, and that'll be the end of Kodak film. I wonder what the true condition of Fuji B&W is. I can't remember the last time we heard anything good, bad, or indifferent, about the financial health of Fuji's film business.

Should times get bad enough, there's always the book "Primitive Photography" to help us all understand how to make our own paper negative materials. I'll be shooting film even if nobody is manufacturing it.

My two cents...and hardly worth that...

Be well.
Dave