Kodak close to filing Chapter 11 bankruptcy

**boriscleto** · 01-04-2012, 01:53 PM

Report: Kodak may file for bankruptcy ? USATODAY.com

eddie1960 · 01-04-2012, 02:02 PM

this has been coming for the last 8 years minimum. it's only a matter of time. Fuji has made the transition much better than Kodak did
Sad really because I like many Kodak films and restructuring will likely kill of many of them

**tranq78** · 01-04-2012, 02:36 PM

Originally posted by eddie1960

this has been coming for the last 8 years minimum. it's only a matter of time. Fuji has made the transition much better than Kodak did
Sad really because I like many Kodak films and restructuring will likely kill of many of them

If it's a Chapter 11 filing it may actually be an OK outcome. Their debt load was probably killing them. The equity holders will get wiped out, but that's a risk they took. Employees will at least continue to get pay cheques. Ch11 will allow the company to keep production at least.

Ratmagiclady · 01-04-2012, 04:17 PM

Originally posted by tranq78

If it's a Chapter 11 filing it may actually be an OK outcome. Their debt load was probably killing them. The equity holders will get wiped out, but that's a risk they took. Employees will at least continue to get pay cheques. Ch11 will allow the company to keep production at least.

Eh.

Scared to ask, but are they still making Plus-X in 120?

Ratmagiclady · 01-04-2012, 05:07 PM

Originally posted by ChrisPlatt

Plus-X was discontinued in all formats.

Chris

Eh, Kodak's been trying to shoot itself in vital arteries for a hundred years, what can you do.

Ratmagiclady · 01-04-2012, 10:21 PM

Originally posted by ChrisPlatt

Photographic film continues to be profitable for Kodak even in a shrinking market.
Perhaps their film products division can be maintained, spun off or sold off intact.

Chris

That would be way too non-suicidal, but it seems to be working for Ilford. The bloom may be off 'Send it to Rochester,' but there should be things that can be done.

*peering through Polycontrast filters* 'These are still pretty cherry. Instead of being a really bad digital camera company, You could, ...make paper?'

KungPOW · 01-04-2012, 10:52 PM

It will be a sad day when I finish my last role of tri-x 400.

I hope it never comes.

reeftool · 01-04-2012, 10:53 PM

It's sad really. Kodak was in a position to be a major player in digital photography and they just let it pass by.

**lmd91343** · 01-04-2012, 11:13 PM

Kodak's digital story is amazing. They made the first digital camera. Nowadays they can't sell enough of their own. Their best digital products have been the sensors of Leica M8 and M9 cameras. People like those!

How they ever got that M9 full frame sensor to work properly is unknown to me. The very short register (28.80mm) must make it a technological challenge. The angle of the light rays at the edge at the edge of the full frame sensor must be quite shallow and diminished in intensity compared to the central region. That has got to be some engineering work.

RioRico · 01-05-2012, 02:54 AM

Originally posted by lmd91343

Kodak's digital story is amazing. They made the first digital camera. Nowadays they can't sell enough of their own.

And I (and maybe others) wonder: how much of what's labeled Kodak is actually produced by Kodak, and how much (especially consumer cams) is spewed from the same Chinese compounds that churn-out an infinitude of other-brand P&S's? Kodak has seemed to be schizoid for quite awhile, making the best high-end technical products and the worst cheap consumer crap. My perception is that Kodak consumer digital cams are at best unremarkable and at worst just junk. Is that a valid perception? Are any consumer products labeled Kodak actually worthy of consideration?

Docrwm · 01-05-2012, 06:27 AM

Originally posted by RioRico

And I (and maybe others) wonder: how much of what's labeled Kodak is actually produced by Kodak, and how much (especially consumer cams) is spewed from the same Chinese compounds that churn-out an infinitude of other-brand P&S's? Kodak has seemed to be schizoid for quite awhile, making the best high-end technical products and the worst cheap consumer crap. My perception is that Kodak consumer digital cams are at best unremarkable and at worst just junk. Is that a valid perception? Are any consumer products labeled Kodak actually worthy of consideration?

Whether that is accurate or not it is the impression of many. When I was buying P&S cameras I would read the reviews prior to each purchase and do recall that the Kodak models were consistently panned by the reviewers. As for Fujifilm vs Kodak and digital cameras - its no comparison. Go look at the Jan 5th announcements at DPReview and you'll see that Fuji just announced about 10 new cameras with some interesting diversity and specs in the bunch. For example Fujifilm announces F770EXR and F750EXR raw-capable 20x CMOS compact superzooms

On the issue of using Chapter 11 to rebuild. Kodak is, again, apparently doing something stupid IMHO and that is trying to sell its 1100+ patents related to digital imaging instead of using Chapter 11 to trim debt, restructure, and come out a more solid and nimble company.

reeftool · 01-05-2012, 08:39 AM

Originally posted by RioRico

And I (and maybe others) wonder: how much of what's labeled Kodak is actually produced by Kodak, and how much (especially consumer cams) is spewed from the same Chinese compounds that churn-out an infinitude of other-brand P&S's? Kodak has seemed to be schizoid for quite awhile, making the best high-end technical products and the worst cheap consumer crap. My perception is that Kodak consumer digital cams are at best unremarkable and at worst just junk. Is that a valid perception? Are any consumer products labeled Kodak actually worthy of consideration?

When my daughter was in college, we shopped for a P&S zoom and there were a couple of Kodak models that looked real good. Schneider lens, very good zoom range with macro and an under $200 price tag. A few Google searches found that while they had some very good IQ, the cameras had a high failure rate. A lot of owner comments like "Took great pics for a month and then it's dead". Got her a Fuji which she is still using.

jogiba · 01-05-2012, 03:04 PM

Quote:

Schneider lens

The German names stamped on the lenses of cameras made in Asia is a joke just like Gucci handbags. Any camera selling under $1,000 is not going to have any optics made by any of the German optics companies. My Schneider 150mm f/4 APO-Componon HM Enlarging Lens sells for $1,244.95 at B&H.

**boriscleto** · 01-05-2012, 04:14 PM

Originally posted by jogiba

The German names stamped on the lenses of cameras made in Asia is a joke just like Gucci handbags. Any camera selling under $1,000 is not going to have any optics made by any of the German optics companies. My Schneider 150mm f/4 APO-Componon HM Enlarging Lens sells for $1,244.95 at B&H.

You mean the Leica on my Lumix isn't the same quality as an actual Elmarit?

Name: IMGP4998.jpg
Views: 464
Size: 133.6 KB

Ratmagiclady · 01-05-2012, 06:26 PM

Originally posted by boriscleto

You mean the Leica on my Lumix isn't the same quality as an actual Elmarit?

Well, I dunno, I think they're pretty nice, actually. Elmarit=Not Elmar, but nice. These actually theoretically come of a real partnership between Leica and Panasonic that I think means it's actually the very same glass as the Leica versions got. Wherever they actually made it. (taking out her own little FZ-7 guy. Probably time for a battery charge by now.

) I kind of got a kick out of the nameplate, "Hey, I'm finally shooting Leica. Kind of.

"

Anyway, in this case there's at least some token Leica involvement in the glass. Though I think Leica may be out of that partnership now, they at least bailed from the 4/3rds standard, apparently.

As long as I like it, really. Got one of the ones that doesn't try to go very wide: I think it has generally-good qualities.

01-04-2012, 01:53 PM	#1
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475	Kodak close to filing Chapter 11 bankruptcy Report: Kodak may file for bankruptcy ? USATODAY.com

01-05-2012, 03:04 PM	#13
jogiba Banned Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Millstone,NJ Posts: 6,491	Quote: Schneider lens The German names stamped on the lenses of cameras made in Asia is a joke just like Gucci handbags. Any camera selling under $1,000 is not going to have any optics made by any of the German optics companies. My Schneider 150mm f/4 APO-Componon HM Enlarging Lens sells for $1,244.95 at B&H. Last edited by jogiba; 01-05-2012 at 03:28 PM.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Kodak shares plunge as bankruptcy fears escalate	jogiba	Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands	8	10-09-2011 08:24 AM
Suggestion Computer & Electronics forum filing in marketplace	Ash	Site Suggestions and Help	2	09-30-2011 08:49 PM
Filing of negatives & Focus issues	zerotonothing	Troubleshooting and Beginner Help	11	09-22-2011 10:55 AM
People Project Zenninth Chapter : The Bohemian Girl	janury87	Post Your Photos!	13	04-02-2011 06:41 AM
Travel Come with us The Final Chapter	slowpez	Post Your Photos!	29	02-27-2011 08:56 AM

01-04-2012, 02:02 PM	#2
eddie1960 Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2010 Location: Toronto Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,667	this has been coming for the last 8 years minimum. it's only a matter of time. Fuji has made the transition much better than Kodak did Sad really because I like many Kodak films and restructuring will likely kill of many of them

01-04-2012, 02:36 PM	#3
tranq78 Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,005	Originally posted by eddie1960 this has been coming for the last 8 years minimum. it's only a matter of time. Fuji has made the transition much better than Kodak did Sad really because I like many Kodak films and restructuring will likely kill of many of them If it's a Chapter 11 filing it may actually be an OK outcome. Their debt load was probably killing them. The equity holders will get wiped out, but that's a risk they took. Employees will at least continue to get pay cheques. Ch11 will allow the company to keep production at least.

01-04-2012, 04:17 PM	#4
Ratmagiclady Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: GA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,563	Originally posted by tranq78 If it's a Chapter 11 filing it may actually be an OK outcome. Their debt load was probably killing them. The equity holders will get wiped out, but that's a risk they took. Employees will at least continue to get pay cheques. Ch11 will allow the company to keep production at least. Eh. Scared to ask, but are they still making Plus-X in 120?

01-04-2012, 05:07 PM	#5
Ratmagiclady Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: GA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,563	Originally posted by ChrisPlatt Plus-X was discontinued in all formats. Chris Eh, Kodak's been trying to shoot itself in vital arteries for a hundred years, what can you do.

01-04-2012, 10:21 PM	#6
Ratmagiclady Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: GA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,563	Originally posted by ChrisPlatt Photographic film continues to be profitable for Kodak even in a shrinking market. Perhaps their film products division can be maintained, spun off or sold off intact. Chris That would be way too non-suicidal, but it seems to be working for Ilford. The bloom may be off 'Send it to Rochester,' but there should be things that can be done. peering through Polycontrast filters 'These are still pretty cherry. Instead of being a really bad digital camera company, You could, ...make paper?'

01-04-2012, 10:52 PM	#7
KungPOW Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Vancouver, Canada Photos: Gallery Posts: 1,699	It will be a sad day when I finish my last role of tri-x 400. I hope it never comes.

01-04-2012, 10:53 PM	#8
reeftool Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Upstate New York Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,555	It's sad really. Kodak was in a position to be a major player in digital photography and they just let it pass by.

01-04-2012, 11:13 PM	#9
lmd91343 Site Supporter Join Date: Jul 2009 Location: Los Angeles, CA USA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 1,027	Kodak's digital story is amazing. They made the first digital camera. Nowadays they can't sell enough of their own. Their best digital products have been the sensors of Leica M8 and M9 cameras. People like those! How they ever got that M9 full frame sensor to work properly is unknown to me. The very short register (28.80mm) must make it a technological challenge. The angle of the light rays at the edge at the edge of the full frame sensor must be quite shallow and diminished in intensity compared to the central region. That has got to be some engineering work.

01-05-2012, 02:54 AM	#10
RioRico Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2008 Location: Limbo, California Posts: 11,263	Originally posted by lmd91343 Kodak's digital story is amazing. They made the first digital camera. Nowadays they can't sell enough of their own. And I (and maybe others) wonder: how much of what's labeled Kodak is actually produced by Kodak, and how much (especially consumer cams) is spewed from the same Chinese compounds that churn-out an infinitude of other-brand P&S's? Kodak has seemed to be schizoid for quite awhile, making the best high-end technical products and the worst cheap consumer crap. My perception is that Kodak consumer digital cams are at best unremarkable and at worst just junk. Is that a valid perception? Are any consumer products labeled Kodak actually worthy of consideration?

01-05-2012, 06:27 AM	#11
Docrwm Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Somewhere in the Southern US Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 12,285	Originally posted by RioRico And I (and maybe others) wonder: how much of what's labeled Kodak is actually produced by Kodak, and how much (especially consumer cams) is spewed from the same Chinese compounds that churn-out an infinitude of other-brand P&S's? Kodak has seemed to be schizoid for quite awhile, making the best high-end technical products and the worst cheap consumer crap. My perception is that Kodak consumer digital cams are at best unremarkable and at worst just junk. Is that a valid perception? Are any consumer products labeled Kodak actually worthy of consideration? Whether that is accurate or not it is the impression of many. When I was buying P&S cameras I would read the reviews prior to each purchase and do recall that the Kodak models were consistently panned by the reviewers. As for Fujifilm vs Kodak and digital cameras - its no comparison. Go look at the Jan 5th announcements at DPReview and you'll see that Fuji just announced about 10 new cameras with some interesting diversity and specs in the bunch. For example Fujifilm announces F770EXR and F750EXR raw-capable 20x CMOS compact superzooms On the issue of using Chapter 11 to rebuild. Kodak is, again, apparently doing something stupid IMHO and that is trying to sell its 1100+ patents related to digital imaging instead of using Chapter 11 to trim debt, restructure, and come out a more solid and nimble company.

01-05-2012, 08:39 AM	#12
reeftool Pentaxian Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: Upstate New York Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 9,555	Originally posted by RioRico And I (and maybe others) wonder: how much of what's labeled Kodak is actually produced by Kodak, and how much (especially consumer cams) is spewed from the same Chinese compounds that churn-out an infinitude of other-brand P&S's? Kodak has seemed to be schizoid for quite awhile, making the best high-end technical products and the worst cheap consumer crap. My perception is that Kodak consumer digital cams are at best unremarkable and at worst just junk. Is that a valid perception? Are any consumer products labeled Kodak actually worthy of consideration? When my daughter was in college, we shopped for a P&S zoom and there were a couple of Kodak models that looked real good. Schneider lens, very good zoom range with macro and an under $200 price tag. A few Google searches found that while they had some very good IQ, the cameras had a high failure rate. A lot of owner comments like "Took great pics for a month and then it's dead". Got her a Fuji which she is still using.

01-05-2012, 04:14 PM	#14
boriscleto Loyal Site Supporter Join Date: Dec 2009 Location: North Syracuse, NY Photos: Gallery Posts: 16,475 Original Poster	Originally posted by jogiba The German names stamped on the lenses of cameras made in Asia is a joke just like Gucci handbags. Any camera selling under $1,000 is not going to have any optics made by any of the German optics companies. My Schneider 150mm f/4 APO-Componon HM Enlarging Lens sells for $1,244.95 at B&H. You mean the Leica on my Lumix isn't the same quality as an actual Elmarit?

01-05-2012, 06:26 PM	#15
Ratmagiclady Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: GA Photos: Gallery \| Albums Posts: 13,563	Originally posted by boriscleto You mean the Leica on my Lumix isn't the same quality as an actual Elmarit? Well, I dunno, I think they're pretty nice, actually. Elmarit=Not Elmar, but nice. These actually theoretically come of a real partnership between Leica and Panasonic that I think means it's actually the very same glass as the Leica versions got. Wherever they actually made it. (taking out her own little FZ-7 guy. Probably time for a battery charge by now. ) I kind of got a kick out of the nameplate, "Hey, I'm finally shooting Leica. Kind of. " Anyway, in this case there's at least some token Leica involvement in the glass. Though I think Leica may be out of that partnership now, they at least bailed from the 4/3rds standard, apparently. As long as I like it, really. Got one of the ones that doesn't try to go very wide: I think it has generally-good qualities.