Crossdressers-Haven.com

The Kodak plant in Coburg ( Melbourne suburb ) will cease production on November 26 , around 600 of its 1000 workers will be made redundant .
The workers will finish up on December 2 and the remaining 400 jobs cannot be guarenteed , happy Christmas guys ???? , I dont think so!

Kodak claim that this is a result of the market move toward digital photography , Coburg manafactures film and paper and has taken a downturn since the digital revolution.
Kodak claim sales of conventional camera's has also dropped off.

Kodak film and paper will now be imported ( probably from Kodak China ) , we will no longer be able to buy Australian made as all other brands are imports.

That story even made the Atlatna paper this morning. There's still something about digital i'm just not sold on. Last year I bought a high quality film point and shoot for my partner and a film slr for myself because at the price there's still things you can do with a film camera that you can't do with a digital

It is sad that people are loosing their jobs. 8-(

The only part of this that irritates me is that companies do NOT give enough warning (if any at all) prior to the layoffs, nor enough of a severance package for the workers to be able to re-train for a different job.

As far as the quality of digital photography... A 4MegaPixel camera will normally produce an image that has as much detail as a cheap consumer class 35mm. (better than the disposable cameras).

It is true that a 35mm SLR in the hands of a pro (or even trained/experienced) photographer can still outperform the best of the digitals, that won't be true for too much longer. Once we hit the 16Mp (4000x4000 pixels) level of images then we will have comparable quality images for professionals.

me, I'll settle for a nice 8.2Mp digital 35mm with a lens mount that is compatible with traditional 35mm SLRs. Until then, I'll hang on to my old entry level SLR for important events and my 1.2Mp digital for random shots.

Ahzz, you've hit it on the nail -- its not the camera, its the photographer!

I generally agree with you, but film won't disappear completely -- there's a look with film (photos or movies) that digital has yet to catch up with (besides, why fake it digitally when you can use the real thing?).

The resurgence if Super8mm film has Kodiak producing a lot more of it than they used to just a few years back.

i think they could be right at kodak couse ever sinds i bought my digital camera i havent used my "normal "camera any more
I got an olympus with 5.2 megapixel and the picture's are as good as any other normal camera
and with photoshop and some other software i can do what ever i want with them
So ok i guess i'm guilty to then
but he time goes on and so is technology
If you dont act on changes in the market then your conducting poor buisness
standing still in buisness will destroy your buisness
I work in the graphical industry and everithing is digital there
I work on a 4 color printingpress from about 1.5 million euro it's completly digital its contoled by a powerfull computer so not mutch hand work there
And sorry but the GOOD digital camera's outperform the non digital ones i've see the results everyday youl be impressed on the currant digital camera's
ok ther expensive but the quality is stunning

Sorry just my point of vieuw and yes i do feel sorry for all those losing their job due to this after all they all have families to take care of


Mellissa

Alexandra wrote:Ahzz, you've hit it on the nail -- its not the camera, its the photographer!

I generally agree with you, but film won't disappear completely -- there's a look with film (photos or movies) that digital has yet to catch up with (besides, why fake it digitally when you can use the real thing?).

The resurgence if Super8mm film has Kodiak producing a lot more of it than they used to just a few years back.

Morning Alexandra,

Do you really think it won't go away?

I ask because in the 80s people thought vinyl records were going to stay around forever, but some kids today have no idea what a vinyl record is. The hard part is that there's no one who really makes them available in mass quantities anymore. You can still find people who do, don't get me wrong.

So I think if production plants for the chemicals, the paper, the cameras, and accessories go away, so will the art. I'm not sure it will totally disappear, but I just wonder if it will be like vinyl records 20 years from now?

Beauty

Girls, I am a member of Photographic Marketing Association Internationsl, Professional Photograhers of America, Associon of Professional Color Labortories. I am also a Certified Photographic Consultant, and A member of The Society Photofinishing Engineers. I have been in the Business sicne 1971. Digital Photography has been a revoulution in the business, only comparable to George's invention of a emulison coating machine in 1879, and The KODAK #1 camera, Photofinshing was born with that camera. "you push the button ,we do the rest" .
Film is going to last according to PMA for about 20 more years. Labs have been closing left and right. There are more used processing machines for sale than at any other time in the histor of photo industry. All the techologies that I went to Technical School for are on the wayside. I lost my(daytime) job 4 years ago, I was a Photofinishing Engineer. I repaired processing and printing machines.
Kodak has been reorganized 15 times in the last 20 years. I do not have a lot of confidence in Kodak they haven't had a decant CEO since Richard Mees. Too many college people running numbers instead people that have come thru the ranks such as Dr, Mees( he wrote the Theory of Photographic Process. With Dr. Shepard.
Want a job with Kodak go to MIT or RIT.
The two main trade magazines, Photographic Processing and Photol Lab Management are so thin these days, compared to even 5 years ago. They have both changed their names because of digital. There is very little to be written about digital compared to the chemical and balancing problems encountered with conventional processing machines.
Personaly I don't have a digital camera as of yet, I will when I find one I like and is not an arm and leg. The KOdak 14n is a dream camera for me, $5,000. Yeah right!!!
We did have a film Scanner in the photo lab I worked at and we had a Kodak Work Station. Shot traditonal negatives ,processed them ,then scanned to work on images, it was a first generagtion work station, made in the early 90's , it was slow and very limited.

There are still some advantages to film, they will last thru any magnetic or eletrical storms, Once you shot the film you can't delete it accidently, I think you learn better from film, but you learn quicker from digital. The batteries aren't so crutial if you have a manul camera.
I can still get a better image by shooting negs and scaning, film is more stable than it has ever been. Color images can last up to 150 years if stored reasonably well.
Digital images I don't know how long they last. I have never seen a study on image stabilty from digital, either electronic images or printed media.
And there are so many manufacures out there don't know if i ever will, too many varibles.
So any way , 20 years or so will be the end of traditional photograhy , i would say this next spring you'll start seeing less competive pricing on traditonal processing. Yep the prices are going to start to rise. that's all folks,............kristen

Beauty wrote:

Alexandra wrote:Ahzz, you've hit it on the nail -- its not the camera, its the photographer!

I generally agree with you, but film won't disappear completely -- there's a look with film (photos or movies) that digital has yet to catch up with (besides, why fake it digitally when you can use the real thing?).

The resurgence if Super8mm film has Kodiak producing a lot more of it than they used to just a few years back.

Morning Alexandra,

Do you really think it won't go away?

I ask because in the 80s people thought vinyl records were going to stay around forever, but some kids today have no idea what a vinyl record is. The hard part is that there's no one who really makes them available in mass quantities anymore. You can still find people who do, don't get me wrong.

So I think if production plants for the chemicals, the paper, the cameras, and accessories go away, so will the art. I'm not sure it will totally disappear, but I just wonder if it will be like vinyl records 20 years from now?

Beauty

For an example of why old things won't go away just look at the DJ industry. Most DJs now use really fancy CD and DVD_audio players that mimmic vinyl players abilities to scratch, slowdown, speedup, etc capabilities. However I know a few that still insist on the old vinyls. There is just something about the old vinyls that sounds warm compared to even the best of the digital players out there.

From what I have been told (and seen/heard) is that the analog stuff will always have a slight edge on digitals in the "artistic feeling" way. For the vast majority of people, the digital stuff will be cheaper, and easier to use while delivering the same (or better) quantitative qualities as analog. But there is an unquantifyable aspect to analog that will keep it around in rare and unique uses for a long time to come.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that there is something about the "imperfections" in analog that creates a warmth that digital's "perfection" will never be able to truly reproduce. It is this "warmth" that the artistic types will always need and want.

Kristen, Alexandra, and Beauty are quite corect in that analog methods and services are going to either go away or become very expencive and affordable by only the true artists. I do know that there are several sound engineers for small label recording studios that have gathered up unwanted analog equipment and stuck with the pure analog systems in order to produce a decently popular "analog feeling" music albums.

Analog is becoming a truly niche artform. As such, it will stick around, but only in rare and artistic forms. For this, I am grateful that some have taken the old ways and used them for art, thus guaranteeing the old ways survival, just like the art of horse training and riding.

I hope I've made some sense in this post. Art is such a hard thing to describe. It's ephemeral, not quanitfiable, and thus since digital is all about quantifiable things, it'll never completely replace analog IMHO.

Ahzz, I have heard that some sound engineers have looked for vaccum tube amps and control boards. Talk I overheard at the theater I used to work at. (production). Don't know if that's true or not?. Kristen

Kristen your post on the photomarket trend was most interesting ( thanks ! )

The good thing about photos on paper is they are easily accessable , if your computer breaks down you cant view anything or if it blows up you lose any stored images.

Most of my work is done on film and then scanned onto the computer , if I really want to keep computer photo files I burn them onto a compact disc.
I can view the compact disc as a slide show on computer or dvd player.

I have recently aquired a digital camera , it saves heaps of time uploading onto the computer unlike scanning which takes hours if you have a lot of photos to do.

I see a lot of negative response to new technology inhere and every where
why is that i rather listen to a cd than to vynil (the sound sucks on vynil)
and digital imaging has made my proffession a lot easyer as we have a demand from clients within 24 hours they want there new product that take's a lot of speed and planning and with the internet and digital technologies its possible
we can deliver 25000 brochures from start to finish in about 36 hours
that can be up to 8 tons of paper (yes 8 tons)
my machine spits out 15000 sheets of paper in one hour thats about one ton of paper
And thats all thanks to digital technology

And then there is the animition buisness check the new Disney /pixar movies all made on a computer like finding nemo, brother bear, monsters inc.
dont tell me thats a bad product compared to the old animations made on film
On film and by drawing by hand these would not be possible

So i think people should learn to accept the fact that technology will always progress
and that old isnt always better
Its nostalgic ok but not better

Just my opinion

Mellissa

additional info about Kodak:

after they started cutting back on the production of negative super8mm (movie) negative stock (not reversal stock -- the kind typically used by most consumers) several companies began to buy 35mm negative stock and cutting it up into super8 size to fill a niche in the market place. Since the market started growing, Kodak started producing super8 negative again.

On the other hand, as noted by someone earlier, the major problem with film is cost. To shoot a basic simple 90 minute 35mm movie can cost upwards of $10,000 for film stock. Then, after the film is edited, one must make at least one negative print which will cost $35-50,000 on top of that.

The reason digital moviemaking hasn't yet overtaken film is the lack of digital projection systems in theatres. It'll be interesting to see how things will be 20 years from now for sure.

Mellisa

It's not a "bad" thing. It's people who enjoy the emotions and memories that are attached to simpler things from the past. Digital will probably never be able to truly trigger those memories so it becomes an art form more so than a question of quality or ease of use.

Take for example the broad brush strokes of the painting "Starry Night". The way it is done in a very rough, broad stroked method is critical in the impression being given by the artist.

Yes, it's true that many audiophiles are latching on to the old tube amps once more. Personally I think it's more a thing of nostalgia that the avid audiophiles are after instead of quality or "warmth" as they call it. This isn't a bad thing really. Nor is it an invalidation of the new technology and methods. It's merely a niceh art form IMHO.

While digital will take over in most places, a hobby of mine, Large format photography, will probably stay the same. These folks are still using pinhole camers and photopaper as negatives. I must admit that having that big ol' 8X10 setup in the park to catch that rose at the perfect moment sometimes makes me wonder what I am doing. I think that a traditional photography, based on making your own negatives and paper from lost and forgotten processes will never go away.

Remember that people said that painting would also go away with the advent of photography. It did not instead it appeared to be strengthened.

When I can get 2440 lines per inch out of an 8 inch X10 inch CCD for a far more reasonable price than what I am currently paying (in 2004 Dollar$) I may change. I most certainly will not until then.