Can you believe Adorama would post this?

[RPC]

Their decisions make sense to them. Why should they bother with a nearly inconsequential market segment? Shop somewhere else.

"Why not just drop film..?" That's what they'll do, eventually. Why shouldn't they? Try to come up with a good business reason.

Most photography is already done by phones. I'll bet Adorama soon makes more $$ with phones and accessories, and with their lab biz, than with all camera sales put together.

Well, by the article's way of thinking, more is spent by a film user than a digital user. So why not promote film? Their profits would increase. They are making money on it, or they would have already dropped it. Many digital users also use film. Again, I say, why rile a good segment of their customers, as well as the photographic community?

 

[Sirius Glass]

You obviously were not paying attention here. The author made up figures to further and agenda. Rhe author stole an image from another photographer. The author then lied about it..and Adorama went with it...until it all exploded. So no...you dont get it.

I got that, but Adorama posted the article. End of story.

 

[removed account4]

recently Apug has gone down the drain with such childish comments...
it used to be a great forum a while back

naaa photrio is actually a BETTER forum than Apug was
because not only does it still have a top-shelf team of moderators and council staff but it also
allows for people to have conversations about electronic photography and
hybrid photography without being drawn and quartered or tar and feathered.

not sure how expensive film and paper and chemistry are in italy but here in the states
it is very easy to rack up a bill for at least $3500
even if it isn't an imaginary boutique film like the $300 schodachhrome™ kodachrome revivial film
BTW postage to antarctica is the dealbreaker, costs an arm and a leg.

 

[JWMster]

Amazed how much life an article or note like this has... for a "dead" subject. Maybe it's not dead?

Somehow... photography is expensive and whether you shoot film or digital, the complaining or justifying on the basis of cost is missing the place of commitment to the process in creativity and exactly what the range of choices may demand - which can matter far more to success than whether the medium is film or digital. On the other hand, sometimes speed IS and/or consistency IS the whole point, and the luxury of missing a shot to capture it another day that amateurs like me have may simply not apply. Then the relatively higher initial capital cost of digital - like for an Alpa 12 with a Phase One Anchromatic B&W back.... might simply be the cost of getting it done. Wouldn't that be sweet? Sure would. Film gives me more satisfaction 'cause that's what I'm using "for now". I can though perhaps as I get older ...and not just geezin' but actually wheezin', I might want to change things up again. We'll see. mIght be another 20 years in the tank... who knows?

 

[kb3lms]

I read it from FB. I was a stupid article and I took my opportunity to tell them so, including the fact that there are legions of us chained to computers all day who don't want to come home and spend the weekend with one. They could make the marketing move to point that out. Maybe they even will. Other than that, I've bought from Adorama for years, as well as B&H. However, most of my film purchases these days are from FPP.

Speaking of getting away from the computer, see y'all later. Have a good Saturday.

 

[PerTulip]

Just one dude's meaningless opinion.And I am absolutely not interested in "film vs. digital" discussions or blog posts. I use both, know the drawbacks both have and have my own opinion and reasons for still using film. I that guy decides to abandon film, his choice. I care more about the selection of films, delevopers, etc. a shop choses to offer, and at what price.

 

[removedacct1]

I’m having a hard time understanding why a transparent piece of marketing fluff has got so many people’s backs up.

 

[Nodda Duma]

“It’s better to let people think you’re a fool than to open your mouth and prove it.”

What was the point of the article? It doesn’t convince digital shooters to shoot more digital and doesn’t change the minds of film photographers. Was it to demonstrate how *not* to treat a minority of customers? The response to Sirius is illuminating: they obviously agree with the argument of the article.

In any case, open blog or no, the damage is done...Pretty much every one of Adorama’s competitors can now say to consumers “Come buy from us. We support your photography unlike those other guys, no matter what media you choose.. and welcome the variety.” And it would be the honest truth!

-Jason

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Adorama added a note to the article at the top apologizing for having Ken Rockwell's edited photo in the article and paid him for its use. This link was added in the original article Dead Link Removed

Their post also stated: "We hope that you will understand that our blogging platform is a place for many writers to share their opinions and personal perspectives on photography. We welcome all perspectives and will continue to do so"

My own take on this is what we would all think if Adorama edited and refused to post opinions and perspectives of photographers who's views might effect their sales? Wouldn't we be rightfully complaining how they bias their articles? Being open to all thoughts on photography, especially many that we might disagree with, is certainly a better approach. In this age of constant media bias in the news and the refusal of supposedly free-thinking institutions that censor speakers of differing opinions, we shouldn't be joining the chorus of trying to shut up people who's views we disagree with. We could well learn something listening to others.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

One other thought. Who would want to buy from a company who edited and restricted articles and opinions based on how it effects their sales? How could you trust them afterwards when you ask for a recommendation of what equipment to buy? When Adorama publishes articles that seem to go against their better interest, then a buyer can feel he's dealing with a company that puts honesty and forthrightness first. That's the kind of a company I want to do business with. I've always dealt with B and H before. I think I'll give Adorama a shot in the future.

 

[Sal Santamaura]

recently Apug has gone down the drain...

There is no APUG. Welcome to PHOTRIO.

 

[removed account4]

I’m having a hard time understanding why a transparent piece of marketing fluff has got so many people’s backs up.

can't please all the people all the time ?

 

[Ko.Fe.]

So, what was achieved so far? Resnick, Mason exposed himself as theft under 5000 in denial and made Adorama pay 1000$ for his act of stealing.

https://petapixel.com/2018/04/05/adorama-angers-film-photographers-with-article-and-stolen-photo/

Now my question is. Are his five reasons as valuable now as as many reasons in mein kampf after 1945?

 

[Helios 1984]

Petapixel made an article about the whole affair: https://petapixel.com/2018/04/05/adorama-angers-film-photographers-with-article-and-stolen-photo/

 

[David Luttmann]

Petapixel made an article about the whole affair: https://petapixel.com/2018/04/05/adorama-angers-film-photographers-with-article-and-stolen-photo/

Hopefully Adorama send the bill to Mason Resnick, and deletes the article. He should have his other articles audited for stolen photos.

 

[faberryman]

Now my question is. Are his five reasons as valuable now as as many reasons in mein kampf after 1945?

The Hitler card. Really?

 

[Truzi]

One other thought. Who would want to buy from a company who edited and restricted articles and opinions based on how it effects their sales? How could you trust them afterwards when you ask for a recommendation of what equipment to buy? When Adorama publishes articles that seem to go against their better interest, then a buyer can feel he's dealing with a company that puts honesty and forthrightness first. That's the kind of a company I want to do business with. I've always dealt with B and H before. I think I'll give Adorama a shot in the future.

In my opinion it's not about honesty and controlling content (and what that says about integrity, as you rightly infer), it's more about the provenance of that content.

I think this could have been handled better by doing something that publications have been doing online and IRL for decades - label it as an Op-Ed piece (before the fact, not after).

Yes, I know, people should know better about the internet, but most publications use "disclaimers" for a reason. They want you to know it is the opinion of the writer. True, some will always be offended, but you'd be surprised how something this simple can make a difference to a majority of people.
A simple change to the page header could label all articles as opinion, and most people would be angry with the author, but not the "publication." Not labeling it as such makes it seem like the views expressed represent the opinions of the company.

It is further complicated by the email response posted in this thread, which suggests the company wants people to upgrade their photography to digital.

One need not agree with someone's choices in order to respect those choices. Failing to do so may alienate a customer to a point that, if they ever do convert, they will do so via another vendor. Many want to do business with companies they feel value their business, not companies that seem to merely be pandering until customers "see the light."

From a practical standpoint, what is important is how customers feel about the company. This is very basic for any business. Few make grand exits, choosing instead to gradually move elsewhere. A company responds by gradually shifting to a different format/content/product to make up for the losses, however small they are, believing the market is changing more or faster than it truly is.

 

[warden]

Petapixel made an article about the whole affair: https://petapixel.com/2018/04/05/adorama-angers-film-photographers-with-article-and-stolen-photo/

They're definitely getting more press than they are accustomed to. Looking at a few other articles they published in the ALC in the week before the film article, it seems their viewership is 100-400 views or thereabouts per article. In three days the film article is over 2,000 views and climbing. It appears the author is no longer participating in the comments section.

 

[HelenOster]

Dead Link Removed

 

[gr82bart]

Dead Link Removed

This article didn't go into film over digital. Not the same.

 

[Sirius Glass]

This email arrived today:
View attachment 198356

I responded to the email:

Bryan,

So all you care about is getting customers to buy more expensive equipment. You do not believe is supporting your customers. That being the case, I have now taken my business elsewhere.

I was a great customer in the past, but no more.

Steve​

While Helen has provided great support in the past, the writing is on the wall and I look forward to Adorama operating under Chapter 7 or Chapter 11. Adorama made their bed and not they can sleep in it.

 

[HelenOster]

The author is just one of dozens of writers who contribute articles to the Adorama Learning Center. As far as I'm aware the Learning Center Editor does not censor articles - and the article was simply to explain the author's own reasons as a Street Photography / pro photography for choosing to shoot digital.

It wouldn't make any business sense if the article were meant to reflect Adorama's owner's personal views as Adorama still sells film and associated products (3612 in all!)
Dead Link Removed

As you are probably aware, the Adorama offices have been closed for the Passover Holiday; I've seen the apology that was posted for the use of Ken Rockwell's image, and I've asked my manager for guidance on how I should respond to our customers who do love film and who are - in my personal opinion - currently feeling let down and unsupported by Adorama as a result of the article.


Adorama is absolutely committed to supporting both film and digital photographers, and I just looked through other articles in the Adorama Learning Center which I think illustrate that - for example:

https://www.adorama.com/alc/top-5-collectible-film-cameras-that-actually-take-great-pictures

https://www.adorama.com/alc/faq-how-to-develop-film

https://www.adorama.com/alc/5-best-film-cameras-that-you-can-purchase-brand-new

I also queried with the Customer Service Manager the - again, in my opinion - extremely poorly worded response to a complaint from one of the members in this thread.

I will hopefully be able to come back to you tomorrow or Monday with a more detailed response.

 

[Sirius Glass]

“It’s better to let people think you’re a fool than to open your mouth and prove it.”

What was the point of the article? It doesn’t convince digital shooters to shoot more digital and doesn’t change the minds of film photographers. Was it to demonstrate how *not* to treat a minority of customers? The response to Sirius is illuminating: they obviously agree with the argument of the article.

In any case, open blog or no, the damage is done...Pretty much every one of Adorama’s competitors can now say to consumers “Come buy from us. We support your photography unlike those other guys, no matter what media you choose.. and welcome the variety.” And it would be the honest truth!

-Jason

 

[HelenOster]

I responded to the email:

Bryan,

So all you care about is getting customers to buy more expensive equipment. You do not believe is supporting your customers. That being the case, I have now taken my business elsewhere.

I was a great customer in the past, but no more.

Steve​

While Helen has provided great support in the past, the writing is on the wall and I look forward to Adorama operating under Chapter 7 or Chapter 11. Adorama made their bed and not they can sleep in it.

The reply you received was not only poorly worded, but the CS agent didn't appear to have the slightest understanding at all of your complaint. As soon as I saw your posting here earlier I fired off a screen shot to the CS Manager stating my concerns. I do understand that this undoubtedly rubbed salt in the wounds (which I'm sure wasn't his intention), however, as it definitely didn't read like an official response, it can only have been the agent's own attempt at an apology/explanation.

Please accept my deepest apologies, although I don't expect this to change your mind about ordering from Adorama Camera. There are many fine alternatives around, and if our failure to serve you well on multiple levels causes you to look elsewhere it is completely understandable.

Maybe going forward, as a first step, the Adorama Learning Center Editor will need to review putting in place tighter controls on contributing authors.

 

[eddie]

Maybe going forward, as a first step, the Adorama Learning Center Editor will need to review putting in place tighter controls on contributing authors.

Actually, the first step should be to end your relationship with Mr. Resnick. Not because of the article, but due to his use of another photographer's image (it takes a huge leap of faith to believe that he would alter an image meant to be a place saver). While I disagree with much of what he wrote, I don't get bent out of shape by the ramblings of every individual who pursues his photography differently than I choose to pursue mine. The fact is Photrio (and APUG before) has had members just as militant as Mr. Resnick, though from the other side. I also agree your CS department is in need of a refresher course in what a CS department is supposed to do.

Finally, I think it would be great if you invited articles from those who choose film over digital. Make it a contest, publish the winner, with a film centered prize for the chosen writer. Set up parameters (word count, number of images), and set a submission deadline. (I'm sure we'd all like to win a few thousand rolls of 120 Acros 100- just kidding, there...)