Talk:AgfaPhoto

	Business portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Business, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of business articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BusinessWikipedia:WikiProject BusinessTemplate:WikiProject BusinessWikiProject Business articles
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Film: Filmmaking

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Filmmaking task force.

Photography Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Photography, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of photography on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PhotographyWikipedia:WikiProject PhotographyTemplate:WikiProject PhotographyPhotography articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

AGFA is redirected to Agfa-Gevaert, but Agfa is not. That seems to be strange for me. Should we merge this page into Agfa-Gevaert? Since I'm looking to write about old Agfa cameras I hope there's some place like List of Agfa cameras. For now these information scattered in Agfa and Agfa digital cameras, the latter includes film cameras and scanners, not very easy to find. Poppy 04:22, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Unclear aspects of article[edit]

The AgfaPhoto article implies that "Agfa" (prior to merging with Gevaert in the 1960s) is in some sense the same entity as "AgfaPhoto". However, "Agfa" merged to become "Agfa-Gevaert", of which AgfaPhoto was- at the time of its sale- merely a division.

I can accept that AgfaPhoto's business at the time of the sell-off was probably quite similar to Agfa and Gevaerts around the time of their merger, but that's not really the point. Agfa merged to become Agfa-Gevaert. The use of financial language/details in the intro kind of obfuscates this.

If the article wishes to focus on AgfaPhoto as the continuation of Agfa's original photographic business (and include a full history of that), that's fine, but the article needs sorted out to clarify things.

Fourohfour 14:40, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Have put a minor rewrite in the intro to address this issue. Fourohfour 15:04, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the history needs more detail and it should also be noted how old the AGFA corporation is -- they were making dyes before color photography existed.

As to the recent history, it also needs more details and will need continued expandion as AGFAPhoto continues to expand their business. According to what I have read, they have the rights to not only the name (this went to court in the EU), but also the consumer photographic products. I find web sites that are selling black and white AGFA film, paper, & chemicals. I presume that their range of products will continue to expand in the future although it isn't clear if black & white film and paper is going to be sold as AGFA or Rollei (or both). Perhaps their new business model will work and they can bring back some of their excellent black & white products. Tyrerj (talk) 08:08, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Current consumer digital photo products[edit]

There are now AgfaPhoto branded digital cameras, which seem to be made by a company called plawa (www.plawa.com) mvdhout (talk) 22:11, 15 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Timeline problem[edit]

This article is about AgfaPhoto, which did not exist before 2004. Nevertheless, there are descriptions and photos of products from the earlier Agfa-Gevaert company. This is misleading, and should be corrected, so I moved the descriptions to the Agfa-Gevaert article.. --Janke | Talk 10:38, 12 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]