|
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
|
Author
|
Topic: Kodak in crisis?
|
Leo Enticknap
Film God
Posts: 7474
From: Loma Linda, CA
Registered: Jul 2000
|
posted 10-23-2003 05:08 AM
Eastman Kodak investors are holding crisis talks amid the continuing slump in the company's share price. Link to story. quote:
Kodak, the world's largest manufacturer of photographic film, is in crisis.
by Mark Gregory, BBC World Service business reporter.
The growing popularity of digital cameras that do not use traditional film has severely dented the market Kodak has dominated for more than a century.
And the company's net profits have slipped to $122m (£73m) for the July to September quarter, marking a 63% drop when compared with the same period a year earlier.
In an effort to sort it out, a group of rebel investors who control about a quarter of the company's shares are meeting in New York on Wednesday.
The investors want to find a way to reverse a plunge in the company share price that has been caused by both the falling profits and by concerns about the group's strategy going forward.
Digital limbo
Last month Kodak unveiled plans to invest $3bn to increase its presence in the area of digital technology.
This, the company believes, would counteract a sharp fall in demand for its traditional products in the world's rich countries - that is, in the markets that matter.
But such plans have infuriated some investors whose dividend payments have been cut by 72% to pay for the diversification.
The rebel investors say Kodak is taking too many risks.
Staying put
The investors want Kodak to avoid head to head competition with established electronics giants like Sony, Canon and Hewlett Packard, which have big leads in digital imaging.
They are worried that Kodak will spend too much on buying up other companies to beef up its position in an area its unfamiliar with.
After all, they insist: Film may be in decline, but its still provides Kodak with sizeable profits.
Besides, in some parts of the developing world demand for film is actually rising.
Rebel investors say the company should stick to the business it knows.
But Kodak is mindful of the fate of the instant picture group Polaroid, which went bust two years ago after failing to move with the times.
The group is desperate to avoid a similar fate.
"Our third-quarter results reinforce the rationale behind the strategy we unveiled to our investors on 25 September," said chairman and chief executive Daniel Carp.
After all, history is littered with examples of firms that were performing brilliantly with one type of technology but failed to make the transition to the next.
| IP: Logged
|
|
John Pytlak
Film God
Posts: 9987
From: Rochester, NY 14650-1922
Registered: Jan 2000
|
posted 10-23-2003 08:33 AM
Here's the information directly from Kodak:
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/pressReleases/pr20031022-03.shtml
http://www.kodak.com/US/plugins/acrobat/en/corp/investorCenter/pr20031022-03.pdf
If you look at the results of Kodak's Research and Development, there's a nice mix of film and digital imaging:
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/researchDevelopment/techProdHighlights.shtml
Here's what Richard Sehlin, Chief Technology Officer for Kodak's Entertainment Imaging has to say about the future:
http://www.kodak.com/country/US/en/motion/products/v2/sehlin.shtml
About 70% of our R&D budget is dedicated to advancing FILM technology.
Within the next few months, Kodak will introduce several additional new Kodak VISION2 films, expanding on the innovations introduced with Kodak VISION2 500T Color Negative Film 5218.
Kodak just introduced two NEW B&W camera films, supporting filmmakers creativity:
http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products/bw/newBWFilms.shtml
Kodak is also investing in developing "Hybrid" technologies (e.g., scanning, recording, image management, etc.), as well as in Digital Cinema:
http://www.kodak.com/go/dcinema
Other companies (e.g., Sony) are facing challenges too:
http://www.forbes.com/business/newswire/2003/10/20/rtr1115288.html
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bobby Henderson
"Ask me about Trajan."
Posts: 10973
From: Lawton, OK, USA
Registered: Apr 2001
|
posted 10-26-2003 08:38 PM
I would not really be interested in buying a camera that recorded a picture digitally only to "print" it to film later. It might be a neat concept, but the practical terms of it make no sense. Perhaps a digital camera might be nice to "proof" or test an image before doing a film exposure. But if I am going to shoot something on film, I want the entire process happening analog, light to lens to film emulsion with no digital step in between.
Most digital cameras use a CMOS chip (while some use a CCD) to "see" a digital image and record it to memory. The resolution of a CMOS chip is finite and would not create any more image data by digitally recording to film than it would by simply storing the image onto a flash memory card. In fact, you would likely get a fair amount of image degradation in the process. The only difference I see in this is just added film development costs. It would be better to save that money, buy some good glossy photo paper and print out the photos using an inkjet printer.
Here's the film/digital combo camera I would like: a 35mm film camera with all the normal bells and whistles of a good SLR and a removeable digital CMOS back that can insert in place of a roll of film.
Granted, creating such a thing would be pretty tricky given the different exposure areas of 8-perf 35mm still camera film versus the tiny size of a CMOS chip. But if large format cameras can switch between analog and digital function why should 35mm be any different? Photographers can invest in really good lenses and make great improvements to both digital and film images.
This kind of insertable CMOS system would also be a good route for varying features to make certain models more affordable versus something more high end. You could have a single chip CMOS setup with a certain level of resolution versus a pretty high end model sporting sharper resolution spread across 3 CMOS chips.
Actually, I'm surprised we haven't seen much in the way of 3CMOS cameras. All digital camera chips really only see a black and white image. Filters are applied to specific areas of the chip to see either the Red, Green or Blue component of color and then the chip interpolates a full color image from that. It seems to work okay in digital still cameras, but not very good at all in consumer CCD video cameras. That's why all professional video cameras have a 3CCD system. It would stand to reason that some digital camera makers might want to try to market a 3CMOS camera with more accurate color than a typical 1CMOS camera can provide. With interchangeable backs, a company could offer such an upgrade route without pinning the entire model line down on it.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All times are Central (GMT -6:00)
|
This topic comprises 2 pages: 1 2
|
Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM
6.3.1.2
The Film-Tech Forums are designed for various members related to the cinema industry to express their opinions, viewpoints and testimonials on various products, services and events based upon speculation, personal knowledge and factual information through use, therefore all views represented here allow no liability upon the publishers of this web site and the owners of said views assume no liability for any ill will resulting from these postings. The posts made here are for educational as well as entertainment purposes and as such anyone viewing this portion of the website must accept these views as statements of the author of that opinion
and agrees to release the authors from any and all liability.
|
Home
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic