Kodak set to quit camera film and photo paper business

[hunter]

Source: BBC News

Debt-struck photography pioneer Kodak says it may sell off its still-camera film and photo paper divisions.

The firm has already stopped making digital cameras as part of efforts to reduce its losses after filing for bankruptcy protection in January.

It has also been trying to raise funds by selling off more than 1,100 digital imaging patents.

It had originally planned to announce a buyer last week, but said "discussions continue" and a deal might not happen.

Read more: http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-19366113

---

First Kodachrome, and now everything...

My old cameras are going to miss Kodak film.

[Not Me]

1. Sad times indeed.

I worked for Kodak for over 20 years. It was a GREAT company.
Many have attributed its current problems to its inability to keep pace with technology. Nothing could be further from the truth.
They invented the digital camera and hold a patent suite that is even today, rich in technology.

Where things went badly for them was their inability to manage the business transition from being (basically) a monopoly in the film/paper/chemical business where barrier of entry was extremely high, to being one good player among many other good players in the consumer electronics marketplace where the barrier to entry is incredibly low.

[Remmah2]

3. Kodak was a great place to work.

I lived in Rochester in the 70's & 80's . I knew a few engineers and quite a few factory workers. They were cutting edge manufacturing and treated the employees decently. Sad times indeed.

[reACTIONary]

37. I worked at Kodak for 10 years. Even their "consumer electronic like" products...

... were never profitable on their own. They were economically justified by the "pull through" of film sales. Cheap, widly available cameras translated into more film sold. Not anymore.

I think they did pretty good in the copier division after a while. But they were dependent on service contracts there, and when largely service-free copiers began to come on the market, their sales and profits went down.

[pstokely]

42. Kodak sent me a new camera when I had an out-of-warranty camera break

This was an APS format camera, this was when digital cameras were expensive and high crappy image quality. They viewed digital photography as a novelty or a toy. They never expected consumers to give up film. Eventually non-photography companies like HP or Sony were able to make cheap digital cameras with good enough image quality. Kodak was built around film, they gave away new cameras because people would always buy film, then they would take the film to developers who would buy Kodak paper and chemicals. There was no need for that when you could buy a 5MP Casio camera at Wal-Mart for less than $100. Kodak couldn't sell digital cameras as loss leaders.

[onehandle]

2. Apple and Google are rumored to go in on the patent buy.

To keep them out of the hands of patent trolls.

[TrogL]

4. if they're not making cameras or film or paper, what's left?

(besides the patents and infrastructure)

According to Wikipedia, printers, scanners and kiosks.

Their printers suck, and scanners and kiosks are too much of a niche to keep a company that big afloat. I could probably compete out of my basement.

[jmowreader]

57. Kodak has a very large portfolio of industrial products

Google "Kodak Graphic Communications." Many years ago, Kodak bought Polychrome's plate business and the CreoScitex prepress equipment company. They also make digital printing presses--basically, very high speed, long-run copiers. If you are a printing company and you go with Kodak, they can take care of all your prepress needs including hardware, software, plates and chemistry.

Kodak can survive without making one thing related to photography...yes, that would be like the Ford Motor Company getting out of the car business or Kellogg leaving the breakfast cereal industry, but they could do it.

[wordpix]

5. heh, heh, I know a buyer called Bain Capital, they love these downgoing companies

[DainBramaged]

6. They didn't see the writing on the wall in 2000 when HP introduced their first digital camera

they didn't see the writing on the wall when their Japanese competitors packed their cameras with features at select price points to undermine their pathetic designs.

They didn't see the writing on the wall when film sales plummeted in 2004 with the onslaught of $99 4MP cameras.


They were blind to technology as it passed them by, and here we are, the end of Kodak.


I sit with a picture of my then baby daughter sleeping with her dog in 1993 on my desk. And on the back barely perceptible is the word Kodak. The picture is bright and crisp.


My beautiful daughter is now 23, but the picture will remain forever, unlike Kodak. Blind to progress.

[wordpix]

8. kind of like the '70s-80's when people were buying fuel efficient Japanese cars

and US manufacturers kept turning out big gas guzzlers.

[DainBramaged]

9. I don't think so nice try

[wordpix]

11. it's called an analogy, Dainbramaged, no "trying" about it

[Ash_F]

12. Took me moment.

1. Tries to understand DainBramaged's guarded response to your perfectly reasonable analogy.
2. Reads both posts twice. Still doesn't get it.
3. Sees the UAW emblem
4. lol

[DainBramaged]

14. You think the UAW emblem is funny?

[GliderGuider]

38. He was laughing at the situation, not the UAW logo.

He understood what was going on in the exchange when he saw the emblem.

Do you see the difference? I get that you're sensitive about this, but not everyone who laughs around you is laughing at you.

[Ash_F]

43. No, I have a lot of respect for the organization. I believe everyone should have a union.

In fact, I don't think I disagree with any position they have ever taken that I have read about.

Looks like you misunderstood my post as well. I guess it was not intentional but you should work on that.

[MADem]

53. You're getting mad for no good reason. No one is making fun of the UAW.

You do this on occasion--not "take" what the person is saying.

Step back and re-read.

[DainBramaged]

15. Here's a fact, Toyota and Honda lost their way while the Domestics caught up and took back share

They're the one's making shit now wordpix.


Have a nice life.

[wordpix]

18. yes & it took Barack Obama to get them to increase the CAFE standards & US fuel efficiency

US car manufacturers fought the CAFE standards tooth and nail. Meanwhile, it took the domestics 20-30 years to start making fuel efficient cars that could compete with Japan. Yes there were a couple of models like the Geo or...or.... but it could not compete with a Civic or Corolla, which could easily go 200K miles without falling apart.

Congratulations, the US car manufacturers are catching up; however your snarky comments aren't helping them.

[DainBramaged]

21. And Toyota has MORE gas guzzling SUV's than Ford and GM combined

Snark this and goodbye

you only know what you Google.


Being anti-domestic is anti-Union in our book, and too many of you think that's OK.

I don't, my Union doesn't so rather than get into an argument with you, goodbye and Merry Christmas.

[MADem]

54. I have a friend who junked his Geo after it hit 500,000 miles.

It didn't owe him a DIME. It sipped gas, didn't require a lot of repair, and his biggest expenses were tires.

Of course, here's what he did do to help the car along--he RELIGIOUSLY changed the oil on a rigidly-adhered-to schedule. He was faithful in the extreme about this, to the point of obsession.

When he junked the car, it still worked just fine. It was getting rather rusty, though, as he lived near the seashore.

[jmowreader]

61. A Geo Prizm IS a Corolla!

Comes off the same manufacturing line, uses the same parts, everything. The only difference is the badge.

[FarCenter]

20. GM and Ford have lost share during the last year

GM share in July was 17.5% down from 20.3% a year ago.
Ford share was 14.8% down from 16.9% a year ago.

Toyota share in July was 14.3% up from 12.4% a year ago.
Honda share was 10.2% up from 7.6% a year ago.

The parts shortage due to Fukushima Tsunami is over and they are back in production.

Ford and GM still survive only because of their pickups and large SUVs.

[DainBramaged]

22. OMG do you think Toyota and Honda aren't selling pickups and SUV's???

You have no idea about the cars or the marketing obviously. You have no idea about the Chevy Cruze (with a diesel next year), Equinox or Traverse, except what you read on Google, but that's OK, when you aren't in the business, blowing smoke up people's asses is all you've got. General Motors has built more than 1.6 million Cruzes since the model was introduced internationally in 2009, with more than 500,000 of those coming from Lordstown. (Via NY Times)


We have a little program called AUTOBOOK by Chrome. It gives us all of the prices for every car sold in America, ALL of the manufacturers use it to place orders via their dealers. Toyota sells the Corolla with near zero profit and the Camry at slightly above cost to maintain market share, while their truck and SUVs are immensely profitable for them and sell just as many as the domestics because hey have more models to cover more niches.


You keep defending the imports. You have no idea what you are talking about. You've always defended the imports since DUII, and I don't know why I borher discussing this with you.

And I won't again. Period.

[pstokely]

24. Does Honda make anything as large as the Suburban?

?

[DainBramaged]

25. Does Toyota?

SUVs

RAV4

HIGHLANDER

4RUNNER

SEQUOIA (Suburban direct competitor)

LAND CRUISER

FJ CRUISER

VENZA



Trucks

TACOMA

TUNDRA

[pstokely]

26. Neither does

nt

[DainBramaged]

27. Wrong

Look again


Sequoia is a direct competitor, right down to the gas millage.

http://www.toyota.com/sequoia/

Curb weight 5670


Good night

[GP6971]

30. Not sure, but

they sure make a big ass Tundra. Saw one today, V8, pulling cars out of the loose sand on the beach. Impressive to say the least.

[jmowreader]

40. No, they're only up to Tahoe size

If you're looking for the Japanese Suburban, the Toyota Sequoia is your best option.

[FarCenter]

34. May 2012 sales data from Motor Trend

Honda Civic............33,490
Toyota Corolla........31,847
Ford Focus.............24,769
Chevrolet Cruze......19,613
Hyundai Elantra......18,877
Volkswagen Jetta....12,962
Mazda3....................8474

Read more: http://wot.motortrend.com/2012-honda-civic-leads-compact-sales-in-may-toyota-corolla-a-close-second-213727.html

Around here, I'd bet that the local Chevrolet/Hyundai dealer sells more Elantras.

[DainBramaged]

36. Discussion over permanently

go change your oil.

[chloes1]

65. Your anger

is interfering with what is, otherwise a fascinating conversation. Please, this is interesting!

[wordpix]

35. direct your anger at the exec's b/c Honda, Toyota were always ahead on fuel efficiency

Yes, things are changing and US companies are catching up and hopefully will thanks to new CAFE standards -----that US car making execs with their bought and paid for congressmen and former prezeldent refused to enact until recently.

Not putting the union down but your anger is misdirected. Contact your executives and ask why they dragged their feet for DECADES on the CAFE standard and making fuel efficient cars.

I went to a number of websites to see the fuel efficiency ratings, not counting plug ins. Toyota's Prius are still at the top with 50 mpg+. Plug-ins are in the mid $30K-$40K+---too expensive for the average joe (me).

The Prius C (smaller Prius) starts at $19K new and gets 48- 53 mpg. Chevy Cruze is rated at 42 mpg, costs $16K+. I don't know if it's a hybrid, website didn't say.

[Union Scribe]

32. They survive because they make kick-ass products

that people buy. No mystery there. Only mystery is why anti-domestic and anti-union bellends are on a website for Democrats.

[armodem08]

33. Because Americans don't have a monopoly on making good cars?

My BMW was quality made (by unions) in Germany. If an American manufacturer approaches that quality level, I'll consider buying. This isn't a union issue, it's a quality one.

[pstokely]

41. Some BMW are made in South Carolina

a non-union state

[Ash_F]

45. I gotta agree with a lot of this.

Both Ford and Chevy have really sharpened up over the last ~5 years or so. I have driven almost all of 2013's models already; the more common ones anyway. I really like the Taurus, Fusion and Focus. Of those I really dig the Fusion(if only I had money, 95 crown vic here). Not big on the mustang though, it still needs to evolve.

From Chevy, I like the Volt and the Camaro. The Volt's interior really stands out. Always felt Chevy had weak interiors.

From Dodge, I like the Dart, Charger and Challenger. Still hate the Durango, sorry if you make those. I still think dodge needs a lot of work.

I wouldn't call what Honda and Toyota make today shit, but from what I have listed, the American version of similar class is definitely better. It is going to take time for people who are not around cars much to fully realize this though. Like 10-20 years.





But you know DainBramaged, the other poster never called American made cars shit. Nor were they talking about today. Chill out.

[pstokely]

23. They actually invented digital photography

but the profits came from film and never expected anyone to give up film

[NBachers]

7. As a Rochester native- a lot of kids I went to school with were from Kodak families-

Kodak lifted the prosperity of the whole region. My brother worked there. What an absolute shame.

[DainBramaged]

10. My best friend moved from there 5 years ago when they started layoffs on a massive scale

worked at an inexpensive family style restaurant. Went from over 200 tables a night to 40 as if a door closed.

[GP6971]

31. Looking back

I started seeing the decline in the mid to late 90s. Upstate NY was one of my territories and didn't realize it at the time

[Canuckistanian]

13. So sad, end of an era

I was a photographer back in the 80's and Kodak was so much more than just film and paper. They defined photography with their numerous books, guides, chemicals and other equipment.

And I still have a friend who shoots dynamite stuff in B&W, still using Tri-X and printing on Kodak paper.

I imagine Ilford will probably buy out their prouducts. An I hope some will still be around.

[Yahagirl]

16. sad indeed

It IS so sad! My first camera as a kid was a Kodak with the old "flip flash". Ah memories

[NBachers]

17. Yep- It was a monumental event in my life when I received an Instamatic as a gift

My older brother had a Brownie, and really caught the photography bug- developing, printing, enlarging . . . What a great thing to be part of . . . what a sad shame that it's over

On edit - Welcome to Democratic Underground, Yahagirl!

[GP6971]

29. The Brownie

Forgot all about them. I know I still have mine packed away in a box somewhere.

[FarCenter]

19. The Innovator's Dilemma: When New Technologies Cause Great Firms to Fail

http://books.google.com/books/about/The_Innovator_s_Dilemma.html?id=SIexi_qgq2gC

[donco]

28. this image was

Was most likly shot with Kodak film.So sad.

[link:|

[daleo]

39. This may be the fate of traditional book publishing too

A new technology disrupts an established monopoly or oliogopy, which can't adjust it's business model. Ebooks may be doing this to traditional book publishing as well.

[Posteritatis]

44. I don't think that one's going to go nearly as easily.

There's still a pretty big difference between buying a physical book and paying for a revocable license to read an ebook under limited conditions.

[daleo]

46. Price differentials may make that a moot point

People may accept the relative transience of a computer file over a physical object, if the price and convenience benefits are high. That's what happened with film vs digital imagery, I think. I don't know if the revocability of digital books will matter to the majority of people. That may or may not be a good thing, but I think that's where we are headed.

[RobinA]

49. They May Accept

the relative transience of the computer file, but they may live to regret that they did. Trying to put together a family history from boxes of old photos, I realized that the next generation will have no pictorial history past the '80's.

[daleo]

62. I agree that paper is an ideal archival medium

It doesn't take long for computer files to be unreadable due to technology changes. It's a good idea to print the really important stuff.

[Xithras]

50. I don't know. It's not really an even comparison.

I once heard a speaker at a college eBook panel make a good point as to how the two aren't really comparable.

Photographs have always been about sharing events. You take a photo, you hang it on the wall to show off, you give it to friends, etc. Digital photography enhanced the existing model by making photos easier to show off, easier to share, and even easier to edit and display on your wall.

Books have always been about the sharing information. You read a book, you refer to a book later as a reference, you loan a book to a friend or three, etc. eBooks do NOT enhance the existing model, because they make books more expensive to read, more difficult to share, and often impossible to refer to again later. They may very well displace ephemeral printed media such as print magazines and textbooks, which typically have a short shelf life anyway, but there are MANY in the publishing industry who have serious doubts as to whether they'll ever fully displace the printed page for more durable books. It would likely take a dramatic reduction in eBook costs (and profitability), and a rollback of copyright protections, for the printed page to vanish entirely. Not only that, but you've got the whole "third world" problem to deal with. There are 7 billion people on this planet, and only a small portion of them have access to both the direct technology (eReaders) and supporting infrastructure (reliable electrical and Internet transmission grids) that make eBooks a viable technology. Until that is resolved, the printed book is here to stay anyway.

[Kolesar]

55. I like to write in the margins

...and on the back leaves. I like to underline words.

I leave bookmarks in place for 15 years--I just found one that was wrapper for Cinnaburst gum.

[daleo]

59. I think a book is about sharing an imagined experience with a writer, especially fiction

For that, I don't think the medium is critical, at least for the majority of us. Paper and ereader can both work fine for that purpose. Paper has some benefits, such as a sense of durability. Ereaders have other benefits, such as ease of use, once you get used to them.

Full disclosure - my wife has published some ebooks, so I have a vested interest, I guess.

[Psephos]

63. Your observations about publishing and books here are spot-on. n/t

[RobinA]

47. Hope You're Right

I like technology much of the time, but some things just aren't the same. Learned photography on Kodak film in the '60's. Learned how to develop film and print pictures in my grandfather's all-Kodak (except the enlarger) dark room in the '60's and '70's. Shot film in my Nikon until about 2006. Stopped with the film because I never much liked printing myself and I couldn't find good processing anywhere but at professional prices. Didn't take pictures for a couple years, then got a digital. The digital has its advantages, but I still don't like it. I just don't like it.

Bought a Kindle because it seemed like it would be easier than actual books. It is. It's nice. I don't like it. I just don't like it. Give me a real book any day.

Now my iPhone you will pry out of my cold, dead hands.

[daleo]

60. I like my kindle

But I read and buy paper books too.

The kindle has some nice features, such as being light and not having to fight the paper book's tendency to want to close up on you - I am thinking about how one has to wrestle with 500 plus page hardcover bricks. Being able to resize the font is awfull handy too.

But paper books can be beautiful artifacts in their own right and bookshelves can give a room a nice cozy feeling.

[slackmaster]

48. My grandfather, a semi-professional photographer, embraced Kodachrome when it was introduced.

He got into color printing after being sent home early from World War II due to an injury, and continued taking slides and negatives for the rest of his life.

I have most of his slides and negatives, many thousands of them. He was a master technician and not lacking in artistic ability.

[MADem]

51. "Progress." Very sad, indeed, but we can't stop it.

Time marches on...!

[DrDan]

52. never thought I would see this

[rachel1]

56. If Kodak had only innovated early instead of relying on patent royalties

they wouldn't be in this mess.

I guess it's too late for them and maybe this'll serve as a reminder to everyone?

[jmowreader]

58. It's not an issue of innovation...

Kodak is a VERY innovative company. They invented the digital camera, among thousands of other things.

Kodak has two problems in the consumer sector. First is they didn't think most people would stop using film. The other can be seen by looking at Kodak's film cameras: very simple and easy to use because all the image control settings were fixed. The Japanese put computers in their cameras to set the image controls for the user. As a result, Japanese film cameras make better pictures than Kodaks. So of course when Kodak introduced consumer digital cameras they made ones that gave you crappy digital pictures instead of crappy film ones. The difference here is, when someone buys a Japanese film camera they still have to buy film for it, and Kodak film is good so they have a reliable revenue stream. When someone buys a Japanese digital camera they never have to talk to Kodak again.

If Kodak can get their company down to just the Graphic Communication division, which sells things like computer-to-plate systems and digital printing presses, they will do well.

[Mnpaul]

64. I have a Z980

and it is far from crappy. 24x optical zoom with German optics. My Z710 wasn't bad either.

[KurtNYC]

66. +1 insightful comments