Kodak activy looking to sell off it's film business

[divewizard]

The End has arrived. Kodak film may live on as a new brand, or it may die.


Kodak about to start talking turkey for the last of its photo biz?

Kodak to begin Imaging sell-off end of January

Eastman Kodak is confident that its film manufacturing division will remain at its US headquarters, and paper production will stay in Harrow, UK, under new ownership.

 

[Timmyjoe]

Well that just blows. Tri-X is the only film I still shoot (now that AGFA went belly up).

The only bright spot is that it looks like, since the still film manufacturing facility is in the same location/building as the motion picture film manufacturing facility (which Kodak is keeping), Kodak is going to "sell" the division, but possibly keep manufacturing the film, which they will sell to whomever "buys" the still film division.

Not happy about this.

Best,
-Tim

 

[sepiareverb]

Was this ever in doubt? They've not been interested in being a photography business for a long while.

 

[Landberg]

I hope film will live on for some years! I remember seeing an interview with ilford CEO and they are good..

 

[dcsang]

Did anyone read any of those links?

A quote from the very first link:
UPDATE: Responding to a question I fired off while writing the above blog post, Veronda has clarified one aspect of the PI sale – specifically how Kodak will sell PI yet still keep its entertainment imaging infrastructure. According to Veronda, “Since we have only one location (Eastman Business Park Bldg. 38) where we manufacture film, we will retain that facility. The buyer of PI would likely engage us with a supply agreement to provide still camera films.” So now you know.

Also...
http://photorumors.com/2013/01/23/kodak-die-another-day/

Enough with the hyperbole already - can we just leave Kodak alone and whatever happens happens?

Dave

 

[Timmyjoe]

Did anyone read any of those links?

A quote from the very first link:
UPDATE: Responding to a question I fired off while writing the above blog post, Veronda has clarified one aspect of the PI sale – specifically how Kodak will sell PI yet still keep its entertainment imaging infrastructure. According to Veronda, “Since we have only one location (Eastman Business Park Bldg. 38) where we manufacture film, we will retain that facility. The buyer of PI would likely engage us with a supply agreement to provide still camera films.” So now you know.

Also...
http://photorumors.com/2013/01/23/kodak-die-another-day/

Enough with the hyperbole already - can we just leave Kodak alone and whatever happens happens?

Dave

Yeah Dave, I read them all.

That is what I was refering to when I said, "The only bright spot is that it looks like, since the still film manufacturing facility is in the same location/building as the motion picture film manufacturing facility (which Kodak is keeping), Kodak is going to "sell" the division, but possibly keep manufacturing the film, which they will sell to whomever "buys" the still film division."

Notice they said, "The buyer of PI would likely engage us . . ." which means the sale would not be contingent on it.

I would love to be as "Que sera sera" as you are, but I depend on the ability to obtain 150+ rolls of Tri-X a year, and if it disappears, I'm going to be in a bind.

Best,
-Tim

 

[Gumby]

I would love to be as "Que sera sera" as you are, but I depend on the ability to obtain 150+ rolls of Tri-X a year, and if it disappears, I'm going to be in a bind.

I'm following Dave's lead... but I don't have the same needs as you do, Tim. But I really hope that you've started working a contingency plan. That seems a bit overdue.

 

[steveniphoto]

saw this a mile away. already switched to HP5.

 

[segedi]

What is Kodak actually actively looking to keep?

 

[x-ray]

Motion picture film is essentially dead. Very few clients in the commercial world have budgets to shoot film on commercials now. I haven't been involved on a shoot in the last three or four years where we shot film.

Theatrical production is now more than 50% digitally shot. Almost all theatrical projection is digital now. Regal Cinemas is based in my town and I believe they are entirely digital now. Regal is the largest theatre owner in the US if I'm not mistaking.

I give cine film two more years at most. Any company buying this division would be nuts IMO.

I hate the thought of kodak folding and really hate the thought that film is one step closer to dead. I shot my first film in 1953 and it's been my life much of my 45 years in business. It almost makes me sick to think about what's happening.

 

[zsas]

Keep Calm and Shoot Tri-X :angel:
http://exchange.kodak.com/projects/3067595-Keep_Calm_and_Shoot_Tri_X_printables_and_wallpapers
^Noteworthy is one of the comments, from Mary-Irene of Kodak on Jul-16

 

[benlees]

saw this a mile away. already switched to HP5.

Ditto. Where I live Ilford has been easier to get and is now cheaper.

 

[sparrow6224]

Tri-X is still cheaper than HP5+ in NYC. Is it my imagination or is HP5 thinner than Tri-X? With a little less contrast? Read another thread: Freestyle says it has received its last order of Arista premium 400, has enough to last a year or so. Despues, no mas.

 

[imokruok]

Motion picture film is essentially dead. Very few clients in the commercial world have budgets to shoot film on commercials now. I haven't been involved on a shoot in the last three or four years where we shot film.

Theatrical production is now more than 50% digitally shot. Almost all theatrical projection is digital now. Regal Cinemas is based in my town and I believe they are entirely digital now. Regal is the largest theatre owner in the US if I'm not mistaking.

I give cine film two more years at most. Any company buying this division would be nuts IMO.

I hate the thought of kodak folding and really hate the thought that film is one step closer to dead. I shot my first film in 1953 and it's been my life much of my 45 years in business. It almost makes me sick to think about what's happening.

Film for motion pictures is more alive than you think.

Yes, cinematographers have migrated somewhat to digital, but it's not a similar migration as happened in the consumer world. Big budget productions are still often shot wholly or partially on film, and keep in mind that 35mm isn't the whole ballgame. There is a lot of use of IMAX film, notably in non-IMAX settings, like "The Dark Knight Rises". (And Kodak Motion Pictures makes IMAX film.)

Also, film archival is very important to Hollywood, which is why Kodak very recently released a new archival film. Film is "future-proof" as you don't need a specialized tape reader, etc., to view it, so long-term storage even for digital productions is on film.

These two uses should provide enough business to keep that business line for Kodak profitable...one would hope.

 

[imokruok]

Did anyone read any of those links?

A quote from the very first link:
UPDATE: Responding to a question I fired off while writing the above blog post, Veronda has clarified one aspect of the PI sale – specifically how Kodak will sell PI yet still keep its entertainment imaging infrastructure. According to Veronda, “Since we have only one location (Eastman Business Park Bldg. 38) where we manufacture film, we will retain that facility. The buyer of PI would likely engage us with a supply agreement to provide still camera films.” So now you know.

Thanks for pulling that quote out. The fact is, if someone else thinks they're better at marketing film than Kodak, it could be worth the purchase. That's what Kodak's banking on, anyhow. Someone buys the "brand," provides Kodak some cash upfront, and also becomes a source of recurring income. Kodak apparently thinks they can do better with motion picture, so they're keeping that product line and the gear to make it!

One other note... one could envision still film dying from the missteps of the new buyer, and the only 35mm film left is the motion picture film. That stuff is amazing and some guys here in LA are repackaging it for consumer use. Not the worst thing in the world!!