Brian C. Miller
Allowing Ads
Right, but to a degree, we have a hand in what the market for film is to become. If we the film user were in full control of that, what would be want it to be given the knowns of the market dynamics and the economies of scale that drive it?
We want our film companies to pull a profit, we want a healthy and realistic product line, but I feel like there are missing pieces of the puzzle, or worse, the pieces are right there in front of us and both the film user and the film companies are missing them..
There is only the standard demand and supply.
Here is how much I care about Kodak...
Are they selling products I like and can easily buy and use? Then I love Kodak.
Are they killing off products I like and can easily buy and use? Then Kodak doesn't exist.
It is not Kodak, it is the products. If the products are gone then Kodak is gone. Their name and history mean nothing to me. Only the products I can buy and use.
This perception thing is a huge problem and this 18 year old man really tells it like it is, a lot of the older folks might need to take a different attitude:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1925151&postcount=48
True statement. So? That is a very, very simplistic view. Demand is created and supply follows demand if there is money to be made. Classic case is the IPhone, and there are many others as well.
The Holga/Diana cameras are a classic example of someone creating demand where none existed. And that one has created the Lomography movement, which in turn has increased demand for film. And though a lot of us look down on them and call them "toys", the co-exist with digital. They are not trying to replace digital, only capitalize on the strength of film. A Holga costs around $45. For $7 I can load some film. Then I go play. For another $10 I get some really wierd pictures back that can be scanned and distributed to all my friends...on those same digital phones that have a camera built in.
You can do this same thing in digital but it takes time on computers to get a similar look. With the Holga it comes with the territory. And on digital it costs a heck of a lot more.
These are the types of things that need to be marketed. Pinhole is something else. Harmann Technologies has a nifty new pinhole camera out. Tough to mimic that with digital, especially for the money.
It isn't demand, it is creativity based on the strengths that film brings to the party.
Maybe what Kodak needs is a Fun division. Not marketing, not photo-evangelism, but fun.
there you go !!
they should come out with a series of commemorative box cameras
"the original holga "
thanks brian you made my night
- john
I have to agree...make film shooting equivalent to fun....that's the whole deal with the lomography/holga movelment and it seems to be working.
Is the total number of Kodak employees laid off since the start of the digital revolution several times larger that the number of remaining Kodak employees?
It doesn't really matter. The divisions are only in the sales departments. The departments making actual product will not be divided up.
The last eight data points fit that curve very well. Looks like around a year left until zero, at least in Rochester. Reality sucks.
The last eight data points fit that curve very well. Looks like around a year left until zero, at least in Rochester. Reality sucks.
there you go !!
they should come out with a series of commemorative box cameras
"the original holga "
thanks brian you made my night
- john
Commemorative 126 Instamatic for the 50th anniversary in 2013 !!
Based on the work I was involved in, I consider the start of 'the digital revolution' at Kodak to be 1990; at that point Kodak Rochester employment was about 42,000. It is presently about 6,000.
http://www.krlretirees.com/files/Kodak_Employees_in_Rochester.pdf
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?