Kodak resurgence in Film

[bob_the_builder1]

Rowland,

 

I criticised your fear mongering about the end of Kodaks film produciton. You have yet to

back up any of your claims with any real facts. Kodak themselves have said time and time

again they have no intention of leaving the business and will stay in it until the end.

 

Clearly, despite your self-proclamed expert status, you dont know what you are talking

about.

[bob_the_builder1]

<i>If APUG.org looks like an Ilford fan club it's because the reborn Ilford have talked and

listened to its customers</i>

 

Oh really, by doing what exactly? There s no doubt that their PR guy is very nice but I dont

see Ilford having actually done anything their customers asked for. We asked if Ilford could

not supply Postcard paper to our market and we told they would not...

[rowland_mowrey]

Bob;

 

Yooo Hoooo.... "Kodak will stay in it until the end".

 

There is a very loose definition of that term. The end is 'the end of profitability'. They reached that abruptly with the end of B&W paper products. I would guess then next 'end' will be Kodachrome films. You see them vanishing already.

 

I think E6 will go sometime after that.

 

Negative film will be profitable (B&W and color) for as long as motion picture lasts.

 

My sources? The Rochester Democrat and Chronicle and updates by Dr. Mary Jane Hellyar, VP of analog products at Kodak and Antonio Perez, both of whom I have met and have heard giving talks on this in person. Tomorrow, I will be at a luncheon talk by Dr. Jim Weaver, current Director of Research at Kodak. I may get more information there.

 

They all agree that 'the end' is defined as the end of profitability. In fact, Antonio Perez said to me directly, "we got out of B&W paper production because we were hemorrhaging out of it".

 

Now, what are your sources?

 

Ron Mowrey

[simon evans.]

BTB,

 

Your scepticism suggests you have not had much dialogue with Simon Galley or the team at Ilford's factory in Cheshire. You seem to be very keen to shoot down anyone who has first-hand information without having any reason to do so.

 

Since its rebirth in 2005 Ilford has, for example, provided ULF materials in uncommon sizes and done a production run of SFX200 after much pestering (120 format was only produced after a great deal of interest, they had initially decided it was not worthwhile). IIRC Perceptol was only re-introduced after requests, it was initially left off the list of chemicals stocked after the management buyout.

 

You might think the posts on APUG by Simon Galley are merely good PR, but in fact the team at Ilford realised that this approach helps both Ilford and their customers. It's symbiotic, I guess. They won't make just anything you ask for, but they will consider all reasonable requests as long as it is economically viable. At the scale they are operating this can be quite a low threshold.

 

It may be that your distributor that has not ordered the materials, decisions made at Ilford HQ are not the only factor in supplying a market.

 

Are you really a builder?

[bob_the_builder1]

Simon,

 

I have dealt with Simon - nice guy, but I have yet to see him do anything to benefit his

customers. My distributor tells me it is Ilford that will not ship Postcard paper to my market.

When I quizzed Simon about this on Apug he said it was the distributor. When I pressed him

on the point I was banned from Apug. Nice way to deal with your customers. All I wanted was

to buy some paper!

[bob_the_builder1]

p.s. At least Kodak can ship film to the client. Outside of the UK and USA (where

coincidentally most Apug readers are located) it is very hard if not impossible to buy many

Ilford products. So much for listening to the customer.

[rowland_mowrey]

Bob;

 

You made two posts and you ignored mine??? Wow.

 

Banned from APUG? Last run-in I had with anyone banned from APUG here on PN, it turned out that they had been banned from several other sites as well. It explains your comments about APUG, I think.

 

Oh well, just goes to show us all. You have actually answered me and Simon as well. Thanks.

 

All the best to you.

 

Ron Mowrey

[bob_the_builder1]

Rowland,

 

There you go fear mongering abut the demise of film again. And your so called "sources"

are nothing of the sort. Nobody has said that negative film will not be profitable without

motion picture film, only you! Kodak have said nothing of the sort. Is Antonio Perez aware

that you spend your free time creating fear about the viability of Kodaks products. I think I

will drop him a line and point this out... seeing as you think you are such chums.

 

Apug is the only site I have ever been banned from. And why was I banned? For daring to

put an advertiser on the spot. As a magazine Editor I am well aware of how to handle

debate and I must say that Apug is one of the the most controlling, censoring sites on the

web. The owner seems to run it as his personal fiefdom and doesnt seem to give a dam

about free speech - just advetising revenues and subscription fees. And dont give me any

of that nonsense about Apug saving film or film knowledge any such conceit. Those guys

are far far too full of themselves and the vast majority of posts are just hot air.

[nige_buddy]

better get Kodak to send you some Postcard stock then...

[rowland_mowrey]

Bob;

 

The consensus of reportage from others and comments from Perez himself have verified my comments. You alone seem to be a disbeliever so belive what you want.

 

I am no chum of his. I met him and spoke with him one time. I feel that he has made errors in both direction and speaking about Kodak, but he is doing what he was hired to do, so I have mixed feelings about the resultant directions.

 

You cannot make people buy analog products and the statistics published elsewhere show that sales are dropping. As long as Kodak can maintain profit, they will stay in film. It does not take an Einstein to figure that out.

 

Draw a line of intelligence amongst all here who understand that logic. Then place a dot below that line. You are either that dot, or you are a total disbeliever in all that logic and the market dictates.

 

You better start buying nothing but Kodak film and 'paper' ~grin~ as you dislike Ilford so much and have such faith in Kodak.

 

Ron Mowrey

[rowland_mowrey]

Here are some statistics for you that I have looked up and checked.

 

Kodak, until recently, had 8 plants ww that produced just about 24/7/365. At the present time, they have 2 plants producing on an approximate 16/5/200 schedule of 2 tricks on a 5 day week with shutdown on holidays (which was not done before).

 

The plants often kept up to 4 machines in just one building (out of several) busy on the original schedule, but on the current schedule, they often run only 1 or 2 machines total at any of the 2 plants.

 

With this, they supply the current WW demand for Kodak color and B&W films and outproduce all EU film companies combined. Does this put the drop in perspective?

 

R&D has virtually stopped except for work on Motion Picture films and 2 electron sensitization for color consumer negative films. See for example the new Vision films and the new Portra films for examples. There is some work on introducing this into B&W products, but it is difficult.

 

Kodak shut down their last in-house continuous seasoned E6 process about 1 year ago during the layoff of about 200 people. These were mainly in reversal color film areas.

 

Kodak has closed down 2 pilot labs for emulsion making. They still have several though. Kodak has shut down most all Research Lab coating machines and emulsion making facilities.

 

Kodak is still making a good profit from analog products, but R&D was becoming difficult due to the maturity of the product and manufacturing lines.

 

Management at Kodak has stated repeatedly that they will remain in film as long as it remains profitable, and doing otherwise would be to the disadvantage of the stockholders.

 

Ron Mowrey

[bigrue]

Gentleman, Gentleman, thank you all very much for your enlighting response to my question. I had no idea it would cost this amount of talk about whether Kodak will still produce film for my 35mm and medium format camera. Can anyone truly say will Kodak will ccontinued to do that? Rufus Watson, Jr.

[bob_the_builder1]

<i>Management at Kodak has stated repeatedly that they will remain in film as long as it

remains profitable, and doing otherwise would be to the disadvantage of the stockholders

</i>

<p>

 

Which is what I have been saying all along.

[simon evans.]

<i>nice guy, but I have yet to see him do anything to benefit his customers.</i>

<br><br>

You've not been looking very hard then. Mind you, if you got banned from APUG for 'pressing' him...   I'm sure you're a lovely guy really, perhaps a little, ahem, misunderstood.

[bob_the_builder1]

Simon,

 

I pressed him (i.e. posed a follow up question when he did not answer the initial questoin) on

the issue of Postcard paper availability because I wanted to enter the Ilford Poscard

competition. Buying Kodak (or any other brand of paper) was not an option because the

competition rules stated entires had to be printed on Ilford paper. It was not Ilford who

banned me but the site owner, Sean.

[rowland_mowrey]

Rufus;

 

I tried to answer that directly from several different points. I apologize for all the additional comments in between.

 

I have stated repeatedly that 'the end is the end of profitability'. The problem is that that profitability of analog film is inextricably linked to motion picture film sales. All other films piggyback onto motion picture camera film and print film production which uses the lion's share of machine time. The second biggest runner is Endura paper. Consumer and professional color negative films come next, then B&W and then reversal color films follow in order of production and sales.

 

India (Bollywood) and Hollywood are the two major film consumers with China closing in fast. If a large changeover to digital projection takes place, then production of analog products will fall by a huge factor.

 

So, as I indicated above, keep your eye on motion picture film production vs digital use in camera and projection use for motion pictures. This will probably be a more rapid decline in the US than anywhere else. Obviously China and India will move more slowly on this due to the huge cost. But if the cost of projection equipment drops below the cost of making all of the prints, it will drive the changeover. Profit will be made as long as Kodak dominates in these markets. So, an additional factor will be if Fuji begins to outsell Kodak in motion picture products. We are not seeing this, yet.

 

Bob can take all the credit he wants for my clear words, but Kodak is in as long as motion picture drives profiability of analog products. I can't predict the timeline, but I can tell you what to keep an eye on.

 

And, just FYI, posts are deleted here and people are banned here as well as APUG and even other forums. It is just that on some forums, they make note of these events, but here they happen with no fanfare or notice except to the party concerned, and even then notification does not always happen. It is a matter of liability of the moderators and owners of the site, and their defined policy that governs.

 

Every site we use is at the suffrance of the owners and moderators who are trying to avoid lawsuits and other entanglements. They are also trying to keep us polite and honest with each other.

 

Ron Mowrey

[kparratt]

My thanks to Simon Evans and Rowland Mowrey for a level headed contribution here.

 

For Rufus, re: "whether Kodak will still produce film for my 35mm and medium format camera. Can anyone truly say will Kodak will continue to do that?"

 

Whether or not Kodak actually remains a player after the global consolidation of the industry, someone certainly will. There is an assured future for your 35mm and MF cameras, and large format too if you want to go that way.

 

During this period of flux, it pays to buy as much of your favourite film as possible, cold store it, but then keep using it, and buy more fresh stock to keep the store topped up. When $$ possible, increase the stockpile. Then if there's an interuption of supply, you are able to keep working whilst reviewing alternatives. I say "reviewing", because everyone should be aware 'next choice' products, and should have used them to become aware of their qualities. It's just plain common sense.

 

So don't panic, just be prepared for changes, but analogue photography is here to stay.

 

Cheers, Kevin.

 

" ... an oxygen mask will fall from the compartment above your head " ... etc.

[kparratt]

Rowland, you have just provided me with questions to a whole host of questions regarding colour processing at http://www.photo.net/learn/color_myths.html#5

 

You work is much appreciated. Thankyou.

 

Following my own suggestion above about keeping a good supply in cool storage, my frustration has been to do with getting good prints from colour negative film. Whether it's Fuji Reala or any of the wonderful Kodak Portra emulsions, local labs here in Norway only offer digital prints, and there is a notable quality loss. Having been handed two colour enlarers, Leitz AF Focomat and Kaiser 6x7 so I have decide to fire up this LaboPhot thing I aquired a year ago:<div></div>

[bob_the_builder1]

<i>Kodak is in as long as motion picture drives profiability of analog products.</i>

<p>

Rowland,

<p>

This is the bit that is entirely your own speculation and which I object to as it is fear-

mongering. You do not know that is the case. Ilford make no motion picture products yet

run a successfull analog film business. Kodak could do the same. We dont know until/if

the moment arises. You seem to have a firm grasp of the technical aspects of film

production but I find your speculative comments to be unfounded and part of the general

anti-Kodak sentiment that is common over at Apug. Who knows, maybee Kodak will

increase its analog sales over coming years. We will just have to wait and see. In the

meantime, please do those of us a favour who actually enjoy using film rather than talking

about it endesley - stop adding to the climate of uncertainty about the future of kodak

and film in general.

[nbg90455]

Can we all agree to get along here ;-) ?

 

The words "beating a dead horse" come to mind...

[bob_the_builder1]

<i>Can we all agree to get along here ;-) ?</i>

<p>

Mike, given that one of the most abusive comemments in this thread <i>"I think Antonio

Perez is a complete *%$^%# when it comes to traditional photography"</i> was actually

penned by yourself perhaps you should be asking yourself that.

[rowland_mowrey]

Gentlemen;

 

I just returned from my Kodak lunch. I heard an update on many topics of general interest that I cannot discuss and some I can. I'll get to those someday.

 

But, the bottom line is that after discussion with many of my former associates, I stand by what I said. It is a factual account of the current situation vis a vis film production.

 

Kevin;

 

Thanks for your comment. I too continue to make prints from my color negatives onto Endura paper and to cross process Endura to make prints from my slides.

 

I also scan some negatives or slides and make digital prints. I do this because my darkroom is taken up right now making and coating emulsions.

 

Ron Mowrey