News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
film is having a little renaissance, i've seen other brands selling more 35mm rolls than Kodak, despite their fame, maybe they'll buy the name
Yeah, the tricky thing about the "analog" Renaissance is the folks going for film cameras, typewrites, vinyl, and so on are looking for higher-quality equipment, rather than "mass market" stuff. Kodak could plausibly rebrand itself to appeal to this crowd.
I'm not trying to start a flame war about film underneath your comment here but I've been bothered for hours so I decided to come back.
Kodak is one of the handful of companies left in the world that can still produce film stock. It's almost a lost art at this point. They are the only ones that still produce color positive film - Ektachrome (E100) - and they also have the highest quality color negative film still on the market right now - their Portra line.
I wish it was as simple as not making mass market junk like disposable point and shoots and Kodak would be saved, but unfortunately it's not that simple. They already own the film stock market - even hipster stocks like Cinestill are using Kodak movie film that is modified to shoot in 35mm and medium format cameras. Ilford is trying to make color negative films again after years of only producing b&w and it's getting better and closer to Kodak's cheaper stocks (gold/colorplus) but nothing touches the latitude of their Portra line. And obviously there's nothing like slide film, color positive E100 is truly one of the coolest things you can shoot these days.
For me personally, shooting on film is going back to the physicalness, the manualness of taking a photo. It's the act of using something physical to capture a memory instead of just taking a million photos on my phone that I'll never look at again. Getting my rolls back and looking through them is the highlight of my month haha. Organizing my negatives and getting prints and making memories is so much joy that is just lost when I use digital cameras.
Losing Kodak to financial attrition would be a tragedy to a small but passionate (and growing!) community.
It does appear that they have ideas on working through this debt and buying time though so we'll see.
Thanks for reading!
I have some photography homies that mainly use digital but have some old canon SLRs for the novelty. I'm a fairly technical person so I asked them about how film works. In the hour or so we talked about the chemical reactions and iso numbers, it was clear that there are only a handful of companies that can produce film stock. Developing it(as in turn it into a picture) can be done by almost anyone, there are thousands of commercial developers in the States, but maybe six manufacturers of stock.
And a lot of the chemicals used for development are manufactured by Kodak too haha.
To be honest, I don't know much about film at all! That is pretty interesting to hear about Kodak - if all the indie/"hipster" companies are dependent on it, then I can see why you wouldn't want to lose it. That was my bad for relying on memories of 20+ years ago - naturally, they would've changed since then