Kodak struggles to find focus in digital era

Discussion in 'Visual Arts' started by Dan C, Aug 8, 2003.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. blackwiggle

    blackwiggle New Member

    Location:
    sydney australia
    Well for me the demise of the photographic medium,and this is VERY irritatingly to me.
    Was when CAMERA & DARKROOM magazine folded.
    Man was I pissed off !
    The best U.S. ,if not the best outright photography mag EVER.
    It's a pity that your [*****] was the cause of it's demise.
    We have Zealots in OZ,but we don't allow them the power to pull a NEEDED forum like that mag was.
    We just don't give them the power,{They've never had it and they never will}WHY DO YOU LET THEM GET AWAY WITH IT

    [This post was edited by - Sckott]
     
  2. Sckott

    Sckott Hand Tighten Only.

    Location:
    South Plymouth, Ma
    Blackwiggle,

    It seems that you have used the forum for airing out some sort of negative feeling you have for Americans or religion in general. It's been noted that not only have you used this seemingly innocent thread to do it, but your linear logic seems to have a bow to it, and to your post.

    Your seemingly angry post was edited for content. Please regard this as a warning. We urge you to try and be as loving to your fellow forum members and exude good taste and understanding as many of our members have varied interests, race, color and religious views. We also do not want threads created or hijacked to voice views on matters of religion or politics. It is not only in the best interest for the forum and the good will of others, but it is also against forum policy. Additionally, we urge you not to challenge this.

    Please think about what you post in the interest of many. This is a forum based on the comfort of all.

    Thanks for your understanding.

    We return you to the thread.
     
  3. jkerr

    jkerr Senior Member

    Location:
    Suffolk, VA
    I used to work for Kodak. Spent 14 years there. I was hired at its peak in '81. Then it seemed that every other year after that there were layoffs. Eventually I decided to leave before I was cut too. I went to a company that lured away a bunch of Kodakers and eventually that company was bought by Fuji. So now I work for Kodak's biggest competitor in their own backyard. Weird.

    It just seems to me that while Kodak's technology was great, the managing/marketing/selling just could not get its act together to create success. Too often products were released before their time (remember PhotoCD?) or bad ideas that too much money was wasted on (Disc Camera). Even worse yet was the idea in the 80's to diversify. Spending billions buying companies then turning around just years later to sell off these same companies in order to "focus on its core business".

    In my opinion, the main thing Kodak knew how to do well is make film and paper. Anything else, they just couldn't succeed.
     
  4. Dan C

    Dan C Forum Fotographer Thread Starter

    Location:
    The West
    Thanks for posting this inside perspective.

    Ugh, I forgot about the Disc. :rolleyes: Also remember Kodak's blatant theft of Polaroid's patents for their own defunct instant film format? They got clobbered in court after that.

    Despite all of their maddening management mistakes, Kodak managed to stay strong by offering mass market and niche photographic products to all conceivable markets. Their quality control was/is second to none. But huge companies like these built on traditional products always have a hard time adapting to massive technological shifts.

    It doesn't seem that long ago when just about every amature photographer who was half way serious with his/her hobby had a darkroom in the house. Now I meet professional photographers entering the market who've never stepped into a darkroom or stuck their hands in a tray of Dektol.

    If you love film, it's going to be a sad show for the next 10 or so years as your favorite products fade into history.

    Dan C
     
  5. aashton

    aashton Here for the waters...

    Location:
    Gortshire, England
    I have recently been wondering what the future for film photography holds - do you think it will be a fringe "hobby" for "enthusiasts" in ten years time Dan ?

    All the best - Andrew
     
  6. jkerr

    jkerr Senior Member

    Location:
    Suffolk, VA
    yep. At that time I was at the plant that made the instant cameras, though I wasn't directly involved with that project. Back then I was writing database programs for warehousinhg/shipping.

    Kodak made tons of money back then and could afford to do all that. I remember there was serious concern that Kodak could be a takeover target because they were so cash rich. That was right before the buying all those other companies, like Sterling Drug.
     
  7. Dan C

    Dan C Forum Fotographer Thread Starter

    Location:
    The West
    I wonder that myself. I guess the fringe is the best one can hope for after some time.
    Not to be a hypocrite or anything, but I took to digital over 5 years ago and haven't really looked back. When I think about the realities of my job, digital makes perfect sense. However, I've been thinking about how magical photography seemed when I first became serious about it.

    Actually, the first practical digital cameras for photojournalists were developed by Kodak. We've just about phased them out now. My newspaper bought into the 3rd generation model, the DCS-520 which ran a cool $15,000 each when new. :eek: They did the job and were razor edge but now their capabilities are so antiquated it blows the mind.

    Professional Kodak no longer supports journalists, choosing to go after the commercial and wedding market. I guess that means my relationship with them is over, but I still want them to succeed well into the digital age. I'm pretty loyal that way I guess. :)

    Dan C
     
  8. blackwiggle

    blackwiggle New Member

    Location:
    sydney australia
    I am sorry if i've offended anybody,it wasn't intentional.
    The thing is ,what caused the demise of Camera and Darkroom magazine was .
    They had put in various issues, the works of Josh sturges and sally mann.
    Now apparently,some puritanical voyers{those who peruse magazines,without willingly following the topic the the magazine espouses}
    Have taken umbrage/offence of it's contents.
    They took there small minded power to the head of a chain of newsagents and said they wanted the mag pulled from the shelf,which I find amazingly the head of the newsagent did.
    Now this from a country that espouses freedom of speech.
    There was no intention by the editor,or it'contributor's to be a source or content of perversion,yet it was contrived that way.
    As latter editorials from Darkroom Techniqes were befuddled and dismayed at the mags demise.
     
  9. Dan C

    Dan C Forum Fotographer Thread Starter

    Location:
    The West
    I seriously doubt that backlash alone was the only cause for C&D's demise. I would guess that a publication dedicated to a dying art form or hobby would eventually fold at least shrink in size and circulation. The parent company was probably preparing to pull the plug after the 'zine's circulation shrunk to a certain size.

    I somewhat agree that America has some annoying quirks on morality. Why the likes of Cosmo, Maxim, etc. can be proudly displayed on the racks and flourish yet an enthusiast magazine like American Photo will get flooded with cancellation notices when they publish an artistic nude is beyond comprehension to me.
     
  10. blackwiggle

    blackwiggle New Member

    Location:
    sydney australia
    We have those who wish to vet and condemm everything that doesn't agree with their mores in OZ as well.
    Thankfully,Australia as a whole, is a lot more broad minded.
     
  11. Ere

    Ere Senior Member

    Location:
    The Silver Spring
    I think that if Kodak managed to come up with some good new products (heck, even bringing back some old ones) they could really leverage the brand loyalty that Dan and many many others (like me) still have for the company. A lot of us baby boomers would flock back to the Yellow boxes if they contained some ingenuity and value.
     
  12. Grant

    Grant Life is a rock, but the radio rolled me!

    My store, a major grocery chain just installed an in-house film/digital developing house using Kodak technology. It does not make any money. People would rather go to Target or Wal-Mart. Many more people just do it all on their computers.
     
  13. Ere

    Ere Senior Member

    Location:
    The Silver Spring
    I think you're right, Grant, about most folks now just using their computers and printers (if they even get to making prints, rather than just viewing onscreen). Don't think I've ever brought my develop/print jobs to anything but a photo store. Now I use a regular pro-lab and get the negs scanned onto a CD. That's as far into digital image making as I've gotten so far, though the convenience factor is steadily luring me towards getting a digital camera.

    Ken
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine