Kodak and film

I saw this in one of the photo magazines last month, may even have been one of Roger Hicks' articles.

I haven't tried it yet, but I do plan to.

At least Kodak realizes that there's still a market. The article asserts that half of the working professionals do film at least sometime. (cite?)

Now, if only they would get a similar attitude toward Kodachrome!

Oh well ... so it goes ...
 
Maybe Kodak thinks that film sales will level off at some point in the future, instead of plummeting all the way to zero.

Maybe their research showed that film sales at that future time will be enough to continue to be profitable.

I can see why they would "cling" to film, it still might have some life left.
 
I find it interesting - when Kodak CEO Perez says "Film is dead," he doesn't mean it. When he says "No, I was mistaken, film isn't dead," he does mean it.

I guess we parse what we read based on what we want to believe, eh? Or am I just poking the bear with a stick again?
 
Hmmm, I was thinking that a very useful new year's resolution would be to stop arguing about the death of film... it would save me countless hours 🙂
 
antiquark said:
Maybe Kodak thinks that film sales will level off at some point in the future, instead of plummeting all the way to zero.

Maybe their research showed that film sales at that future time will be enough to continue to be profitable.
Click to expand...

I'm not a Kodak insider by any means, but given their history over the past few years, and given the current state of the economy, I think it's safe to say that Kodak doesn't f*rt (pardon {blush}) unless they are VERY sure that it will impact their bottom line positively!

With both Fuji and Kodak having recently introduced new and/or improved films, I think it's safe to say that the Powers That Be in the film industry don't consider film to be dead at all.
 
I think Kodak and Fuji will keep making film no matter how much money they lose on it. It's cheap advertising because it keeps them in the press with stories like this one.
 
Business predictions are usually based on growth... clearly there is no more growth in film sales... but supporting a dying product can still be profitable... so it really can be dead and un-dead at the same time.

🙂

bmattock said:
I find it interesting - when Kodak CEO Perez says "Film is dead," he doesn't mean it. When he says "No, I was mistaken, film isn't dead," he does mean it.

I guess we parse what we read based on what we want to believe, eh? Or am I just poking the bear with a stick again?
Click to expand...
 
people are still buying used Leicas (and other RF's), right? As long as we use them there will be someone selling us film... that is the reality. I have a number of very nice cameras that I don't plan to stop using anytime soon... how about you?

antiquark said:
Maybe Kodak thinks that film sales will level off at some point in the future, instead of plummeting all the way to zero.

Maybe their research showed that film sales at that future time will be enough to continue to be profitable.

I can see why they would "cling" to film, it still might have some life left.
Click to expand...
 
mh2000 said:
Business predictions are usually based on growth... clearly there is no more growth in film sales... but supporting a dying product can still be profitable... so it really can be dead and un-dead at the same time.

🙂
Click to expand...

My point was that if Kodak says something we don't like, we say they don't know what they're talking about, they're lying, etc, etc. If they say something we like, then they're clearly correct. I wasn't so much interested in what Kodak has to say, but in what we have to say about what Kodak says, based on whether or not we want to hear it.
 
what that article fails to report is the astronomical sums Kodak has spent on digital business while still failing to see one penny of profit in that realm. Film is arguably a profitable enterprise, while digital is a money pit.
 
Yvette said:
I think Kodak and Fuji will keep making film no matter how much money they lose on it. It's cheap advertising because it keeps them in the press with stories like this one.
Click to expand...

I'll say again, companies often carry a negative cash flow product in order to claim a full product line -- this claim is important to bigger companies. Economies of scale, production line availability, prod mix, etc. also contribute. An intangible gain.

The R&D is already depreciated (paid). We will see fewer new products and eventually a smaller line of B&W and color negative film.
 
40oz said:
what that article fails to report is the astronomical sums Kodak has spent on digital business while still failing to see one penny of profit in that realm. Film is arguably a profitable enterprise, while digital is a money pit.
Click to expand...

Ah, it's all so simple. That must be why Nikon and Canon are bankrupt, they aren't making film cameras anymore. Oh wait, they're not bankrupt. Huh.

Well, this digital fad will be over soon, and we can all go back to film. And having milk delivered. And elevator operators. And disco. Maybe some 8-track tapes.

http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS135789+31-Jul-2008+BW20080731
 
Again - there are more labs at drug stores and photo shop chains in my immediate area than I can count. None of them have stopped selling or developing film. In my family, I'm the only digital camera user - and I use a film camera 99% of the time. Where the drug stores used to sell film, they now sell disposable film cameras. My 10 year old son used one a few weeks ago. Lots of folks out there want to take pictures who are complete luddites - or more accurately, have technical phobias.

Digital P&S cameras - slow zoom lenses, most don't do ISO above 200 very well, battery dependency, poor dynamic range, bad for black and white in-camera, can't do selective focus - images very flat.

Pro still shoot at least "some" film because they see the advantages of it. I get the sense many miss it but are forced to use digital. One pro photog at a recent event had the latest Nikon (and I thought my Lynx 14 was big and heavy...) His lament was that for all its capabilities and bells and whistles, it's "just 35".
 
Last edited:
Film will be like vinyl: a niche market, but stable, and with enough turnover to support a small industry around it. The days of a C-41 lab on every corner are long gone, but 1 good pro-lab/city with mail-order, and Fuji, Kodak and Ilford churning out film, and I'll be happy for decades.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom