Is this new? Doesn't mention black and white film though I know there is still some interest in B&W movie making:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/...eals/22945259/
Is this new? Doesn't mention black and white film though I know there is still some interest in B&W movie making:
http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/...eals/22945259/
Yes. While announced quite a while ago, the agreements (except for the one with Disney) hadn't been executed until Wednesday. Since the studios declined to buy Eastman Kodak's Bldg. 38, its only remaining production coating line, that facility would have followed all its others to the scrap heap if these agreements didn't pan out.Originally Posted by civich
Since Kodak Alaris' current exclusive supplier of film, both black and white and color, is Eastman Kodak, and Eastman Kodak depends on motion picture film production to keep Bldg. 38 financially viable, the large format Kodak-branded films members here use would cease to exist when Bldg. 38 did. It is not known whether Kodak Alaris might seek to source the still film products it currently markets elsewhere if that happened. If "TMX," TMY," "320TXP," "PORTRA" and "EKTAR" were "revived" under those circumstances, they would most likely bear little resemblance to films carrying the same names today.
Note that the Eastman Kodak spokesman quoted in that article, while declining to comment on duration of the agreements, did say that as a result of them film production would continue for "years." In light of the plural form, anyone willing to pay the prices can count on Kodak large format film availability for at least two more years.
I don't know how you make that determination. Things like Portra, Ektar, and TMax are very popular products. It's a more dicey question whether the sheer
square footage of sheet film begins to offset the volume per unit sales of roll film, however. Kodak still commands the lion's share of color neg film, worldwide.
But there are volume users of even sheet film we never hear about on a forum like this. So I have no idea how big a footprint movie film is in relation to the overall picture. Around here the viewpoint is kinda skewed because it's still a holdout for mom n' pop art film theaters. In fact, Rbt Redford attempted to buy the
big restaurant lot right across the st from my office to create a big W coast film gig magnet. But the zoning for a restaurant held firm. The new Pacific Film archive bldg further up the street is still under construction and is obviously an obscenely expensive undertaking. Have no idea yet what its emphasis will be. One thing about artists in general, whether you're talking about either still or moving content, is that once you tell them they can do something a certain way any longer, they'll instantly rebel. Oil painting didn't end when fast-drying acrylic pigments appeared on the market.
Good news. A vital part of Kodak's culture. If it is 'culture', it is worth any effort to keep it alive like old castles."Film has long been — and will remain — a vital part of our culture,"
OK, I have to admit that I am using Fuji films because of larger availability in Europe, but it is always good to have two large players in the field.
Easy. "Very popular" in 2015 doesn't translate to anywhere near the sales volume for which Bldg. 38 was designed. Even with all the coping changes Eastman Kodak has made as the film market shrunk since it built that behemoth.
It's the predominant portion of Bldg. 38's output. Had the studios, their arms twisted by prominent directors, not agreed to purchase minimum quantities of motion picture film from Eastman Kodak, there would have been no economically viable way for Bldg. 38 to continue operating. Even considering possible ancillary work like display touch screen coating. The line is just too big.
It's not clear whether that quote refers to Kodak's or society's culture. So, maybe good news.
But you read the linked article?It's not clear whether that quote refers to Kodak's or society's culture. So, maybe good news.
The article talks about a "transition." That could be a transition to zero film at some point. Or perhaps if they can make enough off of this deal, a transition to a more "right sized" facility.
Yes I did. Why do you ask?
Quote from the linked article:
I assume that if a CEO make this statement, he means the company and not some kinky society."Film has long been — and will remain — a vital part of our culture," Kodak CEO Jeff Clarke said in a statement.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks