 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / Film Photography / Film and Labs / December 2004Future of Kodak Photographic Papers?
If Kodak is going to discontinue film within 5 years, are they going to discontinue printing papers, too? If so, I should order a 5-year supply of paper along wtih my 5-year supply of film! > If Kodak is going to discontinue film within 5 years, are they going to > discontinue printing papers, too? If so, I should order a 5-year supply > of > paper along wtih my 5-year supply of film! That's a big if. The notion that Kodak is going to discontinue film in 5 years is merely someone's guess. But now it's on Usenet and it will get treated as fact! BTW, why has Kodak's web site not indicated any press releases since August 24? Before that, they never went 2 weeks without a press release. Hi Mike, Not to worry, Kodak will be making film and paper for a long time. Also, we have been offering press releases right along. Go to the following URL for details on the most recent. They are only a few as there are many others. http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQuerier.jhtml?pq-path=2509/2510&pq-locale=en_US Talk to you soon, Ron Baird Eastman Kodak Company > > If Kodak is going to discontinue film within 5 years, are they going to > > discontinue printing papers, too? If so, I should order a 5-year supply [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > BTW, why has Kodak's web site not indicated any press releases since August > 24? Before that, they never went 2 weeks without a press release. > If Kodak is going to discontinue film within 5 years, Who told you that? > are they going to > discontinue printing papers, too? As long as they still make money from those, why would they stop making them? Of course, you cold always buy Fuji printing papers, or many other brands. > If so, I should order a 5-year supply of > paper along wtih my 5-year supply of film! Why the sudden paranoia? Some article you read? Ciao! Gordon Moat A G Studio <http://www.allgstudio.com >> If so, I should order a 5-year supply of >> paper along wtih my 5-year supply of film! > > Why the sudden paranoia? Some article you read? Someone over in rec.photo.darkroom opined that film might be gone in 5 years. That was just someone's opinion or exaggeration, but you see how it has taken on a life of its own. > >> If so, I should order a 5-year supply of > >> paper along wtih my 5-year supply of film! [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > years. That was just someone's opinion or exaggeration, but you see how it > has taken on a life of its own. Okay, a rumour . . . that makes a little more sense . . . not really. Ciao! Gordon Moat A G Studio <http://www.allgstudio.com Addendum: Given the longevity of semi-obsolete photographic materials and formats, I expect *some* film to be around for the next 25 years or more. Maybe not much, but some. After all, glass plates were only discontinued (by Kodak) a couple of years ago. << Kodak is going to discontinue film within 5 years, Who told you that? >> A message on this board about a month ago. >>> Kodak is going to discontinue film within 5 years, >> Who told you that? > A message on this board about a month ago. Could you please tell us posting time, newsgroup, and author of that message? I can't find it with a groups.google.com search. I have a "thing" about the NY Times, Washington Post, and so forth being unreliable, so when somebody remarks that Usenet is unreliable, it gets my hackles up. My theory is that you misinterpreted a post about a specific film being discontinued. > My theory is that you misinterpreted a post about a specific film > being discontinued. I seem to recall that the original context was "it looks as if" or "what if" Kodak discontinues film in 5 years. There has been no such announcement from Kodak. In fact, on Kodak's web site, there are no press releases dated after August 24, which is odd; usually they have some every few days, often about picayune topics (so-and-so wins executive promotion, etc.). <<<As long as they still make money from those, why would they stop making them? Of course, you cold always buy Fuji printing papers, or many other brands.>>> Then what is going to be used in every minilab that prints digital files? > <<<As long as they still make money from those, why would they stop making > them? > Of course, you could always buy Fuji printing papers, or many other brands.>>> > > Then what is going to be used in every minilab that prints digital files? If Kodak got out of that market (doubtful), then I am sure Fuji would supply the needed materials. I also expect AGFA to gain more market share, and provide a little competition. The reality is that I doubt Kodak would ever get out of the photo finishing industry. Even if digital cameras become 90% of what everyone uses, some people will still want to print out some snapshots. B/W papers are another story, though there are already some small speciality companies that make really good choices. I rarely found Kodak B/W papers to be better than Oriental, Ilford, or AGFA. Ciao! Gordon Moat A G Studio <http://www.allgstudio.com > If Kodak is going to discontinue film within 5 years, are they going to > discontinue printing papers, too? If so, I should order a 5-year supply of > paper along wtih my 5-year supply of film! People will still want some prints even if no one uses film. -- Dooey. Hi Dave, Let me first assure you that Kodak is not going to discontinue film or paper anytime soon, and surely not in 5 years. There is a giant market out there for such products and you will see that option around for a long time. Rest assured that Kodak will continue to make film for your cameras for a long time. Talk to you soon, Ron Baird Eastman Kodak Company > If Kodak is going to discontinue film within 5 years, are they going to > discontinue printing papers, too? If so, I should order a 5-year supply of > paper along wtih my 5-year supply of film! >Hi Dave, > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] >Ron Baird >Eastman Kodak Company Pan-X, Plus-X, High Speed Infrared, and Tech Pan in sheet sizes? - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Professional Shop Rat: 14,481 days in a GM plant. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Hi Dave, This is a great film list and I have used most of them. Actually, I preferred Pantomic X over techpan for contrast reasons. Unfortunately, not enough people wanted these films to make it feasible to continue to manufacture. The introduction of T-Max also helped in the replacement of them, and so they sadly they were discontinued. This happens like it does for most anything that has completed its product life but that no longer meet the needs of the many, or even the few in some cases. Film in general, however, will continue to thrive for a long time and you will find it for many years into the future. Although the films you note are gone, T-Max was introduced as noted, which brought a whole new emulsion technology to the fore. We do still invest in research for film products. Maybe not as before, of course, but we do. Talk to you soon. Ron Baird Eastman Kodak Company > >Hi Dave, > > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > Professional Shop Rat: 14,481 days in a GM plant. > - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - >Although the films you note > are gone, T-Max was introduced as noted, which brought a whole new emulsion > technology to the fore. We do still invest in research for film products. Hey, Ron-- Can you tell me anything about VR200 film? It seems to be some kind of budget item. I bought it in packs of 4 rolls for $3.99. I can't find any reference to the stuff in the Kodak web site, but the film was all currently dated stuff. Is this emulsion a reincarnation of Kodacolor-II? Hi Jeremy, Just saw your post, so thought I would share what I have on that film. GOLD 200 Film is a great film in its speed class for saturation, accuracy, & sharpness. At the same time - since you noted ROYAL GOLD 200 Film - it offers excellent image structure making it ideal for enlargements. Contrast is slightly lower than GOLD 200 Film which is not necessarily an advantage/disadvantage. The VR 200 gives you good balance of color, grain, & sharpness and is really designed for the value-conscious user. You should be able to find it in stores like Aldi and others of that ilk. Hope this helps. Ron Baird Eastman Kodak Company > >Although the films you note > > are gone, T-Max was introduced as noted, which brought a whole new [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Is this emulsion a reincarnation of Kodacolor-II? Dear Ron and others, Speaking of the future of things... E100 got re-engineered recently (from E100S to E100G) to make it much finer-grained. Someone at Kodak told me E200 was going to undergo a similar improvement. Do you know anything about this? Thanks,  SignatureClear skies, Michael A. Covington Author, Astrophotography for the Amateur www.covingtoninnovations.com/astromenu.html > Hi Dave, > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Ron Baird > Eastman Kodak Company Ron, Here's an idea: Every box of Kodak film and paper sold after June 1 2005 should contain a bond in it worth 33% of the suggsted retail price of the film or paper. The bond would be redeemable for cash if Kodak ceases making that product line prior to the bond expiry. The bond in the box will contain the packaging date of the film/paper product and the date 5 years + ~2 months hence when the bond expires and becomes worthless. Then when Kodak officially announce the 'cut' dates for film they will have to give a 5 year lead time for that type of film, or choose to reimburse the bondholders if they exit early. (I don't mean variants, but major lines like Kodachrome, Ektachrome, Portra, etc.) In this way, a serious film shooter can maintain his film equipment as long as the bonds are issued without too much fear for his investment. If Kodak want an early out, then they can evaluate the financial benefit of paying off the bondholders or maintaining that major film line for another 5 years. (from the decision date, the issued bonds would have ever decreasing validity periods). Benefit to Kodak: Those who prefer film will prefer Kodak risk protected product, keeping the lucrative sales up in that product portfolio as less photogs will jump to digital (given the "insurance" represented by the bond). Of course the bean counters will not like keeping the reserve that a bond would require, but there may be insurance that can be bought in lieu and passed on to the consumer (or simply removed from the fat margins). Don't like a 5 year bond? Okay, make it 2 years, but 100% of the MRSP. Cheers, Alan Signature-- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource: -- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.-- Hi Alan, If that would drive the sales of film, I suspect Kodak would do it along with all other film makers. Actually, you are much better off buying your film as you need it. Might cost a bit more but for the general shooter and many pros, the film would be as fresh as possible. Personally, I don't believe that the change to digital imaging is related to the cost or availability of film but to technology and what you can do with it. For those that want to use digital it is a technology choice and the cost or contract that might be included with film will not keep them as a film shooter. Rather, more than likely the added cost of following your suggestion would increase the transition. Remember, there are literally billions of people that still shoot film and that do not have digital cameras. Not everyone can afford a digital camera. Still, time stands still for no one, including film makers. Technology will take us to a new world of imaging soon enough, and I am sure film will still be part of it for a long time. Talk to you soon, Alan, Ron Baird Eastman Kodak Company > > Hi Dave, > > [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > bondholders or maintaining that major film line for another 5 years. (from the > decision date, the issued bonds would have ever decreasing validity periods). > Hi Alan, > > If that would drive the sales of film, I suspect Kodak would do it along > with all other film makers. Actually, you are much better off buying your > film as you need it. Might cost a bit more but for the general shooter and > many pros, the film would be as fresh as possible. Personally, I don't Oh! Don't be mistaken. The idea is not that people buy 5 years worth of film, but that at any given point in time when he does buy film Kodak would in effect be guaranteeing that the same film will be made and be available for another 5 years (until they make notice that they are winding down). Bonds are about confidence. If there is more confidence, there will be more buyers for the film and less folks running for digital exits. > believe that the change to digital imaging is related to the cost or > availability of film but to technology and what you can do with it. For > those that want to use digital it is a technology choice and the cost or > contract that might be included with film will not keep them as a film > shooter. Rather, more than likely the added cost of following your > suggestion would increase the transition. Printing up little certificates won't cost Kodak vert much at all... it can even be part of the packaging. > Remember, there are literally billions of people that still shoot film and > that do not have digital cameras. Not everyone can afford a digital camera. > Still, time stands still for no one, including film makers. Technology will > take us to a new world of imaging soon enough, and I am sure film will still > be part of it for a long time. Regarding confidence again, it would be nice to see an official statement from Kodak with definite terms for how long they will support film. Cheers, Alan Signature-- rec.photo.equipment.35mm user resource: -- http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm -- e-meil: there's no such thing as a FreeLunch.-- Hi Alan, I doubt there is going to be some statement to that effect as it is not necessary. I am quite confident that Kodak will be making film for a very long time. At least as long as someone wants to buy it. So, if you and I, along with a few others are around for a while, we will have film to use. Talk to you soon, Alan, Ron Baird Eastman Kodak Company > > Hi Alan, > > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > shooter. Rather, more than likely the added cost of following your > > suggestion would increase the transition. > If Kodak is going to discontinue film within 5 years, are they going to > discontinue printing papers, too? Contrary to popular opinion, film is far from dead. It is true that many consumer and business applications are moving to digital, because of economy and convenience, but there will always be film available--even if film amateur photography becomes a niche market. As for paper, have you not noticed that Kodak has been making a major push for "real" photo prints from digital images, through their Ofoto subsidiary? Remember the ads they ran during the Olympics, "Where are all the prints?" Silver halide prints are going strong. Someone has to keep on making the paper for prints . . . |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.