Sanity check -- PE or anybody -- Kodak "study"?
-
A
- Thread starter dmr
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Nikon s2 with 50mm 1.4
- Started by Gram Nylén
-
Sold Fujifilm 4x5 Fujichrome Veliva 100 and Fujifilm 4x5 Fujichrome 64T. EXPIRED
- Started by Renato Tonelli
-
Sold Fujifilm Neopan 100 Acros 120 and 4x5
- Started by Renato Tonelli
-
For Sale Nikkor 5cm f2 ltm
- Started by Gram Nylén
Forum statistics
That's because it's not right: the analysis, that is, not Kodak's approach. Reverse the postulate. Why make something better than most people can see? It's not 'how bad can you get away with', it's 'how good does it need to be'. You could cast the original First Excellent Print research in the same negative style: 'what's the last print you can get away with', not 'what's the first print with a real jump in quality'.
After all, it's not as if they were trying to stop the rest of us using other formats. They just wanted an easy-to-use, cheap format for happy-snappers. Oh: and profitable, too.
For analogies, why don't compact cars have Formula One power and handling? And why aren't .22 pistols .44 magnums?
Ole
Moderator
Anyone remember 110? Or Disk? Or even APX?
As a user of instamatics along with a lot of my friends in the 1970s with minilab processing by mail order, I don't recall anyone complaining of quality at the 4x6 prints that "snaps" and the available money we had, allowed for.
Instamatics did the job they were designed for.
Like Roger I think you are looking at the issue from the wrong end.
Would they do now? Of course not. We've moved on. I wouldn't buy a motorcycle with belt drive either but within limitations they did the job as well.
pentaxuser
Instamatics did the job they were designed for.
Like Roger I think you are looking at the issue from the wrong end.
Would they do now? Of course not. We've moved on. I wouldn't buy a motorcycle with belt drive either but within limitations they did the job as well.
pentaxuser
Roger has it right. The instamatic image was just about the right size for reasonable quality.
APX was not a Kodak venture by itself, it was a joint venture of Fuji and Agfa with Kodak along with camera mfgrs like Nikon and etc....
As for 110 and Disk, they were designed based on expected film improvements which did not materialize in the way intended. The basic idea however, was to have a pocket camera about the size of a pack of cigarettes. This would have introduced a 'cell phone' type photo capability but about 20 years earlier. It failed for reasons of quality. They jumped too quickly.
PE
APX was not a Kodak venture by itself, it was a joint venture of Fuji and Agfa with Kodak along with camera mfgrs like Nikon and etc....
As for 110 and Disk, they were designed based on expected film improvements which did not materialize in the way intended. The basic idea however, was to have a pocket camera about the size of a pack of cigarettes. This would have introduced a 'cell phone' type photo capability but about 20 years earlier. It failed for reasons of quality. They jumped too quickly.
PE
I believe Harley-Davidson still uses belts on some models. But then, they still use 'knife and fork' con-rods too, on all models as far as I am aware, instead of offset pots.
Not that I'd buy a Harley either -- or is that what you meant?
Roger. Well NO I wouldn't buy a Harley either. They never had or have my idea of classic bike looks.
I was a BSA man through and through in my youth in the 60s. Tried the vertical twin Shooting Star but couldn't take the high frequency vibration. My love was the single cylinder 350 B31. With a 5 gallon tank, had the looks if not the speed. Money never stretched to the Gold Star unfortunately. Just about capable of the U.K. legal limit in first gear. Amazing machine.
OK enough reminiscing and sorry to the OP for this diversion.
pentaxuser
Not really a diversion. After all, you could rephrase the original question as 'Why isn't a scooter a DBD34?'
MurrayMinchin
Membership Council
Unless you're manufacturing that product and it's designed so important components will fail after the warranty expires, then you can jack up the price of the replacement parts...the shareholders will love you for it
Does anybody know how much a car would cost if the parts were purchased seperately?
Murray
Dear Murray,
How relevant is that? With a car, you deliver (say) 10,000 parts in one package. Now I want to buy a new headlamp glass, the screws that hold it in place, and an oil pressure gauge sender. The car has been out of production for three years but I still expect the manufacturer to have made lots of spare parts, warehoused them, and maintained staff to send them to me overnight. No wonder parts cost a lot!
Likewise, I am told that some APS cameras had a design life of 100 films or fewer: they'd just start wearing out after that. Well, fine. Let's say a fairly diligent APS user put half a dozen films through the camera every year, and bought a new camera every five or ten years. So? If they want something they can put 10,000 films through, buy an M-series Leica, not an APS point-and-shoot.
Again, I'd say you're getting it backwards. Durability costs money, so you build something that is as durable as people are willing to pay for. Most designers have enough pride not to deliberately design something that breaks too quickly (especially just outside warranty), but something has to break or wear out first.
Cheers,
Roger
As Roger pointed out - when viewed from the "other side" of the argument this makes absolute sense.
Besides motorcycles etc. consider high tech gear.
Manufacturer's establish "price points" ranging from "entry level" to "top of the line". They then create models with varying features, quality and durability etc. at each price point.
Remember too, that Kodak's primary aim for many years was to sell film, paper and chemicals - not cameras. So from it's earliest days it offered simple cameras which were usable by just about anyone in order to create demand for its core products.
This is the key reason why the company has been struggling for direction in the digital imaging age.
Roger,
Nothing wrong with any of them and i regret deeply that i sold the first one i bought. Put hundreds of hours into that bike to customize it, did all paint design and painting with 8 layers of clear coat myself.
The one i have kept is the only new HD i have had. Bought it in 95 and we have been in a lot of places between the east to west coast USA.
Beemers are nice, just to tall and to quiet for me
jan
I think the point is: How good is good enough? Kodak didn't try to make bad cameras to push on us. They just wanted to make cheap cameras that were just slightly better than that market expected. Why put a high dollar lens on a camera if the buyer is happy with a fair 4X5 print? As photographers we may forget that not everyone cares about the quality of their images. Some just want a snapshot of a place or event in their life, the instamatic did that at a low price.
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2005
- Messages
- 6,823
- Format
- Multi Format
Hmm. There were a variety of, um, grades of Instamatic cameras. I remember running into several MDs (medical doctors, not managing directors, Roger) in Germany in the fall of '72 with spiffy new 450 SLs, spiffy new second wives, and spiffy new Nikon Fs with the FTn Photomic head and 50/2 and no other lenses. I don't know that they'd have been as well off with VWs or their original wives, but when I saw them I thought they'd have been as well off with any of the better grades of Instamatic.
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2004
- Messages
- 503
The real image problem with the 126 instamatic format was that they didn't know how to keep the film flat enough inside the cartridge. Not an issue with an f/8 box camera but when they made the 500 and Reflex, expensive cameras with Schneider lenses, the optical quality was negated by the non-flat film. As a pure amateur format, it was a big improvement over any of the paper-backed roll-film formats. Pure convienience made the 126 format a winner in the marketplace (and it was). The problem was addressed with the 110 format but the film wasn't up to it, as PE has stated. I'm sure the designers did their best within the constraints...
MurrayMinchin
Membership Council
Dear Roger,
I was being feces-ish, oops, I mean facetious
Murray
Dear Murray,
Sorry. One's ability to recognize that on the internet, even in APUG, atrophies in nanoseconds.
Cheers,
R.
My Dad took all the family photos with a Rollei TLR with a 35mm adapter in it. When we started to go backpacking as a family, he "upgraded" to an Instamatic 804 (glass lens, focusing). Perfect for those snap shots -- plus he gave me the Rollei (I immeadiately removed the 35mm adapter) and thus started me on my life as a photographer.
So I say "Right on!" to Instamatics! I agree with others -- they made the Instamatics only as good as they thought they needed to -- but I do wonder if this is still the equivilent of "dumbing down" the product -- and lowered the expectations of the consumers.
Unfortunately when I went to university in New Zealand in 1975, my Dad talked me out of taking the Rollei (I had not yet used the camera much and had not made any prints myself yet). So I took an Instamatic 300 instead...that was the unfortunate part! Oh well...I returned a couple of times (1980 and 1986) with a 4x5 to correct that mistake!
Vaughn
So I say "Right on!" to Instamatics! I agree with others -- they made the Instamatics only as good as they thought they needed to -- but I do wonder if this is still the equivilent of "dumbing down" the product -- and lowered the expectations of the consumers.
Unfortunately when I went to university in New Zealand in 1975, my Dad talked me out of taking the Rollei (I had not yet used the camera much and had not made any prints myself yet). So I took an Instamatic 300 instead...that was the unfortunate part! Oh well...I returned a couple of times (1980 and 1986) with a 4x5 to correct that mistake!
Vaughn
Can't argue with that....
MattKing
Moderator
The perspective here is that the Instamatics were the alternative to a 35mm camera or (in Vaughn's case) a Rollieflex. I don't think that was the case.
The Instamatics were marketed to those who either would otherwise have used a Brownie, or who wouldn't take photos at all because 35mm cameras were such a hassle to load and rewind etc., etc.
Many of the compromises built into the Instamatic design were related to the massive expansion of the colour printing industry that accompanied it. We take for granted now the idea that you can get your film developed and printed and back to you quickly, but when Instamatics were introduced, that was really hit and miss (depending on your location). The 126 system really accelerated that.
A lot of great photographs have been taken using Instamatics - and a lot of crummy ones too.
Matt
The Instamatics were marketed to those who either would otherwise have used a Brownie, or who wouldn't take photos at all because 35mm cameras were such a hassle to load and rewind etc., etc.
Many of the compromises built into the Instamatic design were related to the massive expansion of the colour printing industry that accompanied it. We take for granted now the idea that you can get your film developed and printed and back to you quickly, but when Instamatics were introduced, that was really hit and miss (depending on your location). The 126 system really accelerated that.
A lot of great photographs have been taken using Instamatics - and a lot of crummy ones too.
Matt
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2003
- Messages
- 29,832
- Format
- Hybrid
seems like the manufacturers of our current line of snapshot cameras
have done the same thing. image quality is barely good enough to email
to friends and family after uploaded from the phone.
and just like people who use ( i still use a 110 ! ) cartridge film,
if you only get a 4x6, who cares ? i never met anyone who was a
casual "snapshooter" who asked for 8x10 or 11x14 "blow-ups"
good enough is just right .. <smirk>
have done the same thing. image quality is barely good enough to email
to friends and family after uploaded from the phone.
and just like people who use ( i still use a 110 ! ) cartridge film,
if you only get a 4x6, who cares ? i never met anyone who was a
casual "snapshooter" who asked for 8x10 or 11x14 "blow-ups"
good enough is just right .. <smirk>
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |