KA is very disappointing

Why are we banging on KA again?

Dinesh said:

Why are we banging on KA again?

Click to expand...

they don't have a blimp
or a spokesperson like spudz mckenzie
or give away money ( like toothpaste ) or driver's licenses like laundry detergent ...

or free processing or free chemistry, and they don't tweet or do enough you tube videos.

jnanian said:

they don't have a blimp
or a spokesperson like spudz mckenzie
or give away money ( like toothpaste ) or driver's licenses like laundry detergent ...

or free processing or free chemistry, and they don't tweet or do enough you tube videos.

Click to expand...

They have Kodak in the name.

That's a bit harsh.

I think most skeptics are judging Kodak on the facts, not by their logo.

They represent one of the more epic corporate failures in recent times ( there are others too).

Over the years, Kodak has received a lot of love from pro photographers and hobbyists alike.

But that love is clearly unrequitted, or even spurned.

Clearly that hurts

Jaf-Photo said:

That's a bit harsh.

I think most skeptics are judging Kodak on the facts, not by their logo.

They represent one of the more epic corporate failures in recent times ( there are others too).

Over the years, Kodak has received a lot of love from pro photographers and hobbyists alike.

But that love is clearly unrequitted, or even spurned.

Clearly that hurts

Click to expand...

Harsh? Maybe so. Maybe some overly harsh words for KA here too. There are few facts presented here, and without an inside view a complete picture is near impossible. I agree with you on the rest, although if you love a corporation getting burned or spurned or just let down is probably inevitable.

erikg said:

Harsh? Maybe so. Maybe some overly harsh words for KA here too. There are few facts presented here, and without an inside view a complete picture is near impossible. I agree with you on the rest, although if you love a corporation getting burned or spurned or just let down is probably inevitable.

Click to expand...

Photographers love the Kodak films, not necessarily the corporate entity.

I always listen to what prominent photographers have to say about their equipment.

It is striking how strong a bond they have with their films, typically Tri-X or Portra. It's what enables them to make the pictures they want, and utimately to make a living.

I really haven't come across much of the same type of spontaneous love for Fuji or Ilford products.

Jaf-Photo said:

Photographers love the Kodak films, not necessarily the corporate entity.

I always listen to what prominent photographers have to say about their equipment.

It is striking how strong a bond they have with their films, typically Tri-X or Portra. It's what enables them to make the pictures they want, and utimately to make a living.

I really haven't come across much of the same type of spontaneous love for Fuji or Ilford products.

Click to expand...

It exists. You'll find it here on apug if you look hard enough. You are proving my point though, you can love a product with all your heart but if fewer and fewer people are buying that product untimely your love won't count for very much. I love photography and I have been making a living with it for 30 years. Products come and go, it's sad when they go but I try not to get too attached. I'm still sad that I can't get raisin biscuits anymore!

I certainly think Ilford commands the same sort of affection that Kodak films have.

I don't see this as Kodak "bashing". I see it as serious people with serious investments in time/skill/money/craft/art looking for some sense that a key part of their craft takes them seriously in return. That is all.

Jaf-Photo said:

I think most skeptics are judging Kodak on the facts, not by their logo.

Click to expand...

This is the crucial observation. The tipping point fulcrum that so much depends on, and so many here choose to avert their eyes from...

People are judging EK/KA by their observable behavior. There is no better indicator. For years now I've listened closely to what Kodak's management team has told us publicly. And I've watched carefully what Kodak's management team has done with it's film product lines. Both good and bad. And I've formed my conclusions accordingly.

I don't need to have privileged access to the EK/KA private management suites and boardrooms to use my eyes and ears.

When top management at EK, the individuals whose opinions guide the company, tells Wall Street that they don't care about film any longer, that it could vanish tomorrow and they wouldn't be in the least concerned, I take that viewpoint seriously. And I adjust my own opinion of them, and my film purchasing habits, accordingly.

Similarly, when KA hires a self-acknowledged mobile high-tech executive to set the direction of their new company, the one that still markets the vestigial remnants of EK's once magnificent portfolio of film products, I pay very close attention. Both to the hiring, and to his statements. Or non-statements.

Remember the three little monkeys? The first covers his eyes. The second covers his ears? And the third covers his mouth?

Well, that's not me...

Ken

I do see this as "bashing". Kodak Aleris is offering an amazing line of products, so does Ilford. Who can complain about Ektar, Portra, Tri-X, TMax, HP5+, FP4+, Delta, Pan-F etc? Who cares about their marketing strategy?

Skickat från min GT-P5210 via Tapatalk

This thread seems to have run its course.