kodak sells ccd sensor technology

Yeah ... we can do this. If the Redwings stadium doesn't work, we'll just take over Highland Park ... or Durand-Eastman, or Genesee ... frack the downers
 
Their film technology will be bought by someone if they do go belly up. Isn't it made in China now anyway? Doesn't matter to me if the box says Kodak, Lucky or Fuji as long as the emulsion is the same.
 
No, all the films are made in Rochester. And the emulsion being "the same" doesn't mean that any other factory can achieve the same QA.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
"I am likely wrong about this but: I thought their losses were from the "digital" part of their business? And if so, wouldn't it make sense to get rid of those parts?"

Their business these days IS digital. Their film division lost money, too, this last quarter.
 
Rob-F said:
But what makes them think we need Kodak printers over and above Canon or Epson, et. al.? Seems like sensors are just as much today's product as printers. As a consumer I might not know why I need a Kodak printer rather than an Epson. As a manufacturer (if I were one) I might know why I need a Kodak sensor. Hope they know what they are doing.
Click to expand...

Their inkjet printer line is actually making money, something that can't be said for film, for example. (I don't know why I need an Epson over a Canon over a Brother over an HP over a Kodak printer, but I do buy one eventually. Printers are commodity products, like toasters.)

Remember, the first job of a corporation like Kodak is to turn a profit, not to manufacture and sell products for emotional reasons. Kodak might have leveraged its reputation into a substantial share of the consumer digital camera market, but it chose not to play in that game, for emotional reasons. As a result, Kodak is threatened with extinction.

Per the Rochester newspaper piece, here are the product lines Kodak hopes to lean on: consumer and commercial inkjet printing, packaging printing and workflow software.
 
Last edited:
Pickett Wilson said:
Their business these days IS digital. Their film division lost money, too, this last quarter.
Click to expand...

That's wrong, their film and entertainment division was profitable last quarter.

And for all this "doom and gloom" nonsense here about movie film production: All digital movies, yes all, without no exception, are archived on film. Because it is much safer and 10x more cheaper than digital storage.
Recently Fuji released new film stock for this ("Eterna") and Kodak this week officially announced new film type for this application, too.

So even if all films would be made digitally in the future (which is quite unlikely due to some other reasons) there will be film production for the movie industry.
For archival purposes.

The sky is not falling.

Cheers, Jan
 
HHPhoto said:
That's wrong, their film and entertainment division was profitable last quarter.

And for all this "doom and gloom" nonsense here about movie film production: All digital movies, yes all, without no exception, are archived on film. Because it is much safer and 10x more cheaper than digital storage.
Recently Fuji released new film stock for this ("Eterna") and Kodak this week officially announced new film type for this application, too.

So even if all films would be made digitally in the future (which is quite unlikely due to some other reasons) there will be film production for the movie industry.
For archival purposes.

The sky is not falling.

Cheers, Jan
Click to expand...

Only one question. If the only future use for film in movies will eventually be to archive a movie, that must still be a miniscule amount compared when to all movies being shot and distributed on film. Will the volume of film use for archival only use be enough to support both Kodak and Fuji in production of movie archival film?

Bob
 
Keith said:
So will Kodak become the new Benneton ultimately ... just a name that looks good on a scarf? :D
Click to expand...

To be honest, I thought that's what the "new" Voigtlander was a number of years ago - when Cosina had purchased the rights to the name (at least that's how I understood it, please correct me if I am in the wrong here). Not slighting Cosina's equipment as I rather enjoy it :) just noting that this occurs frequently with brands I think.

That said, I believe it is about time to stock up on a lot of Kodak film, Xtol, and various other accoutrements.

Cheers,
Dave
 
Nikon Bob said:
Only one question. If the only future use for film in movies will eventually be to archive a movie, that must still be a miniscule amount compared when to all movies being shot and distributed on film. Will the volume of film use for archival only use be enough to support both Kodak and Fuji in production of movie archival film?

Bob
Click to expand...

Bob, there are lots of other film products with an excellent future as well:
For example microfilm. Most governments and big industrial companies archive important and sensitive data on microfilm.
Then you have PCB films for the computer industry: All computers have film products in it!
Agfa-Gevaert made an official statement last year that they are coating one million m² of different film products every day!

And coating of film related products is increasing for pharmceutical applications.
There are lots of products, and they all can be coated on the existing coating machines.
By the way, also the RA-4 paper can be coated on these machines (Kodak is still using its Denver plant for RA-4, not Rochester; they could keep running Rochester by transferring RA-4 production to Rochester, if it will be needed in the future).

And the RA-4 market is huge, more than 100 million m² p.a.
Most of the digital snap-shots are printed on RA-4.

The future of the coating plants will be a mixture of niche products (e.g. photo film) and mass products (e.g. PCB films, RA-4 paper, archival film) and new applications (e.g. pharmaceutical applications).

Cheers, Jan
 
dcsang said:
To be honest, I thought that's what the "new" Voigtlander was a number of years ago - when Cosina had purchased the rights to the name (at least that's how I understood it, please correct me if I am in the wrong here).

Cheers,
Dave
Click to expand...

AFAIK the rights on the "Voigtländer" name belong to the German photo chain "Ringfoto". And they are cooperating with Cosina.

Cheers, Jan
 
HHPhoto said:
AFAIK the rights on the "Voigtländer" name belong to the German photo chain "Ringfoto". And they are cooperating with Cosina.

Cheers, Jan
Click to expand...

Ahh.. ok, thank you :) .. all the same, it's not the "same" camera as the original brand - I wonder how people would feel about that if it were the Leica brand... but that's a topic for another thread :)

Cheers,
Dave
 
Wow, hope we don´t get a nasty Xmas present like kodak out of business card!

Quoting the words of the first answer to yhis post:

Things are happenig fast!

Bye!
 
elmer3.5 said:
Wow, hope we don´t get a nasty Xmas present like kodak out of business card!
Click to expand...


Kodak wants to sell off a few things like its sensor capacity and about 1000 patents to raise money. Their cash balance is below $1 billion.

Whether or not their film lines are making money, I don't recall seeing anything from Kodak indicating they're marketing them. Whether or not they might do that is anyone's guess, really. Whether or not anyone would buy them is a bigger guess.

All that would change if Kodak actually filed for bankruptcy. Even then, though, there are different kinds of bankruptcy.
 
Rob-F said:
But what makes them think we need Kodak printers over and above Canon or Epson, et. al.? Seems like sensors are just as much today's product as printers. As a consumer I might not know why I need a Kodak printer rather than an Epson. As a manufacturer (if I were one) I might know why I need a Kodak sensor. Hope they know what they are doing.
Click to expand...

AFAIK Kodak's somewhat unique business model regarding printers is that they charge more for the actual devices and sell cheaper ink instead of subsidising the printers with ink sales. In the long run it's probably more economical so I suppose it's a good buy for people who aren't as influenced by the photography community's focus on Canon and Epson printers.
 
Keith said:
I can't believe the dummies aren't checking in here at RFF regularly to pick up some advice and possible survival tips for our (whoops-sorry) their future!

What's the problem ... maybe they've had their internet cut off? :p
Click to expand...

That comment reminds me of a blurb in a photo-book I saw recently, something along the lines of :

"No wonder our government in Washington are in shambles, those who knew all about running a country are apparently busy cutting hair or driving taxis"

:D:D
 
One thing we don't see is the top executives saying: "We'll cut 100% of our wages and bonuses for the coming 5 years to save the company"

Will we?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom