New film from Kodak!

Chriscrawfordphoto said:
The American auto industry went bankrupt last year and the auto industries in other countries are hurting too. Oil companies are selling plenty of fuel for cars!
Click to expand...

The only difference is that we do not have something that replaces the car.... However if the evil business men in Kodak are putting out a new film the only reason can be that digital is dying!
 
O.k. That's funny. 🙂

Kodak, the company that would be digital, is putting out a new film because digital is dying. Somebody put 'em out of their misery. 🙂
 
Kodak makes money on film. My local shop told me they had to improve their films to compete with digital which they did, TMY-2, new version Portras, Ektar 100. These are very good films that SCAN way better than older emulsions. They have to scan well because optical printing is almost gone commercially.

Since Kodak makes little to no money on digital, they have to keep film alive.

And it you think digital is cheaper, I think for the average user it is not. A computer is needed, calibration equipment, programs and uprades, and then it all becomes obsolete for one reason or another. So then you start again and the other equipment will not work with the new computer OS.

What we need is a decent film scanner at < $1000.

Color chems are increasing hard to get in home quantities, not the 25 gal minilab size.
I hear paper for optical printing is no longer made.

We are being lsent down the garden path here folks.
 
You have to be a great man or woman to admit that you were wrong.... After all the bad feedback Kodak got when they discontinued the B&W 220 film nobody had even heard about they realized that the future is film. I read somewhere that they are selling of their digital division and will reinvest in typewriters.
 
Ronald M said:
And it you think digital is cheaper, I think for the average user it is not. A computer is needed, calibration equipment, programs and uprades, and then it all becomes obsolete for one reason or another. So then you start again and the other equipment will not work with the new computer OS.

What we need is a decent film scanner at < $1000.
Click to expand...

I agree a Pc and a digital camera is much more expensive than a film camera, film. processing and a decent film scanner at < $1000 and a PC.
 
Ronald, there are those that would argue that trying to keep one foot in film is actually holding Kodak back from becoming the digital company they want to be. Whether or not film is still profitable for them, it involves resources that might be better directed elsewhere.
 
Ronald M said:
A computer is needed, calibration equipment, programs and uprades, and then it all becomes obsolete for one reason or another. So then you start again and the other equipment will not work with the new computer OS.
Click to expand...

You talk about that device that people have anyway for mailing, chatting, gaming etc.? Most home-PCs are more than sufficient for working with digital photos.
 
A Portra 1600 would be cool 🙂

Regarding discussing film vs digital, interesting and original subject. Please carry on.
 
I assume Kodak did not engage in a cosmic debate of film vs digital and went no further than believing that they could make money with a new film. None of us know what beans the bean counters at Kodak were counting.

That said if you asked me which were the worst managed large American companies over the past few decades, Kodak would be right up there with GM. This is a problem endemic to large old companies with bloated well entrenched managements.
 
Ronald M said:
...

And it you think digital is cheaper, I think for the average user it is not. A computer is needed, calibration equipment, programs and uprades, and then it all becomes obsolete for one reason or another. So then you start again and the other equipment will not work with the new computer OS.
...
Click to expand...

Judging from the use I see of the automatic SD card readers to prints an the loca CVS drug store, I am not sure that holds water.
 
I'm hoping for an updated version of TMY3200P, with a lot less grain and better dynamic range. Ilford killed Delta3200 for me when they jacked the price through the roof.
 
Every new film is good news ! I'm not into color film and don't really give a f about new b&w technology at all as a HP5/Trix user but Kodak still believe in it and it's nice !
 
To be fair, the wording was that there will be a product launch in a few weeks. While a new film would be cool and the obvious thing given the context, it could be anything.
 
Ronald M said:
And it you think digital is cheaper, I think for the average user it is not. A computer is needed, calibration equipment, programs and uprades, and then it all becomes obsolete for one reason or another. So then you start again and the other equipment will not work with the new computer OS.

What we need is a decent film scanner at < $1000.
Click to expand...

My image of the average digital shooter is someone with a point and shoot who already owns a computer. They don't know what calibration is, much less how to do it. If they use photo software, there's a good chance it's a pirated copy of Photoshop. Otherwise, the canned tools in something like Picasa will do them just fine.

The standards RFF'ers apply to our photography are a world away from the standards the "average" shooter is willing to put up with.
 
Pickett Wilson said:
Ronald, there are those that would argue that trying to keep one foot in film is actually holding Kodak back from becoming the digital company they want to be. Whether or not film is still profitable for them, it involves resources that might be better directed elsewhere.
Click to expand...

Yes, that's the idea! The brilliant expert investors should force Kodak to dump it's most profitable line of business so it can grow the business lines that fail to make a profit. Genius!

Let's not pretend you're not included in that group of "those." It's a dumb idea brought to you by the same people who insisted that a business doesn't need to identify a way to make a profit before "building the business." And some of us remember how that worked out. A lot of people don't because it was oh, 10 years ago. And investors have very, very short memories.

For the record, there are those who think that Kodak should stop wasting resources on non-profitable manufacturing ventures and devote those resources to things that make money and grow the company. You remember "making money," right? The number one reason to even have a business? There's obviously enough room in the market for film and digital.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom