anjoca76
Well-known
There are a few Fuji films I really like (especially Provia), same with Ilford, but it will be a sad day for me when I can no longer buy Kodak film. Obviously they have lagged behind in the whole shift to digital and have mismanaged themselves into a serious financial mess as a result, but I'm hoping--selfishly and naively--that they can stick it out for at least a little while longer. I realize I haven't the many years of experience that most of you here have with different films over the years, but I personally think the current Ektar and Portra are terrific, and although I can't say I always love Tri-X, it is nevertheless my go-to for b&w.
Frontman
Well-known
Good post. As for the earlier post about Kodak's execs "cashing in" after the bankruptcy, they only get what's left after the other creditors and hourly employees get paid, which will likely be nothing. Believe me, they aren't smoking any cigars now, though I wouldn't be surprised if they were drinking.
I don't agree with any company receiving any kind of bailout. If a company can't compete or succeed, it should step aside another one which can. Companies, like people or anything else, don't live forever.
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
Tri-X, like Kodachrome, is just an iconic film. Kodak would never kill an iconic film.
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
Bob,
Thanks for the benefit of the doubt. You are spot on about the NYT article giving me incomplete information and thanks again for the follow up.
Cal
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
I bought the last 50 rolls of TXP 320 in 220 at Adorama. B&H stock was already sold out. Only have about 15 rolls left.
How many years can Tri-X be stored in a freezer before degradation begins?
Cal
wblynch
Well-known
I guess the question could be, "acceptable degradation".
In that case I'm sure 30 years could be acceptable. I have some 1980's Agfa black and white film (not even Kodak) that was not stored frozen but it gives me pleasing results.
30 years is longer than I need.
I'm more worried about color film though.
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
Thanks for the response. I'm still a bit overwelmed at the thought of no Tri-X, but hoading also has serious limitations. At 200 rolls a year of mixed 120 and 135 I'd need to stockpile 6000 rolls of film and I figure a 30 year supply is what I need.
Time to come up with a plan B.
Cal
Cal
rogerzilla
Well-known
That's plan C.
Calzone
Gear Whore #1
M9
John
Most likely a M9P in chrome. You know I have a chrome fetish. This would be plan C.
I love medium format too much.
Cal
NickTrop
Veteran
I'd put my M9 with c-biogon up against your medium format with film for "resolution" and "sharpness"... lets see which wins!
(honestly, I would have no fun doing this at all...I'd rather we just shoot what we always shoot and use what we want to use).
rogerzilla
Well-known
Colour neg scans beuatifully;much better than slides as the density is lower and the dynamic range is vast. C-41 processing might become an issue eventually but there are millions of single-use cameras still sold, and keeping that going. Personally I wouldn't want to do C-41 at home because it's smelly, the temperatures are too high and it's boring.
DominikDUK
Well-known
For Joe Public Kodak is synonyme for film and film photography, Fuji is not really associated with film in the same way as Kodak is. If you ask someone in the street to name a film manufacturer the answer is very likely to be Kodak. Today Fuji has a broader product base than Kodak it wasn't always so. When the management of Kodak decided to sell parts of it graphic and medical imaging division as well as it's chemical division, dumbest decision ever, the problems really began to start for the company. While Kodak sold off part of it's company Fuji bought several Chemical factories and even has a pharmaceutical division. So in my opinion the reason for Kodak's problem is still bad management and extremely bad marketing
MartinP
Veteran
The Agfa-like paper is being re-manufactured and is widely available, in Europe at least. Data page for the fibre-based variety is here. Most people seem very pleased indeed with the quality of the product, for example as mentioned on APUG.
Unfortunately Ilford have had to make people redundant this year, so far as I have read from their representative who posts on APUG anyway. This is not such great news of course
I'd guess that black and white materials will continue to be around for some while, as there are probably sufficient smaller manufacturers, so long as the raw materials are available - and so long as you don't get scared of the prices. The current best-ever C41 films are much less sure though.
Wasn't a possible problem with the spinning off of the Kodak film producing bits-and-pieces something to do with legal liabilities for pollution in the decades past? A small company taking over was supposedly going to find the insurance costs prohibitive. I recall reading this in an financial article linked from here last year, but unfortunately can't find it again now.
Lets all hope the seasonal cashflow reason given for the recent credit was indeed the whole story.
mwoenv
Well-known
x-ray
Veteran
I looked at the stock quote today and it's $1.55 dropping 14.84%. It was around $86 a few years ago and paid dividends and split once. Glad I don't have any.
This doesn't mean they're bankrupt even if they drop to 1 cent per share but it does indicate the future projections of earnings.
I really hate seeing a giant die a slow painful death but looking back to the 60's and having had dealings with Kodak since then it's no surprise. They could never accept a fractional part of the market and just never got their feet under them after Fuji came into the market.
Sad particularly for the employs.
This doesn't mean they're bankrupt even if they drop to 1 cent per share but it does indicate the future projections of earnings.
I really hate seeing a giant die a slow painful death but looking back to the 60's and having had dealings with Kodak since then it's no surprise. They could never accept a fractional part of the market and just never got their feet under them after Fuji came into the market.
Sad particularly for the employs.
mwoenv
Well-known
A USA Today article in June 2011 reported that 20 million rolls of film will be sold in U.S. this year, down from a peak of 800 million. This is nearly a 98% reduction, so the 20 million might represent sales to those of us who are committed to film.
10 or 20 million rolls at $4 a roll is roughly an $40-80 million a year business in the U.S. Add international sales and film manufacturing will still be a decent business for a few firms that will obviously be much smaller than Kodak or Fuji. So I can't imagine film not being available in the future.
10 or 20 million rolls at $4 a roll is roughly an $40-80 million a year business in the U.S. Add international sales and film manufacturing will still be a decent business for a few firms that will obviously be much smaller than Kodak or Fuji. So I can't imagine film not being available in the future.
K14
Well-known
I'm in!
I'm in!
I've made my bets and my chips are with Eastman-Kodak.
-$1 billion patent pending suit with Apple (Kodak won similar with Korean Samsung and LG).
-Kodak's assets including companies in Japan.
- KODAK Adaptive Picture Exchange (APEX) dry processing and upcoming innovations.
For a buck/50 you have very little to loose and a lot to to gain if certain events start swinging their way.
Show me the river!
Cheers,
Gary
I'm in!
I've made my bets and my chips are with Eastman-Kodak.
-$1 billion patent pending suit with Apple (Kodak won similar with Korean Samsung and LG).
-Kodak's assets including companies in Japan.
- KODAK Adaptive Picture Exchange (APEX) dry processing and upcoming innovations.
For a buck/50 you have very little to loose and a lot to to gain if certain events start swinging their way.
Show me the river!
Cheers,
Gary
Mikeds80
Member
Maybe I should stock up on trix and ektar... even if kodak sticks around, I at least wont have to buy film for a while.