Kodak, again

[semi-ambivalent]

Just now stopped by at www.slashdot.org (a tech/nerd site) and they have a post about Kodak. The post links to a WSJ article but has this snippet in it:

"...What Kodak failed to understand is that people have switched from taking photos for remembering and commemorative reasons to using photos for identity and communication. The shift changes the emphasis away from print to social media platforms and dedicated apps.""

I don't examine my reasons for doing photography very often, and I don't live with a phone in my hand. But, at 58, I'm not one of the cohort that is defining culture.

s-a

 

[Paul Jenkin]

It's an interesting point that the website makes. When I was a kid, our family always used to get out the photo box and albums when relatives came round. These days, most people seem to live solely in the "here and now" with little thought for the past. Consequently, instant and, more recently, digital photography have taken over as the high volume users.

I prefer film to digital, though I use both, but I must admit that if I'm simply snapping friends and family, I tend to reach for the digital camera for sheer convenience's sake.

 

[railwayman3]

It's an interesting point that the website makes. When I was a kid, our family always used to get out the photo box and albums when relatives came round. These days, most people seem to live solely in the "here and now" with little thought for the past. Consequently, instant and, more recently, digital photography have taken over as the high volume users.

I prefer film to digital, though I use both, but I must admit that if I'm simply snapping friends and family, I tend to reach for the digital camera for sheer convenience's sake.

I, too, can remember the slide shows (and, perhaps to a lesser extent the 8mm home movies) with friends and relatives, up to maybe about 20 years ago. Often they formed a pleasant social evening with a few drinks and nibbles.

Maybe one difference was that long-haul holidays, etc., still had some novelty, or that people had time to put together interesting slide sets of their favourite subjects or hobbies.

It's unusual now to see any holiday pics, except maybe the odd on-or-two on a tiny screen on the back of a digital camera, while information on any subject is instantly available on the web. And I know of no-one who puts their digital prints (other than family shots) in frames or albums.

 

[BrianShaw]

When I was a kid, our family always used to get out the photo box and albums when relatives came round. These days, most people seem to live solely in the "here and now" with little thought for the past. Consequently, instant and, more recently, digital photography have taken over as the high volume users.

I understand both of your points but not how they are related. We still get out the photo box when family and friends visit. It is no different with digital... we load a memory stick and display the photos on the TV (or in a digital picture frame). We even print pictures to send to "old folks" who aren't comfortable with technology. So do most people we know. Seems like Costco and other drug store type photo processors who still exist do most of their business printing digital images. I'm not sure what the WSJ reporter is talking about... other than there are new avenues for sharing pictures.

 

[jeffreyg]

Most people are interested in convenience and instantly getting results. With digital cameras they don't even have to think most of the time the cameras do it for them even knowing when a person blinks or doesn't smile. I recently noticed that as the cellphone cameras have improved that sales of inexpensive point and shoot cameras are down so camera manufacturers are pushing the higher end cameras with more bells and whistles. Who knows at this rate they may move back into film.

For those of us who still appreciate film and printing it will probably still exist. There are still some artists who use charcoal and look how long that has been around.

http://www.jeffreyglasser.com/

 

[zsas]

But they are trying to come back...

Today's press release from Kodak:
"Kodak Continues to Innovate Offering Brilliant Ways to Do More with Your Pictures
Over 1 Million Users Enjoy Printing Photos from a KODAK Picture Kiosk Making Printing Pictures from FACEBOOK More than a Status Update"

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Kodak-Continues-Innovate-bw-2643631261.html?x=0

Anyone's guess if this is profitable venture

 

[Hatchetman]

There are still some artists who use charcoal and look how long that has been around.

My sources tell me that charcoal usage is trending down at 10% per annum. Given the current situation, I don't see how charcoal is a sustainable business.

 

[Steve Smith]

I, too, can remember the slide shows

I can remember our last family slide show too. It was in April last year!


Steve.

 

[Aristophanes]

My sources tell me that charcoal usage is trending down at 10% per annum. Given the current situation, I don't see how charcoal is a sustainable business.

Not if we run out of shovels.

 

[Hatchetman]

We had our last family slide show a couple weeks ago. I need to shoot more film because I'm running out of new material!

 

[TexasLangGenius]

Most people are interested in convenience and instantly getting results. With digital cameras they don't even have to think most of the time the cameras do it for them even knowing when a person blinks or doesn't smile. [...]

For those of us who still appreciate film and printing it will probably still exist. [...]

Ain't that the truth. Another thing, too, is that whenever I have film cameras out and I try to shoot pictures of my friends or family while we're hanging out or at a family event, they never really take the time or have the patience to let me burn through a roll of film! Yesterday, I got back a gorgeous developed roll of Velvia 50 I took at my cousin's university graduation last month and I have to say that it's one of the best rolls I've shot so far (there were a couple of really nice digital pics I took that day, though). All I need now is a nice slide projector (hopefully a carousel one) to show my slides the way they were meant to be shown! (I have yet to test my Super 8 projector that I found in mint condition).

I shoot film mainly for one reason: archivability. Second reason: I love holding the negatives and slides in my hands and knowing that every exposure I shoot is a labor of love. But it's hard fighting the "GO GO!" fast digital habits. One time I ruined the last few exposures on a roll of Tri-X because I got too ahead of myself and opened the camera before rewinding. Third and final reason: I feel like I have more control over my picture with the simplicity of operating a film camera. I have honed my instinct on controlling things like bokeh and things like that with my film camera. I don't have to fool with any internal settings while the action's happening. I mainly use digital indoors and in low light. Outside, in the light, film is my number one choice.

It seems now that many "consume" and go through pictures like it's popcorn or a race to the finish line to look at all the pictures. People seem to react positively to having prints around, though. I have a ton of prints that I have pinned up in my cubicle and people always comment on them. Looking at them on a computer screen is okay for me, but once in a blue moon it seems way too impersonal for me.

 

[Danielle]

There does seem to be a shift to having things in hardcopy though. A lot of photographers, graphic artists etc etc etc seem to have ipads and the like with their folios on them. This is a good idea at times, but people absolutely do like seeing things in hardcopy (eg. a real print regardless of the medium). From people I cross paths with from time to time in various fields, I am told that there is a slow shift back to actual visual art in hardcopy form. I personally think that is true also, if it is then that it is fantastic. There is nothing like seeing a nice folio with 8x10 prints for instance and absolutely nothing like looking at beautiful prints hung on a wall in a real life frame!

I guess we will see what the future holds.

 

[Aristophanes]

There does seem to be a shift to having things in hardcopy though. A lot of photographers, graphic artists etc etc etc seem to have ipads and the like with their folios on them. This is a good idea at times, but people absolutely do like seeing things in hardcopy (eg. a real print regardless of the medium). From people I cross paths with from time to time in various fields, I am told that there is a slow shift back to actual visual art in hardcopy form. I personally think that is true also, if it is then that it is fantastic. There is nothing like seeing a nice folio with 8x10 prints for instance and absolutely nothing like looking at beautiful prints hung on a wall in a real life frame!

I guess we will see what the future holds.

Personally I am a huge proponent of hardcopy archiving (I am married to a librarian/archivist!).

Negatives in the future may be hard to enlarge and print, but prints are gold. Whenever I get a roll [processed (I send out) I get the prints.

To me the best way of getting hardcopy from digital is the welcome rise of the photobook. The templates are excellent and some brands offer very good acid-free archival paper. They layouts are better than rows/columns of 4x6 prints, and the softcopy of the book usually saved as a PDF, which is now an ISO standard, tweaked for digital archiving. If people ask me how I archive my digital photos I point them to this option. It's also very economical. I think we all get too much screen time and photobooks are probably the most approachable format I've come across for efficient and stylish display.

 

[Darkroom317]

My sources tell me that charcoal usage is trending down at 10% per annum. Given the current situation, I don't see how charcoal is a sustainable business.

As a current art student I can tell you that charcoal is still a well used medium even more so than pencil. Even as a photography student I had to take Drawing I and Figure Drawing before I could much of anything else.
Also, at my school Photo I is still nearly all darkroom work. The other students still seem enthusiastic about it. Film will survive.

 

[Brian C. Miller]

"...What Kodak failed to understand is that people have switched from taking photos for remembering and commemorative reasons to using photos for identity and communication. The shift changes the emphasis away from print to social media platforms and dedicated apps.""

From what I wrote on LFInfo:

Antonio Perez was spotted fleeing peasants armed with cameras, pitchforks, torches, rope, sub-machine guns and tripods with long spikey points at the end as Kodak was delisted from the NYSE and filed for bankruptcy. Kodak film, once the choice of the Divine, used for capturing many poignant moments of mankind's existence from creation, the discovery of fire, and that stupid dog next door shagging that gnome lawn ornament, has been on the decline since people figured out that they really don't want memories to last forever. The company will be reorganized into a yet another latte coffee seller, and then go into bankruptcy again because the resulting product tastes worst than Starbucks drinks.

Since the main medium of personal image gathering is now the cell phone, of course it makes sense that the pictures will be of "look at me," "look at stupid," and "here's this thing." That's the kind of pictures that get made using a cell phone. Photographic images have gone from the concept of "the moment" to "a moment."