Kodak: Film sales drop below dismal digital sales.

Sorry - I just felt the need to rewrite 'digital sales overtake film' in a less advertising friendly (and more realistic) way.

So, when will Kodak:

• Re establish its commitment to high end digital
• Stop designing ugly ugly cameras which look like 70s throwbacks
• Bring some innovation to digital photography
• Stop killing film on purpose. Fuji are still developing interesting film products and making money. Kodak seems to have a very negative mindset.
• Finally die? Loosing $1billion a year isn't a recipe for long term survival.

Haha...they have been saying this for 5 years...when will it REALLY be true?

For years, we have been hearing how digital camera sales have exceeded film cameras...or we have been told that 'next year' sales will exceed film sales.

What is happening however, is that digital camera sales have started to level off...profits are not coming in as fast and the smaller players (who thought digital was guaranteed money in the bank) have started to drop out of the market.

All of the loud trumetting about sales figures never tells the whole story...R&D costs eat up almost all of the 'profits' and the race to bring out the next "big thing" is too much for smaller companies.

Andrew Booth said:

So, when will Kodak:

• Re establish its commitment to high end digital
• Stop designing ugly ugly cameras which look like 70s throwbacks
• Bring some innovation to digital photography
• Stop killing film on purpose. Fuji are still developing

interesting film products and making money. Kodak seems to have a
very negative mindset.
-

Click to expand...

In case you missed the other news today, Fujifilm continues to lose money in the imaging segment (which they have for awhile), are going to cut 5000 jobs from said segment, and in the need to greatly reduce spending will decrease R&D, and especially R&D on film.

-gt

Andrew Booth said:

So, when will Kodak:

• Re establish its commitment to high end digital

Click to expand...

Probably never. Kodak probably never WAS committed to high-end digital.

I'm always amazed at the people who think that Kodak is, was, and wants to be a supplier of professional still camera equipment. Kodak's still photography business has always been about making photography available to the average Joe and Jane.

As far as I know, Kodak only built one series of film SLRs: the Retina Reflex. That was in the 1960s. They built zillions of Brownie and Instamatic cameras, though.

Sure, Kodak toyed with digital SLRs, but it's the EasyShare line that is the heart and soul of Kodak. I doubt that we'll see another Kodak DSLR for a long time, if ever.

Member said:

• Stop designing ugly ugly cameras which look like 70s throwbacks

Click to expand...

Maybe when people quit buying them in huge quantities? For the past year, Kodak has been the #1 brand in digital camera sales in the US, outselling Canon, Sony, and all the rest.

Member said:

• Bring some innovation to digital photography

Click to expand...

Like what? Like the recent dual-lens dual-CCD camera with in-camera autostitch? Or a broad line of cameras that come with docking stations that can produce prints without needing a computer?

Oh, you're still thinking in terms of high-end photography. Sorry, Kodak's more interested in innovation for the low-end.

Member said:

• Stop killing film on purpose.

[snip]

• Finally die? Loosing $1billion a year isn't a recipe for long

term survival.

Click to expand...

Read the financial release. In the 4th quarter of 2005, Kodak made $161 million off of its digital operations, but its ongoing "traditional" (film) operations dragged Kodak down to a $162 million operating loss. Kodak says that they expect to lose more money over the next couple years until they can finally get rid of that monkey on their back called "film."

So make up your mind: do you want Kodak to make money, or to keep supporting film?

Andrew Booth said:

Sorry - I just felt the need to rewrite 'digital sales overtake
film' in a less advertising friendly (and more realistic) way.

Click to expand...

As Doug pointed out, Kodak is number one in digital camera
sales in the US (an possibly Europe as I recall). Their cameras
are not in the most profitable niche in the market, so profits suffer.

Member said:

So, when will Kodak:

• Re establish its commitment to high end digital

Click to expand...

Kodak provides the sensors for Olympus DSLRs, Leica DSLRs,
and the 31MP and 39MP sensors for medium format cameras.
I believe they also provide the 22MP sensors for the Hasselblad.
That is a notable commitment to high end digital IMO.

Member said:

• Bring some innovation to digital photography

Click to expand...

Kodak has pretty much pioneered professional color management
in digital photography. My computers come with Kodak Color Matching
Modules buried inside the software. Their equipment is pretty common
in pro studios even though they are not making a DSLR at this time.

Member said:

• Finally die? Loosing $1billion a year isn't a recipe for long

term survival.

Click to expand...

I believe it is well documented that Kodak's $1B loss is due to write-offs
as a result of restructuring -- not a long-term recipe at all.

I think you are displaying a personal attitude about Kodak and messing
up the facts.

Darrell
http://members.aol.com/pixbydg/look/Gallery.html

Andrew Booth said:

So, when will Kodak:

• Re establish its commitment to high end digital

Click to expand...

Kodak makes the sensors for a good portion of all medium format digital backs and large format scanning backs, including the ones for the Hasselblad-Imacon "H series" which seem snow to be the market leader in digital 645 MF systems. Ther commitment to high end digital look strong.

Member said:

• Stop killing film on purpose. Fuji are still developing interesting film products and making money.

Click to expand...

Fuji's film related products and services have today officially joined those from Kodak, Agfa, Konica, and Ilford as shrinking product categories: shrunk to zero in the cases of Agfa and Konica, and Ilford came very close to vanishing a while ago.

Also, Kodak's digital sales are good and growing, "dismal" certainly does not apply.

he has a problem with film............. unlike the senior management of Fuji

Doug Pardee said:

Andrew Booth wrote:

Probably never. Kodak probably never WAS committed to high-end
digital.

Click to expand...

Pardon? You probably need to revisit your digital camera history before making comments like that.

--
Chris

Darrell Spreen said:

Andrew Booth said:

Sorry - I just felt the need to rewrite 'digital sales overtake
film' in a less advertising friendly (and more realistic) way.

Click to expand...

As Doug pointed out, Kodak is number one in digital camera
sales in the US (an possibly Europe as I recall). Their cameras
are not in the most profitable niche in the market, so profits suffer.

Click to expand...

There's no accounting for taste (or lack of it).

Member said:

Member said:

So, when will Kodak:

• Re establish its commitment to high end digital

Click to expand...

Kodak provides the sensors for Olympus DSLRs, Leica DSLRs,
and the 31MP and 39MP sensors for medium format cameras.

Click to expand...

In the last two years they've also dropped out of the DSLR and digital camera back market segments.

Member said:

I believe they also provide the 22MP sensors for the Hasselblad.

Click to expand...

Source? I can't find a link anywhere.

Member said:

That is a notable commitment to high end digital IMO.

Click to expand...

Member said:

Member said:

• Bring some innovation to digital photography

Click to expand...

Kodak has pretty much pioneered professional color management
in digital photography. My computers come with Kodak Color Matching
Modules buried inside the software. Their equipment is pretty common
in pro studios even though they are not making a DSLR at this time.

Click to expand...

But what have they done recently?

Their DSLR cameras were great, and implemented a load of novel ideas. The Kodak RAW format was a great idea (JPEG + difference data). The DCS pro back was cutting edge.

What now?

Member said:

Member said:

• Finally die? Loosing $1billion a year isn't a recipe for long

term survival.

Click to expand...

I believe it is well documented that Kodak's $1B loss is due to
write-offs
as a result of restructuring -- not a long-term recipe at all.

Click to expand...

Restructuring? Rightsizing? Downsizing?

Member said:

I think you are displaying a personal attitude about Kodak and messing
up the facts.

Click to expand...

Well, I'm not a shareholder.

And have a look at this quote from Kodak's official report:

"and we made substantial progress on our goal of reducing our traditional manufacturing footprint, while benefiting from the strong cash flows available from that business". In other words emulsion film technology is still a massive earner for Kodak.

Tradition film technology sales were $1,514 million ....those sales are STILL massive! .. and probably mainly due to the sales of disposable cameras, 70mm movie film, film used in the health services (e.g. X-ray film) and ancilliary products.

Digital technology sales( not profits) were $2,614 million ... but what constitutes these sales? ... cameras, printers, whatever?

And if, as we are led to believe by the digital (emulsion-film-bashing) self-proclaimed 'experts', that 'digital' is the only future for photography, then how come Kodak report such a huge loss, and prestigious companies (e.g. Minolta) have 'retired' from the digital market?

... they do not need to because their excellent range of films are more than sufficient at the moment. They should also be cutting back on funding R&D on digital imaging because I suspect that now the 'novelty' of owning a gadget that will take an instant picture (whether it be a camera or mobile phone) is now truely past (hence the current and future demise of certain digital camera manufacturers) , busy, time-short, consumers will revert back to their trusty old film cameras... you take the pics.. you take your disposable camera or roll of film to your photodealer... and at the end of the day you get a cheapo (perfectly-acceptable) set of prints back, plus a free replacement disposable camera/roll of film.... no fiddling about with computers, rechargeable batteries, relatively-expensive (compared to a free roll of film) memory cards. needed.

film is going to kill digital!
and i cannot wait for his other predictions to come true,too.
the gramaephone is going to kill the record player.
but first, vinyl albums will kill the cd.
i-pod is a fad. given me my 8 track boombox!
talkies will never catch on in the cinema. only silent films show true acting!
hdtv broadcasts the same shows as my trusty 12 inch b&w Zenith.
typewritters with whiteout will defeat the computer.
: )

but actually, i like film and still use it for my panoramic shots. but face it, film is a dying/dead industry.
film sales are down and dropping at an increasing rate every year.

investing in this dying technology is foolish. if fuji is doing this, they are throwing good money after bad.
Konica Minolta died because they were too slow to adapt to digital.

kodak has huge digital sales and does well in the usa and world market in general selling cameras designed to be simple and most useful for the average consumer. they have moved upline with the 8 megapixel 24mm super wide manual zoom P880 prosumer with video (just read the great reviews here and on steve's digicams--only $399 at costco!) and have unique offerings, like the superwide angle pocket twinlens in camera stitching V570.

Andrew Booth said:

• Stop designing ugly ugly cameras which look like 70s throwbacks

Click to expand...

It is necessary big talent to make so ugly camera. It is not easy at all.

insectman said:

... they do not need to because their excellent range of films are
more than sufficient at the moment. They should also be cutting
back on funding R&D on digital imaging because I suspect that now
the 'novelty' of owning a gadget that will take an instant picture
(whether it be a camera or mobile phone) is now truely past (hence
the current and future demise of certain digital camera
manufacturers) , busy, time-short, consumers will revert back to
their trusty old film cameras... you take the pics.. you take your
disposable camera or roll of film to your photodealer...

Click to expand...

That is extremely unlikely. People can and do take their memory cards to the photo printers or print their own on film. Digital revolutionized photography and there is no turning back. Many people who have been shooting film, however, will continue shooting film for the time being, especially if they only shoot a few rolls a year, making a digital camera (especially DSLR cameras) too much of a luxury.

insectman said:

and at
the end of the day you get a cheapo (perfectly-acceptable) set of
prints back,

Click to expand...

Or you only pay for the few prints that you find are acceptable, instead of the whole set.

insectman said:

plus a free replacement disposable camera/roll of
film.... no fiddling about with computers, rechargeable batteries,
relatively-expensive (compared to a free roll of film) memory
cards. needed.

Click to expand...

The cost of film can easily exceed the cost of a memory card.

Andrew Booth said:

Sorry - I just felt the need to rewrite 'digital sales overtake
film' in a less advertising friendly (and more realistic) way.

So, when will Kodak:

• Re establish its commitment to high end digital

Click to expand...

Who knows, Kodak doesn't seem to have a clear strategy as to what its niche in the digital market. Kodak was a pioneer in large photosensors and DSLR cameras, but it has withdrawn from the medium format camera back/sensor market and the DSLR market just when those markets heated up. It is now concentrating on gaining market share in the saturated and marginally profitable digicam market.

Member said:

• Finally die? Loosing $1billion a year isn't a recipe for long

term survival.

Click to expand...

Kodak knows that film is going to decline and it clearly wants to be part of the digital revolution. But it does not seem to know what role it should play in that revolution. It has some excellent CCD sensors, but it instead went out and bought a full frame CMOS sensor it did not design and that is notorious for high noise levels. It may be a wise thing for Kodak to spin off its digital business and separate it from the film business. The film business will be much smaller but nevertheless a profitable company. The digital business can then be made to sink or swim on its own without dragging down the entire company by draining profits from the film division.

insectman said:

I suspect that now the 'novelty' of owning a gadget that will
take an instant picture (whether it be a camera or mobile phone)
is now truely past (hence the current and future demise of
certain digital camera manufacturers) , busy, time-short,
consumers will revert back to their trusty old film cameras...

Click to expand...

Just like the novelty of computerized spreadsheet has worn off and people returned in droves to the old, trusted pencil and paper versions.

Anastigmat said:

Who knows, Kodak doesn't seem to have a clear strategy as to what
its niche in the digital market. Kodak was a pioneer in large
photosensors and DSLR cameras, but it has withdrawn from the medium
format camera back/sensor market and the DSLR market just when
those markets heated up.

Click to expand...

see this???:
Kodak launches high resolution CCDs
Friday, 21 October 2005 09:30 GMT

Kodak has announced the world's highest resolution sensors for medium format cameras with the KAF-39000, 39 megapixels, and the KAF-31600 (pictured), which offers 31.6 megapixels. The CCD sensors will be used in Phase One's upcoming P45 and P30 digital backs.The KAF-3900 covers an area of 36x48mm, while the KAF-31600 offers high performance in a 33x44mm imaging area. These two new sensors join three other CCDs in Kodak's line up, including the KAF-22000, which used to be the company's highest resolution CCD at 22MP.