No more film R&D, we're going digital: Kodak

Discussion in 'Kodak' started by Bushy, Sep 28, 2003.

  1. It would. Ditto settings for e.g. color saturation. If the cameras don't
    get them, software will.
    John Rethorst, Sep 29, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  2. When I started doing spectroscopy in 1950, Kodak provided the most-used
    forms and plates for spectroscopy, and also for astronomy. Both fields have
    gone substantially to electronic photodetcors, including imaging arrays.
    Kodak stopped making those emulsions several years ago. Kodak always said
    they made these special emulsions as a service only, and did not make money
    on them. The announcement indicates that they don't see the film business
    as profitable much longer.

    The next question is how much longer it will be profitable for them to make
    print papers.

    I'd guess there were cries of alarm when IBM stopped making typewriters.
    Marvin Margoshes, Sep 29, 2003
    1. Advertisements

  3. Bushy

    Eric Gisin Guest

    | I'd guess there were cries of alarm when IBM stopped making typewriters.
    Nope, IBM was the leading computer company at the time.

    Why is that Kodak was a leading digicam company 10 years ago, and risks
    disappearing today?
    Eric Gisin, Sep 29, 2003
  4. ????????????????????????????????????

    You seen their range? Hardly disappearing and trust me, no problem selling
    them either.
    David in Perth, Sep 29, 2003
  5. Bushy

    Norman Worth Guest

    Few are aware of Kodak's long term leadership in digital photography. They
    have developed and produced some of the top electronic imaging parts, and
    they are very well known in the military, intelligence, scientific
    instrument, and astronomy fields for them. Now that the competition has
    heated up in the consumer area, they see a way a leveraging their R&D into
    big money.

    The announcement only mentions a suspension of efforts in consumer films.
    What about professional products? Certainly our choices from Kodak have
    been declining recently, but will they keep supporting and improving
    professional photo products? If they do, any improvements will trickle down
    into the consumer products, which remain excellent.

    BTW, Kodak has been a leader in devloping digital methods for x-ray, too.
    Norman Worth, Sep 29, 2003
  6. Bushy

    Pulver Guest

    What has that to do with the fact that "Kodak was
    already dead when it introduced "Instamatic""? You
    seem to be a few bucks short in the cognition department
    Pulver, Sep 29, 2003
  7. Bushy

    Pulver Guest

    Kodak made a couple of fold down bellows cameras in the
    late 40's, copies of Ansco 30's models but with
    inferior lenses. Essentially they have only been a
    film and paper producer and a chemical packager.
    The problem was it represented a desperate gasp by a
    firm built on solid dead wood. A late century revival
    of the 620 box camera, while its core business was on a
    slippery slope that got steeper day by day.
    Pulver, Sep 29, 2003
  8. Bushy

    Pulver Guest

    Pulver, Sep 29, 2003
  9. That's not a fact, it's your assertion, and I challenged it. Successfully,
    as it seems, because you've yet to support it with anything other than

    Daniel J. Stern, Sep 29, 2003
  10. Bushy

    Pulver Guest

    With their management — guaranteed to make all the
    wrong decisions.
    Pulver, Sep 29, 2003
  11. Bushy

    Pulver Guest

    Excellent analogy!!!
    Pulver, Sep 29, 2003
  12. Bushy

    Pulver Guest

    But Kodak's engineers are oriented to film and paper
    and they seem to be unconscious when it comes to
    hardware. Also with dwindling cash flow, R&D funds
    will dry up quickly.
    Pulver, Sep 29, 2003
  13. Bushy

    Pulver Guest

    One of the big profit centers at Kodak is xray films.
    With hospitals going 100% digital that will wither and
    eventually die. I have been discussing the economics
    of digital xrays with a pal who operates a successful
    radiology practice. On another year or so the price of
    DX equipment will become more affordable and with the
    elimination of darkroom space and huge film file
    storage costs, private labs will convert.
    Pulver, Sep 29, 2003
  14. Bushy

    Pulver Guest

    And with a few more minutes and "Photoshop" crop the
    errors and do a professional retouch job on Grandma's wrinkles.
    Touché on that
    Pulver, Sep 29, 2003
  15. Bushy

    Pulver Guest

    Few quality pros would touch Kodachrome. To get colour
    fidelity they shot eastman colour negative like 5254
    and 5246, later the improved version of Kodacolor, then
    printed the slides on eastman color movie print film.
    When I was active in NY there were a half dozen labs
    that did nothing else. If you got Kchrome in a new
    emulsion batch, fresh shipped from the factory in the
    winter time, and stored it in the freezer, and got
    consistent test shots over several random rolls,
    processed every roll in fresh chemicals, you had a good
    chance for good results. But if the colour quality was
    paramount as for magazine spreads and art books etc,
    negative film allowed for colour adjustments.
    Pulver, Sep 29, 2003
  16. Bushy

    Pulver Guest

    Stern you are a few eggs short of a dozen. What I said
    about instamatic simply provided a time line but you
    went into a great defense of a piece of junk. What you
    wrote was/is irrelevant to my post. I only responded,
    which you might note i rarely respond to your posts,
    because I am trying to increase the traffic stats in

    In the 65 years since I first learned about darkroom
    procedures and photo emulsions, depth of field, how to
    focus an 8x10 view camera, make wet plates (glass) for
    the same, etc........ I have had little to do with
    Kodak consumer products...... as little as I could
    ........ usually I got better quality from Ilford or
    Fuji, and of course the Eastman commercial line was a
    different ball of wax.

    Therefore I could care less about the instamatic film
    sales ploy -- it was just another of Kodak's efforts to
    increase verichrome and later kodacolor film sales like
    the brownie pinhole box camera.

    Please learn to read what is on the screen not what is
    rattling around in your cranium.
    Pulver, Sep 29, 2003
  17. What an amusing little yahoo boy you are.
    mark_digital©, Sep 29, 2003
  18. Bushy

    Phred Guest

    An interesting point. But just what *is* the realistic archival life
    of CDRs?

    Early in the piece they seemed to be claiming "100s of years". Then
    we had Kodak Gold CDRs with turned to silver and then back to "silver
    plus gold" for "six times the [unspecified] life", or something like

    Finally, a week ago, the local ABC morning computer guru said that
    "new Dutch research has shown that the life of CDRs may be a little as
    two years". Now that's a bit sad, if true.

    Let's be optimistic and assume they're out by a factor of ten and
    allow a fudge of 2X, and we get about 40 years. Still not real
    brilliant when you consider you can still make good prints from
    B&W negatives 100 years old, and Kodachrome slides can do better than
    40 years anyway.

    Cheers, Phred.
    Phred, Sep 29, 2003
  19. All wisdom and knowledge will surely die with you, Pulver.
    Could you? Then you obviously care to some degree.

    Don't s'pose you meant that you *couldn't* care less, now, did you?

    Daniel J. Stern, Sep 29, 2003
  20. Bushy

    edward ohare Guest


    Would you like to buy some Kodak stock?

    Oh, that changes it, eh? <G>
    edward ohare, Sep 29, 2003
    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.