This is more common than it should be. Even photographers who should know better will blithely quote "The Law" to each other about the legality of taking photographs on the NYC subway system.
Some Police Still Enforcing Non-Existent Ban On Photography In The Subways
February 23, 2006
When the MTA tried to ban picture taking in the subway last year, that plan quickly died in the face of widespread opposition. But that hasn't necessarily stopped police from enforcing the non-existent rule. NY1’s Bobby Cuza filed this report.
Taking pictures or video is perfectly legal anywhere in the subway or commuter rail system, and not grounds for a DisCon, or Disorderly Conduct, summons. And yet, scenes like this one are not uncommon; police trying to block the practice, as they did when NY1 visited the Atlantic Avenue station in Brooklyn with newspaper photographer Todd Maisel, Vice President of the New York Press Photographers Association.
He says police are routinely enforcing a rule that doesn't exist.
One of the major reasons that people don't argue with the cops on things like this is because although it may be legal to take photos in NYC subways, the cops have this little thing they like to call
"Felony Contempt of Cop" which they feel is a serious crime that requires an immediate beat-down.
Smooches,
Wiggy
Oh yeah...
Kodak spun off Eastman Kodak Chemical into Eastman Chemical a few years back. They produce the chemicals used by Kodak (and others) to make and develop film, photographic-process paper, and so on. But as the film-photography industry has sagged, so has the need for raw chemicals.
Now comes this news:
http://deltafarmpress.com/news/060216-biodiesel-arkansas/
Chemical company goes with biodiesel
Feb 16, 2006 9:00 AM
By David Bennett
...
“At that time, we were part of the chemical division of Eastman Kodak. We made photographic and other chemicals for the company.”
In 1994, Kodak spun off its chemical division and set it up as an independent company, Eastman Chemical. Today, the Batesville plant has roughly 408 employees. Only a fraction of the plant site’s 2,200 acres is in use.
“We specialize in chemicals and have for 25 or 30 years. In a year’s time, about 35 to 40 different chemicals come off our site. We sell those to around 200 customers around the world. We bring in raw materials from around the world and also ship around the world.”
...
At one time, the plant had over 700 employees. Every company building was “pretty much” filled with production and product. Today, the plant has too much unused capacity.
...
Last October, the Batesville site was able to produce 3 million gallons of biodiesel annually. Since then, the company has added reactors to the production line and is now able to produce 6 million gallons per year. By mid-2006, McDonald says, capability will be up to 15 million gallons annually.
See, this is important (and not just because biodiesel is way cool and way ontime for the recent State of the Union address where President Bush indicated that alternative fuels are a high priority for the US in the near term. It is also important for photographic reasons. There are those who say that when Kodak, Fuji, et al, finally quit the film manufacturing business, other companies will step into the gap and produce film instead - albeit on a smaller scale. It won't happen, and here's yet another reason why - there won't be any raw chemical manufacturers to support such an operation anymore.
Glad to see Eastman Chemical moving on. They've got a shot at survival.
Smooches,
Wiggy
PS - Here's an interesting blog entry on the subject of Kodak survival:
Show Me The Money - Eastman Kodak - Sinking or Surviving?
Those who wish film was not dying a very rapid death tend to search high and low for any signs that film's demise is being exaggerated, that this horrifying frog-march into digital technology was not happening, and they're willing to grasp at anything that is offered them that seems to purport that film might not be going the way of the Dodo.
Around the beginning of the year, Fujifilm's CEO offered a public statement in which he affirmed Fuji's ongoing commitment to film technology as well as digital. This came hard on the heels of announcements by Nikon that they were going to stop making most film cameras, and Konica-Minolta's statement that they were going to leave the photography business altogether, selling their digital SLR line to Sony to continue to develop and sell. Of course, Agfa Photo had already folded their tent and left the field of honor.
Now, to many, this seemed like exactly what Fuji's CEO hoped it would appear to be - a reprieve, a lifting of the death sentence, a step back from the precipice.
Being a salty old cuss, I doubted this. I could see no reason why Fuji's CEO would make an unprecedented and unprovoked statement like this. Why did he do it? What could cause those conditions. I opined that it was a simple PR move, and a smart one. When one retreats from the battlefield, one needs time to regroup and remove remaining soldiers while not being harried. In other words, Fuji still has a lot of film-based cards on the table - they want to make sure people buy them right up until the day they aren't made anymore and the retail channels are empty. No little boxes of film left over, keep that demand up until doomsday. And I think that was smart for him to do.
Couple of days ago, Fuji announced several new film emulsions, including an ISO 64 chrome. Shades of Kodak! Many people again embraced this - seeing it (wrongly) once again as a salvation of some sort. Look, Fuji is keeping the torch lit! Nothing could be further from the truth.
See, it takes years to get a product from corporate approval to production. Chances are, these new emulsions have been in the pipeline at Fuji for at least a year, maybe more. And a year ago, Fuji, Kodak, and everyone else in the industry except Bob Shell and yours truly thought that film would not die quite as quickly as it has. They knew film was a goner, of course (unlike the idiotic consumers), but they thought they had maybe 5 or 10 years to make an orderly retreat. They were all kicked in the snarglies by the astonishing rate of digital camera adoption across all strata - from retail to professional, and they have had to jerk those wheels hard to starboard - ICEBERG AHEAD! No bets on which of them (Kodak or Fuji) moved fast enough, they may all survive or they may all die screaming in ice-cold digital waters.
So getting back to Fuji's new emulsions - these are not the reprieve so many would prefer they be - they are the last of the R&D push to production that was scheduled long before Fujifilm and Kodak realized that they were about to have their lunch eaten for them. It is the 'other shoe' regarding the curious statements regarding Fujifilm's commitment to film - now we see what market he was trying to protect. He didn't want to be stuck with a full production run of a new emulsion that no one would be buying. He's got to recoup and then cut and run. Not a major deal, but a master stroke.
Kodak, on the other hand, muffed it. Their CEO recently made a number of disparaging remarks about the future of film - he made it painfully clear that Kodak is going to do what everyone already knew they were going to do - shut down all film production and walk away as clean as they can. Too bad, so sad, film gone bye-bye. Buy a digital camera, please.
However, reading their press release today, one must note that they stuck some nasty old film-based stuff in there - kind of hiding it - including (surprise) some new film emulsions. Just like Fuji, they had some stuff sliding down the pipeline. But instead of preparing the market to absorb it by making some nice-nice words about how Kodak still loves the filmies, they have already ticked those guys off by saying how cold the corpse of film is. So I doubt that anyone is going to be receiving this news with great enthusiasm:
http://home.businesswire.com/portal/site/google/index.jsp?ndmViewId=news_view&newsId=20060217005259&newsLang=en
Announcements include a new emulsion for 800-Speed Film, improved KODAK PROFESSIONAL PORTRA 800 Film, increased post-processing antistatic protection for professional and consumer 35 mm capture films and simplified consumer film brands, graphics and packaging.
That would be why they tucked it into a remote corner of a PR announcement and didn't make a big deal about it, is my guess.
Anyway, that's the news for today. It's a fun ride, innit?
Smooches,
Wiggy
See, Kodak is being keelhauled by photographers for having done two naughty and unforgiveable things:
1) Announcing that film is dead.
2) Acting as if it were.
Kodak, being an early participant into R&D for digital cameras, didn't get it at first. Despite being on the market early with digital SLR cameras that were snapped up by news media photographers and others who worked to extreme deadlines and were willing to accept the (at the time) serious limitations that DSLRs put on them, Kodak still didn't get it.
They could have had the lion's share of the digital camera market in a walk - but they blew it through incompetence and poor management. Through fossilized thinking that hired the best and brightest, turned them loose to be creative, and then failed to listen to them.
It was nearly too late by the time Kodak woke up. It may still prove to have been too late - but the giant has clearly awoken, shaken off the cobwebs, and Old Yellow is trying very hard to join the rest of the world in the 21st Century.
One thing they got right - once they brought their new CEO onboard, they set sail and began jettisoning dead wood. They took a 1.1 billion dollar write off last quarter, another the quarter before that - they're bleeding red ink, their stock price looks like a vast wasteland.
But they are turning. Slowly.
Two things - Kodak is DONE with film. Get that through your thick skulls, you morons.
Second - Kodak has decided that they can't compete with Canon and Nikon in the digital SLR market, so they've withdrawn from that toyland. They are concentrating on RETAIL digicams, and R&D / Production of the best image sensors in the business, for cameras of any type or size. From the new 33 megapixel Hasselblad medium format cameras to the tiniest cell phone cams, Kodak wants to be in everything. Like the old BASF commercials - they don't want to sell us digital SLRs, they want to be inside of the digital SLRs we buy.
This, they can do. They OWN the retail digicam market in the USA, despite tough competititon from Canon.
If they keep getting that right, they can use it as a cash cow to fund their cutting-edge R&D.However, one thing Kodak has to watch closely - their cost-per-unit is much, much, higher than Canon, et al. They have the Chinese factories where these retail consumer-level digicams are cranked out by the millions, they need to get their costs in line with what the Japanese are paying for the same items. What's up with that, Kodak? Your profit margin on a per-unit basis blows.
Hey, Kodak-haters - you know who you are. You're the guys who cling obsessively to film, and you hate Kodak because they turned their backs on you. Well, if you're American, you might want to consider that Kodak is making inroads - competing directly with the Japanese in an area where Japan has consistantly beaten the pants off of the USA (not without assistance from Japan, Inc., but that's another rant). You might want to consider rooting for the home team once in a awhile, bubba. Yeah, jobs are being lost. Kodak is still a huge employer of AMERICANS. You want that end because you soon won't be able to buy a box of Tri-X? Fool.
Anyway, here's the latest news story. Glad to see it.
Smooches,
Wiggy
http://www.electronicstalk.com/news/est/est108.html
CMOS sensor aims for mass-market handsets
A new 1.3Mpixel CMOS image sensor is targeted at the high-volume camera phone market.
Eastman Kodak Company continues to expand its portfolio of CMOS image sensors for mass-market consumer applications with the release of a new 1.3Mpixel CMOS image sensor targeted at the high-volume camera phone market. The Kodak KAC-01301 image sensor expands Kodak's existing portfolio of CMOS imagers, which provides manufacturers a range of solutions designed specifically for high-volume markets such as digital still cameras and mobile devices. The new product further demonstrates Kodak's commitment to develop next generation, cost effective CMOS image sensor devices that provide the image quality currently available from CCD image sensors, while taking advantage of the power, integration, and cost benefits traditionally associated with CMOS technology.
I've been saying this for awhile - Kodak is outselling everyone else in the USA when it comes to digicams. I don't know why people are so resistant to hearing this, and deny it is true when they do hear it. I guess they're just stupid.
Smooches,
Wiggy
Click here for link to article
Article published Feb 10, 2006
Kodak tops U.S. digital-camera market again
By BEN DOBBIN
The Associated Press
ROCHESTER — Eastman Kodak Co. captured the No. 1 slot in the ballooning U.S. digital-camera market for a second straight year, extending its lead over Japanese rivals Canon Inc. and Sony Corp.
Domestic sales of digital cameras surged 21 percent to 28 million in 2005, and Kodak's market share leaped to 24.9 percent from 21 percent in 2004, according to data released Thursday by IDC, a research firm in Framingham, Mass.
Kodak shipped 7.05 million digital cameras to U.S. retailers last year, 43 percent more than in 2004. Tokyo-based Canon moved ahead of Sony into the No. 2 spot with 5 million shipments, a 16 percent increase, but its market slice still shrunk from 18.3 percent to 17.7 percent, IDC said.
Japan's Sony, which lost its front-runner position in the U.S. market to Kodak for the first time in 2004, was third in 2005. It shipped 4.78 million cameras, up 10 percent from 2004, but its share of the U.S. market slumped to 16.9 percent from 18.5 percent, IDC said.
Canon benefited from robust sales of digital single-lens reflex cameras, IDC said, and Kodak is now increasingly shifting its focus toward boosting sales of higher-end models. Its new pocket-sized EasyShare V570 couples two lenses — a 3x optical zoom lens and a specialized lens for ultrawide-angle pictures.
Some analysts think Kodak waited too long to launch its easy-to-use line of digital cameras in 2001 because of a reluctance to phase out film, its 20th-century gravy train. But the 125-year-old company insists its switchover was timed to take advantage of filmless imaging's emergence as a mass-market phenomenon.
Digital cameras began outselling film cameras in the United States in 2003. And in 2005, Kodak generated more annual sales from digital imaging than from film-based photography for the first time.
In the global digital-camera race, Kodak was third in 2004 with an 11.8 percent market share to Canon's 17.1 percent and Sony's 16.7 percent. While the 2005 rankings are still a few weeks away, “we don't expect any big changes” but Kodak will likely make up some ground, said IDC analyst Christopher Chute.
Behind the top trio in the U.S. ranks in 2005 were Nikon Corp. with an 8.2 percent share and Palo Alto, Calif.-based Hewlett-Packard Co. with 7.5 percent.
A free and democratic society absolutely depends upon the existence of a free and unfettered press. Is there anyone who doubts that?
When a nation's leaders speak, would you rather read a reporter's description of the event, or the description as presented by that leader's office? Would you rather see photos of news events as taken by the press, or would you rather see photos taken by the leader's office?
In every generation, the leaders of democratic and free societies have sought to control the press, because it is the press that makes them look bad to their constituents. The news make much of elected officials who lie, cheat, and steal and get caught doing it - sometimes voters look with disfavor on such things. Is it any wonder that our elected officials would rather that not happen? Don't you think that our elected officials would hold all of their meetings in secret, with the votes unrecorded, no photos or television coverage - if they could?
Governments will always prefer to work in the dark, away from public scrutiny. It is their nature. News organizations will always prefer to expose what happens in those formerly-dark places - this is their nature. A free society depends upon both elected officials and a free press to keep them honest.
Now comes the Bush Administration, and although your correspondent is no 'Bush Basher', I do not condone or approve of what I am finding out about.
Photogs Slam White House Use of Handout PicturesPhotogs Slam White House Use of Handout Pictures January 30, 2006
By Joe Strupp, Editor &
Publisher
White House photographers aren't looking for a handout these days. In fact, they've gotten far too many. While the practice of providing news organizations with staged photos of events involving the president goes back decades, veteran shooters at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue say it has become almost a regular occurrence with the Bush Administration. A review of Associated Press archives found that during the entire eight years of the Clinton administration, only 100 handout photos of events were released to the press. During the first five years of Bush's presidency, more than 500 have been distributed.
The key is that each of these events was closed to news photographers.
The Bush Administration, apparently, has found a way to muzzle the press photo corps - just do an end-run around them. No more will the President have to suffer the indignity of a published photo showing a baby punching him in the nose...
Such photos will never be released! We'll forever be deprived of such opportunities. Such a loss.
However, we will also be deprived of photos like this...
And I have to tell you - the public does have a right to know - and the press has a right to publish.
Denying press photographers opportunities to attend public newsworthy events and providing stock, vetted, photos taken by one's pet photographers is unacceptable.
Write your Congresscritter and tell them.
Best,
Wiggy
All text, graphics, and images copyright (©) 2006 by Wigwam Jones,
unless otherwise indicated. All Rights Reserved. Mattocks Photography dba
Wigwam Jones.
