Re: OT, was

From: Susan Huber ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 07/13/05-06:30:17 AM Z
Message-id: <002901c587a6$a0ca71b0$f99dc8cf@ownereb7xeo44n>

  Hi R; I agree- someone will step up to the plate as they say...
  ----- Original Message -----
  From: "Ryuji Suzuki" <>
  To: <>
  Sent: Tuesday, July 12, 2005 10:44 PM
  Subject: Re: OT, was

> From: Dave Rose <>
> Subject: OT, was (Re: Kodak B&W Paper Discontinued? Good Ridence.)
> Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2005 20:45:44 -0600
> > This kind of political commentary is off topic but not unexpected
> > for this list. I've endured so much far left liberal nonsense on
> > alt-photo-process.
> As a general comment apart from the past postings in this thread, I
> think "left liberal" and "left liberal nonsense" are very different
> things. I would think a good number of the former would agree with a
> reasonable fraction of what you said.
> > As for Kodak discontinuing B&W paper, it's a wise and prudent
> > business decision. Kodak needs to either remain profitable, or face
> > financial ruin.
> I agree. Every time they drop some products there are enough people
> blaming their business decisions as if Eastman Kodak Company was a
> charity. I do miss some of their very unique products like direct
> positive dupe films, etc., but I wouldn't blame them for discontinuing
> products that don't sell. At this point of the game I'd rather have
> more secure supply of Kodak b&w films than Kodak b&w papers and I'm
> glad they dropped papers if it was indeed a necessary decision.
> > Not to worry, if there's sufficient demand, a small manufacturer
> > will step in and capture the market that Kodak has abandoned.
> I'm not very certain about this. Silver gelatin is obsolete but that
> doesn't make it "low tech." Large manufacturers had full scale
> corporate research facilities and staff to do basic scientific
> research as well as product development, but they don't share their
> commercially important findings with others. I do not think a small
> company who didn't make equal effort in the past can jump in the
> market and make post-1990 quality films. They'll need time to do
> necessary research to come up with Kodak- or Fujifilm-quality
> products, so the market would be further shrunk by then.
> In my view, it is thus our best interest to support a selected group
> of a couple of viable manufacturers that can fully adapt to shrinking
> market rather than to blame them. I wouldn't count on small
> corporations that are yet to emerge.
> Ryuji Suzuki


Received on Wed Jul 13 06:32:38 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 08/25/05-05:31:51 PM Z CST