Kodak plans to quit film

[darekk]

Kodak plans to quit film business
BBC News | News Front Page | World Edition
Camera pioneer Kodak plans to sell its remaining still-camera film and photography paper businesses to help it avert collapse.

As a kid I dreamed about taking pictures on legendary Kodak films, but they were far too expensive in my country and unavailable in legal official stores. Only smuggled Kodak materials were available.

[darkslide]

It's a sad but possibly inevitable end to a historic company (or at least, part of it) - but if you read the article it does say "may sell"...

This said of course Kodak are not the only people currently making film or paper.

Leaves whistling "Always look on the bright side of life..."

[AB26]

If Kodak has to collapse it will be a disaster for Hasselblad I suppose.

[darekk]

Inevitable result of digital photography appearance. But what about medical B&W matrials, materials used in science to capture chromatograms - radioactive, fluorescent etc. However this is only small part of entire business. They developed very sophisticated science branches and everything goes to archives.

[John Morton]

Well I suppose that this has been coming for a while, and everyone knew it was more or less inevitable. I guess we could go on and on about the shortcomings of Kodak photographic products (well, I could) just compared to other manufacturers of film and paper (Ilford, Agfa, Fuji, etc.) but of course none of those companies are anywhere near where they use to be with their product availability.

I think, though, that everyone now agrees: nostalgia aside, digital captures are far superior to film captures. I haven't shot, developed or printed B&W film since 2007 and although I have everything I need to do so ready at hand, I have no intention of doing so in the foreseeable future. I would have to travel at least 50km to another, larger city just to find a decent roll of color film; and I would have to send it even farther to a yet larger city to have it developed and printed decently.

On the one hand people are sad to see Kodak come to this end; but on the other hand, Kodak developed the original Bayer sensor pattern that is still the mainstay for digital sensors; so I think that people will be wondering for at least the next hundred years "What the heck happened there with that company?"

Truly an archival quality question!

[jcuknz]

"What the heck happened there with that company?"

Simple answer, management didn't pick the right options .... I think the last time I used film was round 1996 or '97. Maybe the turn of the century.

[darekk]

Simple answer, management didn't pick the right options .... I think the last time I used film was round 1996 or '97. Maybe the turn of the century.

It is difficult to believe this because digital cameras did not exist yet or their price was comparable to price of a good vehicle (and they had maybe something around 2MPx ...).

management didn't pick the right options ....

Sooner or later others would create sensors, but only a little different. Moreover Kodak perhaps tried to switch to digital photography, maybe still does. They have very good knowledge about colors and conversion from stored information (film) to a final image.

[Glenn NK]

I don't think that Kodak even kept up in the film field - many pro film photographers in the landscape field used Velvia (Fujii) - and some still do. Losing Kodak won't be a hardship for them.

At first (1962) I used Kodachrome, but I switched to Fujichrome and Fujicolor when these became available.

As for Hasselblad, they have digital 50 MP backs.

Glenn

[darekk]

many pro film photographers in the landscape field used Velvia (Fujii)

Me too. Beatiful saturated colors. Especially when used together with polarizing filter. And superior resolution (very small grain).
And Kodak Ektachrome E-200 to take pictures of animals, because it requires higher sensitivity (short exposition time) and also because Velvia's shadows would be sometimes to dark because of high contrast, sometimes too high.

for Hasselblad, they have digital 50 MP backs.

Royce royce among cameras. Like probably Leica. And a little retro. Very nice looking toys. Yes, they can switch from films to proffessional backs.

[drjuice]

I can't speak to what's happening in other countries, but in the US, because of federal mandates about the availability and transferability of medical records, virtually every "standard" medical imaging technique has converted to digital or is in the process of doing so.

IJS....

v

[darekk]

But maybe they scan X-ray images, not shoot them using sensors.
This is very dangerous. One day electricity will be turned off and entire human knowlege will dissapear irreversibly.
I think that carvings in stone would much more permament.

[jcuknz]

Darekk ...
I cannot remember exactly when I bought my first digital camera .. a Coolicam 480x320 pixels which on first day of use captivated me to digital*... when it was pointed out that it didn't do justice to my skills I advanced to a Canon s20 3.3Mp.
This happened about the turn of the century. I remember my first PP was changing pixel by pixel to block out a background from somebody. My foolishness in objecting to large files clogging up my very limited storage space of those days. Of buying a 32Mb CF card for the price of three 8Gb SD cards today

*I was editing a club magazine in those days and club members were engaged in two locations ..I covered the first with the Coolicam and had written the story and arranged the photos in about an hour before driving a few hundred miles to the other location.... digital was marvelous for my needs. The Coolicam cost me $175. The S20 around $2200. My latest GH2 $700, I already had the $700 lens for it.

[Glenn NK]

I can't speak to what's happening in other countries, but in the US, because of federal mandates about the availability and transferability of medical records, virtually every "standard" medical imaging technique has converted to digital or is in the process of doing so.

IJS....

v

I am occasionally in the medical imaging departments of the three local hospitals; literally every image is now digitized. The specialist can examine all image types in his office or even at home. (the equipment is very heavy and must be well supported by the structure to prevent vibrations during imaging - that's my involvement).

X-Rays: (I don't know if they shoot film first and scan), but I think that other imaging goes directly from the scanning device to the digital format (MRI's). There are many large screen monitors in the medical imaging area.

Perhaps you can fill us in.

Glenn

[darekk]

This is very comfortable.
But there are techniques like Western, Southern, Northern blotting and other ones, where pictures are taken by putting film on membrane in special casette for from parts of second to several days until light from fluorescent probe or radiation from radioactive marker exposes it, sometimes at -70 degrees.
http://www.molecularstation.com/images/western-blot.jpg
Sometimes they are kept at -70 degrees in freezer many days covered with film until they are get exposed sufficiently ... It is impossible to keep digital camera under such conditions, and digital sensor is probably insensitive to such radiation, and there are no lenses transforming beta radiation. Actuall sensor should be extremaly large, like ~30x30cm, to take such picture ... And kept on a blot in a freezer ...

Or even pictures of gels wit nucleic acids labelled with fluorescent ethidium bromide are being shot using cameras:
http://www.google.pl/url?q=http://ww...rrZ-HlFCIsem7Q
http://www.google.pl/url?q=http://ww...reDIMIFukcehCA
Here:
http://toolboxes.flexiblelearning.ne...ogy/step07.htm
http://webserver.nccsc.k12.in.us/rha...docstation.jpg
is such camera, maybe Polaroid (at least papers). However in this case replacing it by digital camera would be perhaps easy.

[Manfred M]

If you read the article, they are not looking at exiting the commercial film business, just the consumer market. Paper and camera film are speciifically mentioned, as well as the kiosk business. They are also exiting the commerical document scanning business.

Commercial film (I believe this is their movie film stock and X-ray films) will be retained. The fact that they are looking to sell the camera film and paper business means that the buyer is likely to continue to produce these products. These may or may not carry the Kodak brands (that would be a licencing issue).

[AB26]

As for Hasselblad, they have digital 50 MP backs.

Glenn

Exactly, with Kodak inside!

[darekk]

Hasselblad moved to the new, digital era.

[blakemcguire]

Kodak just signed a contract with some major cinema names to continue selling cinematic film. To the extent of my knowledge, their primary business is going to be in printers and ink until they're clear of bankruptcy. Hopefully they do well, because IIRC they aren't doing the ridiculously high prices on ink that the other companies are doing.

[AB26]

Hi darekk,

Hasselblad uses a Kodak digital sensor in that back. But the problem seems to have been resolved for Hasselblad, Kodak sold its Image Sensor Solutions business to Platinum Equity in November 2011. Well they might also divert to Sony for sensors, like Nikon, with Sony inside.

Seems like Kodak is really in big financial trouble.

[jcuknz]

Commercial film (I believe this is their movie film stock and X-ray films) will be retained. .

I read a newspaper in the last week where there is turmoil in the American cinema business because 'hollywood' is giving away film for digital means of projection* ... the writing is on the wall for film
However much its supporters will cry denial. I hope for their sakes a few niche producers will remain in business.
Just as in around 1984 I embraced Electronic News Gathering as opposed to film so in recent times I dumped my film gear.
*I would suggest the production use of film is miniscule compared to the release print use.