Kodak will no longer make slide projectors

Discussion in 'Kodak' started by Tony Spadaro, Oct 1, 2003.

  1. Not until there's a really good substitute technology which offers
    similar convenience and image quality in a small, portable package....
     
    Scott Norwood, Oct 2, 2003
    #21
    1. Advertisements

  2. Tony Spadaro

    McLeod Guest

    How about a laptop and lcd projector running a CD or DVD?
     
    McLeod, Oct 2, 2003
    #22
    1. Advertisements

  3. So maybe, deep in the steamy jungle in some foreign, unknown land, up on the
    heights of a unreachable plateau, a place can be found where time will stand
    still... ;-)

    I agree that projected slides are awesome to see. Yet the days of people not
    being bored by the thought alone of a slide projector and a box of slides
    being produced are so remote that they are almost forgotten completely.

    Projectors were last used in presentations, mostly of the corporal type, not
    in home entertainment. Presentations have to be a little bit less static,
    faster, more dazzling, and that's why computers, digital images and beamers
    have taken over completely.
    The "really good substitute technology" may not be on par with the projected
    slide as far as image quality is concerned, but beats the old slide-show
    hands down on all those other qualities that matter (and matter even more
    than image quality).

    And how many slide projectors do you buy for home entertainment in a life
    time?
    So it's quite simple: there's no market for slide projectors. They will go
    the way of the dinosaur. In fact, they are almost there already.
     
    Q.G. de Bakker, Oct 2, 2003
    #23
  4. Tony Spadaro

    Jeremy Guest

    x-no-archive: yes
    They cost thousands--to produce images that probably aren't as luminous as
    those from a plain old slide projector.

    There may be a place for that kind of equipment, but it seems that, for the
    more casual user, it is just an expensive replacement for perfectly good
    slide projector technology.
     
    Jeremy, Oct 2, 2003
    #24
  5. Tony Spadaro

    Jeremy Guest

    x-no-archive: yes

    Do you not see the irony in that? Here we have a NG with people that are
    trying to eek every ounce of image quality from their equipment, only to
    compromise on the viewing end! Supposedly in the name of keeping up with
    the times.

    I couldn't care about a snappy presentation--I just want to see those
    luminous, color-saturated images projected on a screen. If slide projectors
    are going out, it is because we have allowed ourselves to be influenced by
    the digital crowd.

    Why buy and use excellent equipment, only to dumb-down the final image? I
    look at computer monitors all day--and I don't want to view all my images on
    them, too.

    Just my 2-cents' worth--I agree with you that slides and projectors are a
    dying breed.
     
    Jeremy, Oct 2, 2003
    #25
  6. You seem to think that projecting slides is the only way that we can "trying
    to eek every ounce of image quality" from our equipment. It, of course,
    isn't.

    And that the good old slide-show has lost ground because people want to keep
    up with the times. That too is only part of the slide projectors demise. The
    home entertainment slide show was boring people to death, and people were
    avoiding having to sit through these shows by whatever way possible. Not
    because there were newer technologies to use, but mostly because people knew
    better things to do with their time, in fact couldn't think of worse ways to
    spend their time.

    The slide presentation survived in the pro-presentation world. People there
    had to sit through/see what was presented. They were interested in the
    content, not the esthetics of what was presented. Better technology becoming
    available, pushing out the slide projector was not "keeping up with the
    times", it was actually using the better ways that became available to put a
    point across, more effective ways to deliver a message.

    And yes, looking at a projected slide is nice.
    But that's not enough to sustain a slide projector producing industry. How
    many projectors have you bought recently? When do you think you will replace
    the one you have now?
    And that, in the end, is it.
     
    Q.G. de Bakker, Oct 2, 2003
    #26
  7. I wonder if one of those smaller companies will buy Kodak's carousel
    projector rights from them.........
     
    William Graham, Oct 3, 2003
    #27
  8. Brightness is not a problem any more. Contrast might be (I've measured
    max dynamic range at about 100:1 from a slide projector, vs perhaps
    50:1 or 70:1 on the only LCD/light valve projector I've measured).
    Resolution is definitely less in the low end, and colorimetry is
    probably pretty iffy. If what you want is to make sure folks can tell
    the difference between red and green on you pie charts, they are more
    than enough. They can even project nice color images. But a slide
    projector will probably give better results for less equipment cost.
     
    Stephen H. Westin, Oct 3, 2003
    #28
  9. Tony Spadaro

    Rafe B. Guest



    Yeah, but won't you miss the occasional upside-down or
    sideways slide, or the ones that jam, or melt in the projector
    while being viewed?

    Won't you miss them going out of (or into) focus as the
    emulsion warms from the heat of the bulb?

    Or the ones that shift in the mount, showing those lovely
    sprocket holes? Or the dust and hairs that collect and
    gather at the inner edges of the mount?

    God, I'll miss all that....


    rafe b.
    http://www.terrapinphoto.com
     
    Rafe B., Oct 3, 2003
    #29
  10. Tony Spadaro

    Alan Browne Guest

    In 99.9% of cases, this was (is, eh Pierre?) still the case. However
    slide shows by good photogs that have been edited to essentials, themes
    and quality are always a delight to the eye.
    Real photogs who shoot slide film will want to have a slide projecotr
    (if not a couple) around, even if it is just for them.
    Business presentations do depend on an aesthetic to keep people
    interested. Color, style, emphasis keep people in it. Very few, even
    cold hearted no nonsense business people can stay focused on a business
    presentation of more than 50 minutes. The eruption of powerpoint and
    the very high quality projectors (as expensive as they are) have added a
    lot of visual quality to such presentations. Business is no different
    than any other endeavour: a picture is worth a thousand words to convey
    most thoughts.
    (Remember the commercial with accounting dweeb with rows and collumns on
    the screen: "These numbers are self explanatory, but let me explain them.").
    Now you're on to something. If Kodak have decided to drop these lines
    it is most likely becasue there is a measured drop in demand. At some
    point the line ceases to make money...
    My (Kodak) slide projector is just over a year old. I will likely still
    have it in 20 to 30 years. My mothers (Kodak) slide projector is
    nearly 30 years old. She still uses it.
    On the other hand I'm on my second slide scanner in 3.5 years...

    Cheers,
    Alan.
     
    Alan Browne, Oct 3, 2003
    #30
  11. Tony Spadaro

    Alan Browne Guest

    "management consultants"? Any qualified business manager can quickly
    calculate when it is time to exit a business segment. Most quality
    oriented companies do not exit a business lightly and even have a
    detailed process for doing so. That Kodak have announced this almost a
    year ahead is a postive sign about their responsibility to their customers.
    Yes.
     
    Alan Browne, Oct 3, 2003
    #31
  12. Tony Spadaro

    McLeod Guest

    Yes, I agree. Slide projectors are great but most fancy slide shows I saw
    involved several projectors and audio equipment and the projectors had to be
    exactly aligned, etc. The chances of having a problem with the presentation
    that required an intermission to fix were about 50/50. A laptop running an
    lcd projector has the capability built in to do audio, special dissolves,
    intricate sequences all on software simple enough for a chimp to operate.
     
    McLeod, Oct 3, 2003
    #32
  13. And of course I've never been to a conference where the connection
    between laptop and projector wasn't working.
     
    Andrew Eremin, Oct 3, 2003
    #33
  14. Tony Spadaro

    Nick C Guest

    Burn the slides onto a CD and view them on a television monitor.

    Nick
     
    Nick C, Oct 3, 2003
    #34
  15. Take heart. In its place, we get green letters announcing "no input"; the
    unavoidable glimpse of a very interesting Windows desktops, giving us an
    insight in what else the presenter is doing (including short-cut icons for
    presentations to rival firms); PowerPoint screens; a demonstration of how
    proficient the presenter is in using the laptops pointing device, and
    through that also an idea of what brand laptop is easiest to operate; etc.

    And some things remain: we still get the presenter giving directions to one
    of his "vasals" to change to the next screen; the occasional wrong screen,
    either one we shouldn't see yet, or one we are not supposed to see at all.
     
    Q.G. de Bakker, Oct 3, 2003
    #35
  16. Tony Spadaro

    Loren Coe Guest

    i just now am wondering if possibly Kodak will stuff the channels? maybe
    there will be a last 'clearance' sale, that _would_ be a nice gesture.
    there will be slide projectors for decades to come, when was the last time
    you saw a 2-1/4" projector? they were avail from Rollie for many years after
    the others dropped that line (and probably still are).

    and btw, wrt presentation quality, i agree that 35mm beats any 2-5000.00
    hi-tech gizmo/computer, but until you see well produced 2-1/4" slides, you
    haven't seen anything to write home about. just a humble opinion from a
    medium format retread. --Loren
     
    Loren Coe, Oct 3, 2003
    #36
  17. Tony Spadaro

    ThomasH Guest

    Not now, the technology is cry far away from a resolution of a
    top lens and good slide film. But I think that for the future
    this is the direction to go.

    Personally I do not believe in LCD or plasma though. I would
    rather expect DLP to be the technology for photographers. With
    DLP contrast values, resolution, luminance and... maintenance
    DLP has the best value. If pixels go bad in a multithousand dollars
    screen, the screen is trash. In an DLP system you would exchange
    the mirror chip, or put in a new lamp or replace (faded?) filters.
    That's it.

    Besides, TI contracted a series of tests with diverse LCD screens
    used in 24x7 usage (around the clock) and the tests unveiled severe
    deterioration of blue layer, what made the current screens basically
    worthless as durable displays for photography.

    See dlp.com for detailed description of the technology. Its cool,
    but do not use this web page with older Netscape, unless you like
    to reboot your computer.

    Thomas
     
    ThomasH, Oct 3, 2003
    #37
  18. Michael Scarpitti, Oct 3, 2003
    #38
  19. Tony Spadaro

    Peter Chant Guest


    OK, but they can be the wrong way up scanned or out of a digital
    camera.
     
    Peter Chant, Oct 3, 2003
    #39
  20. Tony Spadaro

    Peter Chant Guest

    Right, thats it, I'm off to rec.photo.equipment.110
     
    Peter Chant, Oct 3, 2003
    #40
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.