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

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

  1. Stephen Pinker, in _The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language_,
    wrote:

    A tin ear for prosody (stress and intonation) and an obliviousness to the
    principles of discourse and rhetoric are important tools of the trade for
    the language maven. Consider an alleged atrocity committed by today's youth:
    The expression _I could care less_. The teenagers are trying to express
    disdain, the adults note, in which case they should be saying _I couldn't
    care less_. If they could care less than they do, that means they really do
    care, the opposite of what they are trying to say. But if these dudes would
    stop ragging on teenagers and scope out the construction, they would see
    that their argument is bogus. Listen to how the two versions are pronounced:

    COULDN'T care
    LE
    i ESS.


    I
    CARE
    LE
    could ESS

    The melodies and stresses are completely different, and for a good reason.
    The second version is not illogical, it's _sarcastic_. The point of sarcasm
    is that by making an assertion that is manifestly false or accompanied by
    ostentatiously mannered intonation, one deliberately implies its opposite. A
    good paraphrase is, "Oh yeah, as if there was something in the world I could
    care less about."
     
    Michael Geary, Sep 29, 2003
    #61
    1. Advertisements

  2. Bushy

    Üter Guest

    That is mostly among the pros who do advertizing print work. As
    Film offers more than resolution. Digital technology has a long way to go
    before I'll give up film. I'm not talking about image quality either.
     
    Üter, Sep 29, 2003
    #62
    1. Advertisements

  3. Film offers more than resolution. Digital technology has a long way to go
    So what's the point in continuing to work on creating new films when
    the handwriting is clearly on the wall?
     
    Randall Ainsworth, Sep 29, 2003
    #63
  4. Bushy

    John Smith Guest

    Edward,

    Yes, I believe that digital is supplanting film. No question.

    But as you look around the world, many people are now being able to afford a
    camera. They cannot afford both a digital camera and a computer. But they
    can afford a cheap camera to use with film. A family's photos are still one
    of their most valued possessions. People in developing countries (and there
    are lots of both) will buying inexpensive film cameras to keep a record of
    their important occasion.

    If you were Kodak and had miserable operating performance, what would you
    do? As you look at your sweet of products, you already realize that your
    film is pretty darn good. Yes, there is still room for incremental
    benefits, but at a high cost. You know that most film makers are likely to
    taper their R&D efforts as the advanced world will move towards digital.
    The lesser developed countries will be pleased with current commercial
    films. So expending valuable capital towards achieving incremental gains in
    film appears to a suboptimal use of precious resources.

    I also suspect the high-end film cameras made by Canon and Nikon will be
    their last major models. They already have plenty of bells and whistles
    that should more than suffice even the most demanding of photographers. So
    now their energy and resources will be applied towards digital.

    I see nothing shocking or unwarranted in Kodak's release. It appears rather
    obvious. The company had no choice.

    Regards,
    Kevin
     
    John Smith, Sep 29, 2003
    #64
  5. Bushy

    Jan Philips Guest

    "Please, don't take my Kodachrome away" - Paul Simon, Kodachrome (TM)
     
    Jan Philips, Sep 29, 2003
    #65
  6. Bushy

    photon Guest

    (...)
    I have a few CD-Rs that are not 4y old and that I can no more read. Brand
    name ones, even if not of the highest quality (obvioulsy).

    Digital is only archival if you are extremely careful, backup everything
    regularly and copy old media to new ones to avoid obsolescence. I even just
    upgraded my PC with a RAID setup to have some sort of fault tolerance,
    following a recent hardware failure of my system disk, which caused me the
    loss of a few files only.

    The problem is I know I'll eventually neglect or forget to backup some data.

    The digital backup/archival issue is currently stopping me from going to
    full digital.

    Film may fade with time, but restoring a faded photo on a computer is pretty
    straightforward. Restoring a corrupted image from an obsolete medium is
    another thing...
     
    photon, Sep 29, 2003
    #66
  7. You believe what you want to believe and that makes you amusing.
    You're not the first Yahooer to come here and amuse us.
    Mark_
     
    mark_digital©, Sep 29, 2003
    #67
  8. Bushy

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    Considering the ridiculously cheap price of blank DVDR's
    today (as low as 50 cents each, when bought in bulk) and
    that CD-ROM's are now next to free (or even completely
    free, I recently bought a 50-pack for the same price of the
    included rebate check), you'd be pretty stupid if you didn't
    make at least 3-4 backup copies of your most important
    stuff.
     
    Paolo Pizzi, Sep 29, 2003
    #68
  9. Bushy

    B.Rumary Guest

    Reminds me of that remark by George Bernard Shaw - "a photographer is like a
    salmon laying its eggs; he produces a thousand pictures, of which only a few
    survive" (or something like that!).

    Brian Rumary, England

    http://freespace.virgin.net/brian.rumary/homepage.htm
     
    B.Rumary, Sep 30, 2003
    #69
  10. Bushy

    B.Rumary Guest

    Are you sure about that? I thought most of them had gone to video years ago,
    to save costs.

    As for cinema film, Lucasfilm is one of a number of companies who are
    experimenting with digital shooting _and_ projecting!

    Brian Rumary, England

    http://freespace.virgin.net/brian.rumary/homepage.htm
     
    B.Rumary, Sep 30, 2003
    #70
  11. Bushy

    obakesan Guest

    HiYa


    I just had a hard disk fail, which despite backing up monthly to CD-R meant
    that I lost the images from a particular camping trip, and a trip to a
    national park. As well as backing up to CD-R I also backup to an external HD,
    but due to the amount of copying, and some re-arranging of my filing structure
    (some 4000 images) I ended up not getting that onto my backup.

    so you still need to be careful.

    With a larger volume of files to organise, its easier to loose things amid
    the volume, and I have not misplaced a negative yet.


    See Ya
    (when bandwidth gets better ;-)

    Chris Eastwood

    we tend to blame others for our problems
    I think this is something we inherit from our parents

    please remove undies for reply
     
    obakesan, Sep 30, 2003
    #71
  12. Our local university hospital built a new outpatient facility a few
    years ago. Not a single wet darkroom was included in the facility,
    everything in the new radiology department was digital processing.

    Even a few dentists are using digital radiography; the digital
    equipment is too expensive for most dentists, but the radiation
    exposure is less with digital equipment.


    Yes, indeed, we are living during the onset of the digital age. I
    suspect that
    massive change is upon us when someone with many film negatives from
    his past states that he'd do his future work digitally.

    Officials at Western Union telegraph company weren't impressed with
    Alexander Graham Bell's demonstration of his new fangled telephone.
    Some computing person said that there was a worldwide need for only
    six or so computers. Another computing person said that no one would
    need more than 64K of memory. The list goes on.

    _________________________
     
    camera critter, Sep 30, 2003
    #72
  13. Bushy

    Ron Andrews Guest

    Maybe so in the UK, but Burbank still uses a lot of film.
    George Lucas certainly garnered a lot of attention for his digital
    production and distribution systems, but other producers aren't exactly
    standing in line to copy his methods.
     
    Ron Andrews, Sep 30, 2003
    #73
  14. Its archival properties and qualitative excellence will be
    Sorta like DDT pesticide,
    Sorta like abestos insulation,
    Sorta like thalidamide sleeping pills,
    Sorta like chrome bumpers on automobiles ;-)
    All were excellent for their intended uses, but they also have
    unacceptable consequences.

    U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Labor
    (DOL) took the position that industrial workers shouldn't need to die
    from chromium poisoning just so that automobiles could have shiny
    bumpers, and the manufacturers concluded that it wasn't economically
    feasible for them to develop safe processes for chrome plating, hence
    our automobiles now have plastic-polymer bumpers rather than chrome
    bumpers.

    Since there are less toxic processes available in photography, EPA
    probably takes the position that our environment doesn't need to be
    poisoned with toxic chemicals just so that archival Kodachrome
    transparencies can be manufactured. For example, just imagine how many
    of the early photographers were sickened from being confined in tiny
    and unvented darkrooms while fixing their exposed silver plates with
    fumes of mercury (using a candle flame to heat mercury). The phrase
    "mad as a hatter" probably could be applied to the early
    daguerotypists.

    Freon is very useful as a refrigerant chemical, but its destruction of
    the ozone layer of our atmosphere is an unacceptable consequence.

    Many children have been burned when their sleeping clothes burst into
    flames due to a lit cigarette or a lit match, but now doctors are
    detecting flame retardant chemicals present in Mother's breast milk.

    Such are the risks/benefits of our modern technological society.

    Some of our processes really do deserve to be made obsolete when
    different technologies are developed. [Please note that I chose to
    write "different" technologies rather than "better" technologies.]
    ___________________________
     
    camera critter, Sep 30, 2003
    #74
  15. (camera critter) wrote in
    The way you wrote that, it sounds like an adaptation to prevent children
    from combusting. I.e., the mother's body adds flame retardant chemicals to
    breast milk, and voila, fire-resistant babies.
     
    Constantinople, Sep 30, 2003
    #75
  16. Bushy

    Eric Gisin Guest

    | >Its archival properties and qualitative excellence will be
    | > missed when it's gone.
    |
    | Sorta like DDT pesticide,

    Pretty harmless compared to it's successors, organo-phosphates, which are
    neurotoxins to children and some adults.

    | Sorta like abestos insulation,

    You would rather burn to death?

    | Sorta like thalidamide sleeping pills,

    Sleeping pills? It is currently approved for some disorder.

    | Sorta like chrome bumpers on automobiles ;-)
    | All were excellent for their intended uses, but they also have
    | unacceptable consequences.

    Wacko.
    |
    | U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Labor
    | (DOL) took the position that industrial workers shouldn't need to die
    | from chromium poisoning just so that automobiles could have shiny
    | bumpers, and the manufacturers concluded that it wasn't economically
    | feasible for them to develop safe processes for chrome plating, hence
    | our automobiles now have plastic-polymer bumpers rather than chrome
    | bumpers.
    | i
    There are plenty of just-as-toxic metals in use today.

    If you want to live with wood heating, leaches, horses, etc. and die a
    horrible death from them, I'm all for it.

    | Since there are less toxic processes available in photography, EPA
    | probably takes the position that our environment doesn't need to be
    | poisoned with toxic chemicals just so that archival Kodachrome
    | transparencies can be manufactured. For example, just imagine how many
    | of the early photographers were sickened from being confined in tiny
    | and unvented darkrooms while fixing their exposed silver plates with
    | fumes of mercury (using a candle flame to heat mercury). The phrase
    | "mad as a hatter" probably could be applied to the early
    | daguerotypists.
    |
    What does hundred year old chemistry have to do with today's much safer world?

    | Freon is very useful as a refrigerant chemical, but its destruction of
    | the ozone layer of our atmosphere is an unacceptable consequence.
    |
    There are plenty of alternatives. Get a clue

    | Many children have been burned when their sleeping clothes burst into
    | flames due to a lit cigarette or a lit match, but now doctors are
    | detecting flame retardant chemicals present in Mother's breast milk.
    |
    You prefer your children to die a painful death, over a one-in-a-million
    chance of cancer.

    | Such are the risks/benefits of our modern technological society.
    |
    | Some of our processes really do deserve to be made obsolete when
    | different technologies are developed. [Please note that I chose to
    | write "different" technologies rather than "better" technologies.]

    Another environmental mental case. Do you use film or etch rocks?
     
    Eric Gisin, Sep 30, 2003
    #76
  17. Bushy

    Paolo Pizzi Guest

    Granted that, but shit also happens with film.
    Trust me, I learned that the hard way...
     
    Paolo Pizzi, Sep 30, 2003
    #77
  18. Bushy

    Ron Andrews Guest

    Speculation is not fact. Let's be careful with the truth. I like the
    free flow of information in this NG, but some days I appreciate some of the
    moderated groups where the strongest words are: "Can you cite a reference to
    support your contention?" More comments interspersed.

    The EPA has not taken the position that localities are responsible for
    local sewer codes. Local sewer codes in general have tight limits on silver
    and a few other chemicals. This required recovery and re-use by the
    photofinisher. The rules were stringent, but they could be met by many labs.
    Can you docment a case where someone was poioned by Kodachrome processing
    chemcals? How about a fish or a bird?
    You've got the right idea, but it was the fuming mercury developer, not
    the fixer that was toxic. FWIW, the fixer that Daguere used (sodium
    thiosulfate) is often used today. 96 years later industrial hygene had
    progressed to the point where processing chemicals could be handled safely.
    Hydroquinone and paraphenylinediamine developers have replaced fuming
    mercury.
     
    Ron Andrews, Sep 30, 2003
    #78
  19. Bushy

    Shane Baker Guest

    Agreed.

    That said, apparently all brands aren't equal. According to an
    article you can find at
    http://www.wilhelm-research.com/pdf/Family_Tree_MagazineSept_03.pdf

    Mitsui Gold are good for 100 years and Fuji for about 70.

    The trick is to find someone (in Australia at least) who sells them!

    Regards


    Shane Baker
    ______________________

    Canberra, Australia
     
    Shane Baker, Sep 30, 2003
    #79
  20. Bushy

    dvus Guest

    photon wrote:

    [snip]
    <shudder...>, I went the Raid0 route awhile back for the speed increase, (turns
    out that wasn't even that significant), and had a problem with one of the
    drives. Due to the mechanics of the system, when I lost one drive the info on
    the other was useless as well. I learned a big lesson then, I stick with
    conventional drive use now and if one drive fails I still have the info on the
    others.

    dvus
     
    dvus, Sep 30, 2003
    #80
    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.