|
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
|
Author
|
Topic: UK high street electronics store chain to stop selling 35mm stills cameras
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
William Hooper
Phenomenal Film Handler
Posts: 1879
From: Mobile, AL USA
Registered: Jun 99
|
posted 08-10-2005 02:23 AM
I don't want to appear to be piling onto Kodak, especially as it's the generous John Pytlak's employer, but Kodak seems to be 'transitioning' like it's on crack. So much seems to be based on discontinuous reasoning. B/W materials, except for papers? The notice specifies it's part of a move to digital output technologies, so that means gallery prints are expected to be digitally output?
In the corporate profile, there's a lot of IT & printing stuff that's always been a wide, contentious field; the health industry digital imaging area has been steady & growing for a while, but a lot is still output to film & there's growing competition for the digital-only approaches. As for the EI division, as digital acquisition & projection are worked towards, it becomes an all-hardware proposition.
So with Kodak's EI division's outlook of increased investment in D-Cinema, it becomes like health imaging, & Kodak becomes a manufacturer of Widgets like Panasonic or Sony. All the other IT, systems design, & printing stuff will all be just another company in the frothy selection of different vendors. Broadcast no longer really has any hardware standards since tape bit the dust; & the dynamic of buying widgets & system design & installations has been over the decades driven more by budgetary nepotism (is our company invested in that company?), sheer cheapness, putting up high-class front, etc. Manufacturers have ebbed, & flowed, & mostly it's transmitter manufacturers that have been the most stable.
But Kodak's going after widgets like d-cameras, d-projectors, printers, etc., competing with for example Sony, which not only has a much broader r&d resource, but more diversified product output. D-cinema cameras not so hot these days because Panasonic's making a cheaper one, well Sony's still got TV's. Not a prob for Sony, they're a widget company.
The wording of the press release about dicontinuing b&w papers seems to be another example of the mission hysteria at Kodak. Nikon doesn't say it's transitioning to digital; that indicates upcoming abandonment of current product. Nikon just adds some digital items & discontinues lower-performing film ones.
Kodak actively seems to be distancing itself from & making the products it once supported to be a *greater* chore than neccessary for the consumer to deal with.
An example is the Kodak Gallery site: someone at Kodak must have noticed the photo sites on the internet, had the *very* bright idea of hosting one as a hook to have folks buy prints, etc., then someone suggested that film processing by mail could also be incorporated with it. All bright, modern-use ideas!
Then it looks like marketing got their fingers too deep in it, so that if you want to post a link to an uploaded photo on the Kodak site it's 90 characters long & linewrapped, unlike other photo sites. And people who visit a linked photo? Make sure that first there's a screen demanding to register first, with tiny print on a link to see the photo without registering for the entire Kodak Gallery Experience. Marketing WANTS that extra pump for information, even if surfers don't have time for it, don't like it, & thus other photo sites don't do it.
Film sent in for processing isn't scanned at a resolution sufficient for the display-window poster print sizes that uploaded d-camera files are; CD's are at this lower resolution & there's no selection of what goes on the CD-- it's EVERYTHING on the site for a good sized chunk of change. Want Kodak to mail Uncle Harry a CD of the roll of Bermuda pictures but not the roll of insurance pictures of the busted septic tank? Sorry, can't be done.
Resized images on the site aren't sharpened, so to see if the photo was even in focus you've got to order prints or a CD. Want the full-resolution scans? They can only be downloaded for the $50 annual premium membership. But wait, the D-camera users already have the full-resolution scans, it's basically a $50 annual fee for shooting film!
Basically, on the Kodak Gallery site, film cameras are inferior to digital cameras, & access issues make it a functional non-starter against photo hosting sites like Flickr, etc.
I only go into all this about the chaos of the Kodak Gallery site because it's ASTOUNDING that the company which brought you the Brownie & Super8 movies cannot figure out how every other photo hosting site on the internet is approaching the end user.
I suppose Kodak is trying to look dynamic to investors by reiterating "imaging", but everybody's doing that. It's abandoning its capital of its associations with previous & current products. Look what folks here think of Sony & how much extra consideration *it* gets with a new product.
It's a gruesome analogy, but Kodak right now seems to be a corporation that's hysterically pulling out its own guts.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stephen Furley
Film God
Posts: 3059
From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England
Registered: May 2002
|
posted 08-10-2005 07:34 AM
Ilford is safe for the time being; it's been through a management buy-out. I would imagine that there will probably be a serious pruning of the product range sometime soon though. At the moment they still have a wide range of general purpose black and white films:
Pan F, FP4 and HP5
Delta 100, 400 and 3200
XP2 (chromogenic)
SFX (sort of semi-infrared ish)
plus they also have a medium contrast ortho emulsion, for pictorial use, in sheet form only. I can't imagine that all of these will survive.
They also make a wide range of papers, there will probably be some rationalisation there, as well.
Most of their more interesting chemicals are published formulae, so can be easily made up if dropped as a packaged product. Some have never been available in packaged form anyway, I don't think ID-78 warm tone developer which I like, was.
I don't use as much kodak product as I used to, though I do still use their colour print film. The other products of theirs which I liked, and used to buy, have largely been discontinued, Black and white paper, Panatomic X, Kodachrome 25, Ektar/Royal Gold 25, Kodalith, I've even heard that Technical Pan is either going or likely to go soon. I also used to buy quite a lot of colour paper, Ektacolor 37 and 74 RC in those days, but I gave up colour printing years ago. That really leaves only 100 colour negative film as about the only product that I buy regularly now, plus occasional things like 16mm stock (usually 7245), filters, E6 chemistry etc.
I think the digital and inkjet papers side of Ilford has been split off from the conventional side, but I don't know the details. Ilford haven't made conventional colour film for many years, and when they did it was pretty terrible; I have some pictures of my last (6th) birthday party in 1963 taken on it, and the contemporary Kodak product was much better. I'm not sure about Ilfochrome (Cibachrome) material, but I can't imagine that it's got much of a future now,
I don't know about the rest of the World, but here in the UK Agfa and Fuji have very little of the black and white market. What we have seen in recent years is a growth in the market share taken by the smaller companies, mainly from central and Eastern europe, names such as EFKE, Forte, Maco, Bergger, Fotochemica (sp) etc. Here in the UK Kentmere is a major manufacturer of black and white papers.
Kodak always seem to have been more involved in the commercial and technical products, and the smaller companies in the more 'arty' stuff.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
John Pytlak
Film God
Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 08-10-2005 09:19 AM
quote: Steve Guttag
I'm surprised to hear you say you still buy E-6 chemistry from Kodak...didn't Kodak kill off their reversal films (Ektachrome)? Who else makes E-6 process films?
Kodak EKTACHROME films are still very much alive:
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/colorReversalIndex.jhtml
quote:
Capture everything your mind can see
You want a unique look, an image that is unmistakably yours. You can capture it with KODAK PROFESSIONAL EKTACHROME Transparency Films.
Our E-Family includes four transparency films, offering a variety of speeds, color saturation/balances and formats. So no matter what you need, there's something for every situation.
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/ektachromeIndex.jhtml?id=0.1.18.14.9.22.5&lc=en
quote:
The extended family of EKTACHROME Professional film is standard equipment for many photographers who desire a unique look daylight or tungsten illumination.
KODAK EKTACHROME Professional Infrared EIR Film
KODAK EKTACHROME P1600 Professional Film (EPH)
KODAK EKTACHROME 64T Professional Film (EPY)
KODAK EKTACHROME 64 Professional Film (EPR)
KODAK EKTACHROME 400X Professional Film (EPL)
KODAK EKTACHROME 320T Professional Film (EPJ)
KODAK EKTACHROME 200 Professional Film (EPD)
KODAK EKTACHROME 160T Professional Film (EPT)
KODAK EKTACHROME 100 Professional Film (EPN)
KODAK EKTACHROME 100 Plus Professional Film (EPP)
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/chemistry/filmE6main.jhtml?id=0.1.16.14.32.14.3&lc=en
quote:
KODAK PROFESSIONAL Chemicals, Process E-6, are used to process KODAK PROFESSIONAL EKTACHROME and ELITE Chrome Films, as well as other manufacturers' color transparency (chrome) films.
Process E-6 requires each of the following chemicals:
First Developer converts exposed silver halide to metallic silver. This is the most critical step in Process E-6.
First wash stops the action of the first developer, and removes the first developer solution from the film.
In the Reversal Bath , reversal agent is absorbed into the film, preparing the film for the color developer step.
In the Color Developer , the developing agent reacts with silver halide to form metallic silver.
Pre-Bleach prepares the film for the bleach step.
Bleach converts metallic silver back to silver halide.
Fixer converts all of the silver bromide into soluble silver compounds.
Final wash removes chemicals remaining in the film emulsion.
Final Rinse promotes uniform drying.
Process E-6 chemicals are offered in sizes designed for all types of processing operations—from small tank or rotary tube to large professional finishing labs and photofinishing operations. The chemicals are supplied as liquid concentrates for ease of handling and mixing.
Even an E-6 motion picture film:
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products/reversal/5285.jhtml?id=0.1.4.4.6.4&lc=en
quote:
KODAK EKTACHROME 100D - 5285/7285
Intense saturation + true 100 speed
Now you have a 100-speed color reversal motion picture film designed for daylight. Whether you're shooting ads, music videos, documentaries, television, or features, it delivers intensely saturated color, plus a neutral gray scale and accurate skin tones. All with a sharpness you won't find in any other 100-speed reversal film.
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stephen Furley
Film God
Posts: 3059
From: Coulsdon, Croydon, England
Registered: May 2002
|
posted 08-10-2005 10:48 AM
quote: John Pytlak
The Kodak website has a new on-line interactive "Gallery", that shows how Kodak helps its customers take, keep, protect, and share images.
I'll have a look at that when I get home tonight, John.
quote: Steve Guttag
I must admit, I'm not familiar with the Ilford's "Delta" line of products. I've always used HP5, FP4 and a roll or two of the Pan-F. In my fridge, one could normally find two bulk-loaders with HP5 and FP4 respectively (this was a while ago). Ilford made the best reusable film catridges too.
Delta is pretty much Ilford's answer to Kodak's T-Max. It's finer grained, but I fnd the graain looks rather 'mushy' when you blow it up; I prefer the more conventional emulsions for black and white. I'd rather go to a larger format or a slower film to get finer grain.
quote: Steve Guttag
I'm surprised to hear you say you still buy E-6 chemistry from Kodak...didn't Kodak kill off their reversal films (Ektachrome)? Who else makes E-6 process films?
E-6 is still going strong; Kodak and Fuji are the most common films, but there are others, I think Agfa still make some, and Konica.
quote: Steve Guttag
As for Cibachrome...I loved it...I've many slide to prints that look quite stunning. But one has to question...if there is not a market of revesal films (slides)...what is the point of reversal prints other than for those that have slides and wish to make prints of them long after the slides were made. I suspect that many/most people will be happy to merely scan their slides in digitally and make prints of them that way or share them electroncially.
I tried Cibachrome A and P30, I think that was what it was called, soon after they came out. It can look good for some subjects, but I had problems with it. It's very high contrast; I was trying to print pictures of very dark skinned (African rather than Carribean) girls wearing light-coloured dresses. It was very difficult to get a print that didn't look like a black blob sitting on top of a white blob. Short of making a negative mask there didn't seem to be any way to reduce the contrast Not really a suitable subject for that material. The other problem is that I was having to work in a darkroom about 1x1.5 metres, with no ventilation, and the fumes from the bleach were pretty nasty. Cibachrome was rather similar to the Gasparcolor motion picture printing process, which seems to have been mainly used for cartoons and advertisments, in the '30s. Gasparcolor was printed from separations, not colour positives, and I think that, at least in the early days, each layer was coated, exposed and processed separatly, but the principles were similar. Nothing's new ![[Smile]](smile.gif) .
Slides can be convienient, you can just look at them on a light box, and you can project them. The 'grain' on them looks quite different to that on a negative film, if you scan it and zoom in it's quite obvious which you are looking at. I did try reversal printing papers many years ago, Kodak Ektachrome 14RC and the Fuji equalivilent, but I wasn't very impressed with either of them. Also, the chemicals were problematical, expensive and had a short shelf life, not much good if you only needed a few prints occasionally. These days I think the best option for printing from slides is to make a high quality scan, and have that printed on normal negative paper.
I find that I'm increasingly tending to use slide film these days, because it's now much easier to get prints made than it used to be.
I seldom use anything faster than 100 film; but then I'm using old, 1960s and 70s cameras, with fixed focal length lenses and large maximum apertures. A lot of the more modern camera seem to have zoom lenses which only go to about f4, or even 5.6. The school I was working at in the mid '70s did a lot of gymnastics, for which we used to use Kodacolor 400 film, about the fastest there was then, pushed two stops. It didn't look good; colour film has improved a lot since those days.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
Printer-friendly view of this topic