It's official: Kodak in bankruptcy

I love how many hate Kodak the company and its practices, but continue to use Tri-X (not a dig at you SSS). If I only used products by companies I like, I wouldn't be using much.
 
I've not used any Kodak produces for over ten years now ... I decided there was no point supporting a loser ... and I was right
 
I like their film. They are clueless as to their real base of fans and users however (like many companies stuck in the realm of legacy products). Kodachrome was a treasure and a gem that could have been exploited to great profit and goodwill with wiser owner connected to the artistic fan and support base.

We can only hope that some entity who understands the niche film (and probably larger cine) market takes over those products, but I'd not bet on that.
 
I really don't understand how this thread came to be a discussion about the ethics of patent litigation. It doesn't matter one bit if any of us like it or not, it's an "any port in a storm" situation for the company.

Some of us remember a little outfit called Polaroid that got a few more years of life (and, unfortunately, self-complacency) out of winning a big patent lawsuit. Against Kodak, of course.
 
Hope Tri--x wont die :(

What about the Arista Premium? They are somesort of rebranded Tri-x, right? Where they made by Kodak?
 
batterytypehah! said:
I really don't understand how this thread came to be a discussion about the ethics of patent litigation. It doesn't matter one bit if any of us like it or not, it's an "any port in a storm" situation for the company.

Some of us remember a little outfit called Polaroid that got a few more years of life (and, unfortunately, self-complacency) out of winning a big patent lawsuit. Against Kodak, of course.
Click to expand...

I was once advised by my chairman to "stick to the knitting" at a time of corporate adversity ... perhaps Kodak would have been better attending to their own business instead of suing others, no?
 
Kodak stands for quality films. That is how I have been seeing this company. Something went wrong there.

The top products have been Kodachrome and Tri-X.
 
I agree, but so does Ilford and they went belly up. Thankfully there was enough passion and belief to resurrect the brand and make the business work. Lots of people complained about some of the Ilford lines dropped, but at least they are alive and kicking.

Hopefully some wealthy film photography loving business people will come to the rescue.



raid said:
Kodak stands for quality films. That is how I have been seeing this company. Something went wrong there.

The top products have been Kodachrome and Tri-X.
Click to expand...
 
PAN F said:
I read somewhere that Leitz use a Kodak sensor for their current M range of digital cameras (M9,M9P).
Could this mean that they will have to find a new source of sensors for their current M digital range and future digital M cameras?
Click to expand...

Not Leitz, but Leica Camera. Leitz divested themselves of their camera making business back in the 1980's.

And Kodak sold their sensor-making division to somebody last year.

Jim B.
 
shadowfox said:
Who would be interested in buying Kodak's film division?
Who is big enough to do that?
Click to expand...

At this point, I don't think they would be trying to sell it anyway. Looking at last year's financials, the film division is the only one that turned any profits.
 
I don't think kodak films will be gone. The film photography is indeed a niche market, but what about the cinema industry ? Over there digital is still far away of the quality of the film
 
It doesn't seem to me - at risk of overstating the obvious, that there is enough demand for film for two suppliers the size of Kodak or Fuji to continue. Fuji adapted, Kodak did not. Kodak is hanging their future on printers and inks? That seems not to be a wise idear to me... I've given up printing with inkjets, never to return. How will Kodak compete with on-line services that produce prints for significantly less money that the cost to do this at home... for those who even still print at all?
 
Just as a side not:

Leitz company has nothing to do (anymore) with Leica. See what Leitz is actually doing.

As there were come comparisons of Apple and Kodak - I think the biggest difference is that the value of Apple company is estimated at 150 billion Euro :cool: I like products of both, but I have no illusions about their business practices - probably similar in many ways.
 
David Murphy said:
Glad to see them gone. Any company going around trying to shake down other companies for tribute the way they do needs to go bankrupt. Kodak actually patents such incredible innovations as computers sending other computers data (in 2007 no less). They are pathetic.
Click to expand...

totally pathetic nonsense.

without patent protection
few companies would invest in research and innovation
if Kodak got a patent on something before someone else
its because at least that part of the Kodak was working right.

Stephen
 
Drago said:
I don't think kodak films will be gone. The film photography is indeed a niche market, but what about the cinema industry ? Over there digital is still far away of the quality of the film
Click to expand...

Bad news on this front too. Panavision and Arri have ceased production of motion picture film cameras. Some time last year, the last film motion picture camera was made. Thus the future of "films" is digital.

http://nofilmschool.com/2011/10/rumors-films-demise-longer-exaggerated/
 
Drago said:
No doubt digital is the future, but i don't think that future is close
Click to expand...


That is the trouble with the future. Before you know it, it is here. Just ask Kodak. Some companies have more foresight, Fuji for instance, than others, Kodak for example.

Bob
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom