Kodak is out of the camera business

PhotonWrangler

Flashaholic
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Messages
14,433
Location
In a handbasket
They've announced it today. They're going to focus completely on printers and inks going forward as they work through their Chapter 11 process.

While I prefer digital cameras to film, it's still sad to see the end of an era like this. As a child I remember our family having one of those boxy Kodak Brownie cameras with that mysterious ground glass viewfinder and the 120 roll film. And my first SLR was the venerable Pentax 1000 that I learned how to use in high school photography class. While I don't miss being a slave to processing labs, I will miss the Kodak camera era.

Nowadays most people prefer to use their cellphone for a camera, but I still prefer a dedicated doesn't-do-anything-else camera. I like the greater control that I can have over the picture with a camera that has a real multi-element focusable lens.
 

TooManyGizmos

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jan 12, 2006
Messages
3,079
Location
Died Nov. 2015
~

Yes , it is kinda sad. I have those memories too .

Does this mean our Kodak box cameras in the closet will be worth something now ?

~
 

StarHalo

Flashaholic
Joined
Dec 4, 2007
Messages
10,927
Location
California Republic
I'm only old enough to remember using the little 110 cameras, but my dad was an amateur photog who worked at a camera store for many years, I can't recall all the Kodak display crap we had around the house; I still keep my audio plug adapters in an Ektar 25 plastic case.

You could in theory stuff a cell CCD/flash mem/Li-po cell in an empty 110 film case..
 

Flying Turtle

Flashaholic
Joined
Jan 28, 2003
Messages
6,509
Location
Apex, NC
As a kid I remember using a "Hawkeye", and the special Christmas when I got an "Instamatic". Wish I still had them.

Geoff
 

orbital

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Feb 8, 2007
Messages
4,257
Location
WI
+

Kodak developed the OLED years ago and holds the broad Patents on it,..don't count them out yet.

OLEDs' will change everything, hopefully Kodak is part of it.

====
 

fyrstormer

Banned
Joined
Jul 24, 2009
Messages
6,617
Location
Maryland, Near DC, USA
Kodak's core business has always been the production of high-quality photographs. Once upon a time, that meant they had to manufacture the image-capture medium (the film), in addition to the image-reproduction medium (the photo paper) and the post-processing machinery (everything else in the darkroom). Nowadays, producing high-quality photographs only requires a good printer and archival-quality ink; the image-capture medium (the image sensor) is now integrated with the camera, so there's no reason for Kodak to worry about it. Even in the early days Kodak bought lenses and film-feed mechanisms from companies that specialized in making these components, so their cameras were never really their cameras in the first place. Going to printer-and-ink-only will allow them to focus on what they've always done best -- post-processing and reproduction.
 

chmsam

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Apr 26, 2004
Messages
2,241
Location
3rd Stone
It will most likely soon be gone almost completely.

Kodak has been a part of the landscape in Rochester, NY for a long time but it's not going to last. The local news has been full of reports and comments for quite a while now. Not too long ago Kodak was the largest local employer. IIRC there were about 62,000 local employees just a few decades ago and now they number only about 7,200 (again, my recollection might be a little off but you get the idea). They are now selling off most if not all of their important patent holdings.

Most former employees I know took early retirement or buy-outs years ago. Their thinking is that the company held on to film technology far too long without pushing their digital cameras enough even though a lot of the original patents belonged to the company. They also think that branching out into the copier market, medical imaging, and other areas where the competition was already stout and entrenched was a mistake. They feel that the corporate management refused to see the writing on the wall for almost 30 years. Golden parachutes apparently were common for top management but the upper levels were replaced with folks of similar thinking.

The company that started amateur photography for the average person might well be gone in a few months.

Among their first products was a camera that was pre-loaded with film. The buyer took pictures, mailed the film AND the camera into the company, and had a reloaded camera sent to them along with their photos. It quickly became the thing to do and the idea of taking snapshots lasted for 100 years or so. Film is dead for all but the professional market and a lot of that is digital now as well. This area knew that the company was going long before the last roll of Kodachrome was sold. I've met quite a few people who more than 10 years ago bailed out of the company that had jobs that were the "golden ticket" through most of the last century.

Those jobs used to have great pay, lifelong (or so they thought) benefits, and a yearly bonus for virtually all employees that meant that most workers had several extra weeks of pay to spend in the local economy. Most car dealers ran "Kodak Bonus Plan" sales every year when the extra pay came out. Rochester boomed during those years but the area has known this was coming for a long time.
 

ElectronGuru

Flashaholic
Joined
Aug 18, 2007
Messages
6,055
Location
Oregon
Steve Jobs' Theory of Decline:

[A] company does a great job, innovates and becomes a monopoly or close to it in some field, and then the quality of the product becomes less important. The company starts valuing the great salesman, because they're the ones who can move the needle on revenues.' So salesmen are put in charge, and product engineers and designers feel demoted: Their efforts are no longer at the white-hot center of the company's daily life. They 'turn off.' IBM and Xerox, Jobs said, faltered in precisely this way. The salesmen who led the companies were smart and eloquent, but 'they didn't know anything about the product.' In the end this can doom a great company, because what consumers want is good products.
 
Last edited:

fyrstormer

Banned
Joined
Jul 24, 2009
Messages
6,617
Location
Maryland, Near DC, USA
Canon successfully made the transition from making traditional photography equipment to making high-resolution photo printers. Kodak can do the same if they don't strangle themselves with conflicting executive visions.
 

EZO

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 15, 2010
Messages
1,431
Location
Vermont, USA
It is truly sad to see what has happened to Kodak, especially for someone like me, a pro photographer who learned to develop film when I was 9 years old. Kodak has been a big part of my life. While it is true that corporations like Canon or Nikon have handled the transition to digital with aplomb, I don't see this as a meaningful analogy. These are pure camera manufacturers. A more appropriate comparison with Kodak is Fujifilm, a film manufacturer that also designs and builds cameras and competes with Kodak in many if not all of the same fields such as medical imaging, graphics, photofinishing, printing, etc., etc. Fuji has not only held their own in the still viable analog film industry, they make some of the more interesting and cutting edge digital cameras available. They are thriving in these same markets where Kodak has floundered. Sadly, Kodak dropped the ball somewhere along the line. It reminds me a bit of what happened to the American automobile industry; another example of American manufacturers who have been beaten at their own game by the Japanese because they remained too entrenched in the past and didn't quite grasp the future.

"The future is already here, it's just not evenly distributed" ---- William Gibson
 
Last edited:

chmsam

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Apr 26, 2004
Messages
2,241
Location
3rd Stone
Here in Kodak country things are pretty darned clear. As I said before the company is selling off their major patents. Doesn't seem like there's any coming back or hanging on if you sell off most if not all of the last and best of your major assets. Most folks around here expect the end to come within a year at best but there might be a much smaller portion of the company that will survive. It would be nothing like the former industry giant to be sure. The "big yellow box" is already long gone though.

There are many museums, buildings, and large portions of the university (campus buildings, medical center, college of music, etc.) that owe much if not all to the company and its founders. That history will live on but the company is all but doomed.
 

blasterman

Flashlight Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 17, 2008
Messages
1,802
I spent about a decade in professional photofinishing and then digital reproduction, and had some pretty close ties with the eggheads in Rochester. I have mixed feeling about the company given they employed so many intelligent people but then wasted so many resources on dead-end projects with no vision of the future. The inside joke at the time was Kodak only cared about the aethestics of 50yr old professional photographers and not 20yr old professional photographers, and hence it's a big reason their film / paper division stalled and lost market share. Everybody threw a fit on their blog when Kodachrome was eliminated, but the fact is most pros abandoned the fickle emulsion a decade or more earlier for the better performing stuff in the green boxes that could be processed anywhere with greater consistency.

I'm hearing some of the same luddite explanations here I've heard for years, and ironically some of it is the same attitude I encountered with Kodak. First, color chromogenic films and papers (E6, C-41, RA-4, EP-2, etc) *do not* last in a pristine state for 20yrs, let alone 10 - Unless you have your color film stored in an argon sealed container at 50F. Even Kodachrome requires dark storage and low temperatures to reach it's much bragged about archival capabilities. Engineers I knew at Kodak were always uncomfortable about the claims of their marketing dept in this respect. Also, the display life of both Kodak and Fuji RA-4 papers is greatly exagerated, although pigment based ink-jet is rapidly displacing the medium. My pigment based ink-jet prints don't fade no matter what I do to them, but I can't say the same for displayed Endura and Crystal Archive Prints I have on walls which show problems in less than 10 years. A $100 desktop ink-jet printer now does a better job than a lab outfitted with $500,000 worth of wet-lab gear. When your income relies heavily on those labs buying chemicals, papers, service contracts and selling point and shoot film cameras chances are you are going to fall on hard times.

As for digital formats being orphaned, I'm sorry if you're still using Windows 3.11, Pagemaker, floppy disks and proprietary .PCX or .EPS formats. I don't have any issues opening 20yr old TGA files, TIFF files or any Photoshop medium. The bigger problem with digital content is making it go away in a few decades (see current Facebook fiasco) or not having your blockbuster movie shared instantly on pirate web-sites. Film, especially color film starts to degrade the second it comes out of the processor dryer not to mention good luck getting two existing labs to make the same looking print twice in a row. I'll take ones and zeros in a file format and not some mystery industrial film dye that reacts to airborne gases in unpredictable ways and depends on an impatient teenager for quality control.

One issue that's facing the entire industry right now is photofinishing is either flat in some market segments, or headed down. People are taking more pictures than ever right now, but they are posting those images to Facebook, Flickr, etc., and then are done with them. Malls, grocery stores and dept stores are booting their photolabs because they are losing money, and those people that are fussy about prints either use online pro labs, or print them themselves. I print all my high end stuff onto dye-transfer metal without any chemicals or Kodak gear in the loop, and the results are astounding. However, with due respect to Kodak, I know there are likely dozens of Kodak patents and software tables involved in the loop that allow me to get there.
 

Burgess

Flashaholic
Joined
Apr 10, 2006
Messages
6,545
Location
USA
Just stumbled upon this thread.


I well remember (at age 9) Christmas 1962,
getting my Kodak Brownie Fiesta camera kit.

Twelve exposures on a roll of 127 film.

Complete with (slip-on) flash attachment, for AG-1 bulbs.

(hey -- i can STILL vividly remember how they SMELLED when they went off !) :)


Each and every flash photograph was An Adventure ! ! !



Then, 40 years ago, I bought my first "REAL" camera, a Canon TL 35mm SLR.

Set up my own darkroom in our basement, using Lots of Eastman Kodak equipment & supplies.


Processed many hundreds of rolls of Kodak Plus-X and Tri-X panchromatic film.

Some Panatomic-X, also. But that was simply too darned Slow ! :)


Eastman Kodak was a very, very important part of my photography past.


Alas -- they haven't had anything to interest me in a long, long time.


Sad.

:candle:
_
 

PhotonWrangler

Flashaholic
Joined
Oct 19, 2003
Messages
14,433
Location
In a handbasket
I remember those AG-1 bulbs and that smell also! And I remember being astonished by the bulb's visual transformation after being flashed.

I also remember those large edison-based screw-in flashbulbs. Those were so cool looking! We didn't have a camera that used them but I inherited a package of them from a relative when I was little, so I kept them for experimentation. Once I wired up a 120v socket in the back yard for nighttime lighting, and I was unsure of my wiring job so I didn't want to test it with a live 120v circuit. So I screwed one of those big flashbulbs into the socket, walked across the yard to the other end of the wire, touched the leads to a lantern battery and :poof:. Wiring verified! :)

And Blasterman, I agree with you on your feeligns about film vs digital and Kodak vs the "green box" brand. We should have treated this as a wake-up call, much like we did with the automobile industry, but it was a case of too little too late. Very sad indeed.

On the upside, they might have a chance to make some money on their intellectual property and patents. It won't bring back the glory days of the yellow box, but it might keep a foot in the door as imaging technologies progress.
 

Monocrom

Flashaholic
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
19,859
Location
NYC
I was reading Bram Stoker's "Dracula" a couple of days ago, and was floored to see Kodak mentioned in the book.

Later I learned that Kodak has been around since 1888 and putting out cameras since then. It was a one-line mention in which Jonathan Harker is presenting the Count with several documents regarding the property which Dracula wishes to purchase near London. Apparently the documents included a photo of the property which Harker refers to as simply "a Kodak."

Wow . . . Truly an end to an era. :(
 

GlocksInMySocks

Newly Enlightened
Joined
Feb 28, 2012
Messages
3
Used to sell cameras and from what I saw.. Kodak had seriously gone down hill... The only time I recommended that people buy one was if they had a younger child who couldn't be trusted with a really nice camera. You could give them one of these that only used to Double A's and call it a day.

They couldn't even compare to the higher quality camera's like Cannon... probably best they stepped out of the game...
 
Top