Lomography is a Potential Suitor for Kodak’s Dwindling Film Photography Business

by Christian Rudman on 11/24/2012

This came as a bit of a surprise to me after paging halfway through the interesting BBC article on the Lomography brand’s history and subsequent film mini-renaissance; but, apparently there is currently some speculation that the company may be poised for a takeover of Kodak’s professional and consumer photography brand and trademarks. Just check out this short cut from the BBC article that makes any film nut’s pulse quicken after the jump:

As former giants like Kodak and Agfa’s film ranges have dwindled, Lomography has also rescued old emulsions from extinction or created new ones. There has been much speculation that Lomography may buy the rights to some of Kodak’s extinct emulsions if the photography giant – now in bankruptcy protection and likely to focus in future on its printer business – sells off its film division.

It’s not the biggest player in the film market, but it’s the most vibrant, and it’s been there all along – unlike Ilford, which went under, and was resurrected.

It makes a ton of sense when you think about it, but I had personally been banking on Ilford since they have been on a steady roll with their B&W business, and I figured that the buyout of major color films like Portra and Ektar would allow for them to keep their branding separate from the color industry. However, who can’t argue with a business with a true love for film and all it’s quirks and beauty taking over the arguably best emulsions in the business?

I have a huge love for Portra myself, but have been shifting my purchases from the likes of Kodak and Fuji towards companies that have a legitimate interest in furthering the culture of film photography; companies like Ilford and Lomography. While Lomo has yet to introduce a film that is truly their own as opposed to a rebranded version of another company’s emulsion (the Sunset Strip is quite the contender though, as they have tweaked it from the original Efke formula with some magic of their own), they do seem to really be pushing to reintroduce film to the market within and beyond the photographic community.

Now all we can do is sit back and pray that the higher-ups at Lomo see the value in acquiring their own line of films and pumping some life back into the community of Rochester with new jobs at reopened factories pumping out some of the most glorious imaging emulsions ever developed. Of course, this will hinge on some sweet soul in Kodak’s bankruptcy committee greenlighting the deal. Like I said, start praying for it now because it will be nothing short of a modern miracle.

(Via PetaPixel.com)

Please Support The Phoblographer

We love to bring you guys the latest and greatest news and gear related stuff. However, we can’t keep doing that unless we have your continued support. If you would like to purchase any of the items mentioned, please do so by clicking our links first and then purchasing the items as we then get a small portion of the sale to help run the website.

Also, please follow us on FacebookFlickr and Twitter.

  • Nightfly

    “Lomography may buy the rights to some of Kodak’s extinct emulsions”

    Are we looking at bringing back past emulsions and current production films possibly? I want my Ektachromes back!

    • ChrisGampat

      You and me both.

      - Chris Gampat
      Editor in Chief
      The Phoblographer

  • Petr

    I’m not afraid about the B&W films. I think Ilford is a viable alternative. However I think that Ektar and Portra are unreplaceable.

  • Pingback: Der analoge Stammtisch - Seite 103

  • Andie

    GIVE EKTACHROME BACKK!

  • cgw

    You’re kidding, right? Where in the BBC piece is there any accurate fact-based discussion of demand for film materials? Anyone connected in any way with film photography for the last 10+years knows the answer, often with painful certainty.The scale of the Rochester coating operations is the problem. The N. American market alone, according the the PMA, swallowed around 1 billion rolls of film in 1999. The same market absorbed barely 19 million in 2009 and, I’d guess, considerably less in 2012. It borders on the sort magical thinking common to “analog or death” online communities like APUG.org to believe Kodak’s gigantic capacity can be neatly downsized to suit repackagers like Lomo and still-declining demand for film materials. E6 is nearly dead and C-41 materials could be next, especially as Kodak faces a shrinking market for cine films. Ilford gets this new reality. Lomo? Not so much.

    • ChrisGampat

      Different marketing style.

      • cgw

        There’s nothing more to Lomo than marketing–no production, no R&D, no real commitment.

        • ChrisGampat

          While I respect your opinions and love hearing them as you’re a consistent commenter here, I think that Lomo actually needs to be experienced to understand. Shooting with their cameras? Not always the best experience, but the La Sardina, Lubitel and LCA (and the wide) are actually pretty darned good.

          Do I always personally shoot with their stuff? No. I love my Voigtlander Bessa way too much. But Lomo does an excellent job with their processing, customer service, scanning, lots of their folks ar friendlier than even some of the people I used to work with at B&H Photo, etc. They actually do care about film and they’re more than marketing. Many of their own films are actually really nice. Have you tried Lady Gray or Earl Gray?

          Also, what about them doing the one thing that no one else thought would happen: the revival of 110 film? Seriously, who would shoot 110 film? I wouldn’t. But I’m a different film shooter and you probably are too. That doesn’t mean we should bash the people that want to experiment with new things though; it just means that they’re not necessarily catering to us. With that said, we can also probably argue that Kodak gave up on us when they announced they were exporting the Kodachrome processing to a third party company.

          I think there surely is some R&D. I’ve seen prototype hacks and units for instant film to be used with the Lubitel for example. And the one I saw was very rough, but it’s an idea. Plus, look at the Bel-Air. Is it what we want? No, I want manual controls. But that doesn’t mean that once again they’re catering to us. They’re catering to another segment of the market. Apple is doing the same with all the ways they’re screwing the high end guys and professionals.

          Okay, this has probably officially been the longest comment I’ve ever typed on this blog and I want you to know that in no way was my intention to hurt you or offend you in anyway but I wanted to give you another viewpoint.
          *Chris Gampat*
          Editor in Chief

          • cgw

            No worries. They’re considered a bit of a joke here in Toronto where a healthy film ecosystem of labs, camera shops, college programs, and regular swap meets makes the local Lomography outpost a quiet place. Aside from the odd Holga, beginning film shooters seem to grab old Spotmatics or Nikons or Yashica TLRs first–all gateway cameras to the depths of film dependency. That “other segment of the market” here uses Smart phones and Instagram instead of Lomography’s merch. The only thing “new” about Lomography is their attempt to “brand” film photography. Guess that’s why I view the redemptive power of Lomography for the future of film to be farfetched.

  • Pingback: Film Will Live on After Kodak » The Rochesterian

Previous post:

Next post: