Shouldnt Kodak Make Film Cameras?

[Craig Swensson]

]How does Fujifilm do it? [/B] I mean really, why is it that Fujifilm can do things right but Kodak cant? Fuji doesnt even sell that camera outside of Japan, yet you see a dozen eBay sellers shipping them all over the world.

Can't can't can't is all you hear when it comes to Kodak.

Making a profit on cameras isnt the point. Keeping film in the public's eye is. How can film survive if it is invisible?

Well for a start Fuji will not be paying a CEO 8 million bucks a year,plus the salaries and stock options for a whole bunch of hangers on..thats the western way:munch:

 

[PKM-25]

If I were the new captain at the helm of Kodak film, I would hire a few good repair techs, machinists, someone to design slick and fun new camera coverings like Cameraleather, Aki Ashai makes but better. This fun division would take advantage of all the used cameras on the market and not only restore them, but make them as hip and fresh as classic cars with flames painted on thm and then sell them at a range of prices.

These young visionaries would take good film cameras and make them a knock out in terms of looking cool and working great. For example, I sometimes feel like my mechanical cameras are like guitars, I play them, they feel great in the hand and do everything I need them too. So when I went to shoot Burning Man in 2010, I covered a Leica M3, M6 and a Nikon F100 to look like Eddie Van Halen's guitars with random colored stripes. The M3 looked like his yellow striped Strat from the cover of "Women and Children First", even the lenses and shades were covered.

Talk about fun and what an ice breaker for photographing people. Kodak does not need to make a new camera, like film it self, they just need to think out of the box and make it REALLY fun again. This is already going on with old bikes, cruisers and it is very lucrative for those who took the vision to the point of execution.

 

[RattyMouse]

Cosina's annual sales are miniscule compared to Kodak sales. Form Kodak's perspective, why bother?

*SIGH* To put film in front of people's eyes!! How can anyone join this hobby without knowing about it?? My god, the lack of vision here is staggering.

 

[removed account4]

kodak used to make some great film cameras
they bought companies that made large format cameras
and sold film, chemistry and paper.
the put box cameras into the hands of millions
( one of my first cameras was a hawkeye flashfun )
and made the retina 35mm folder with a schneider lens.

it would be great if they started making a camera again
something cheap and hipster like a seagull or holga, or
a modern box camera, ...
but unfortunately i don't think they have the luxury to do that
when they are basically fighting for their life.

oh well

maybe they could just advertise
and distribute their products?
( something they had trouble doing before they went bankrupt )

 

[Alan Klein]

Scanners like some mentioned above would have been a good bridge to digital and pushed the use of film cameras and mainly to sell their film.

Kodak was always very good at keeping things simple in their digital cameras. Just plug it in to their cradle and their software downloaded and did the rest into your computer. They always tried to reach the masses with simplicity - everyone could be a photographer was their credo.

They should have made a scanner like that. Take a batch of slides, drop them in the slot, get a cup of coffee and come back twenty minutes later. Then you have a slide show that would connect to your HDTV or show on your computer, output a disk that you could give to friends, press another button to up load to YouTube Flickr and Facebook or APUG, print out 4x6's in B/W or color automatically, and things like that.

Another suggestion would be to buy Holga or that other
hip film camera company and then expand and promote using their good name. But they gave up with the digital onslaught. A shame.

 

[RattyMouse]

Yes, Kodak should have made the best film scanners. That would have helped keep the Kodak name alive in the photography world.

 

[mnemosyne]

I don't think that it would help much if Kodak built film cameras. There are so many excellent film cameras around, new and used. The biggest problem for film users like me is affordable quality development, scanning and printing services. Modern film is capable of remarkable, outstanding results, but most film users nowadays are left with a choice between poor to mediocre development and scanning services at the big commercial labs on one side and (for amateur use) prohibitively expensive high quality pro services on the other. It seems there is nothing or little in between. This can be very frustrating and is one factor that has turned away a lot of people from film in recent years or kept them from returning. Most of the people who count every penny when shooting have turned to digital long ago anyway. But I am convinced there is a considerable number of enthusiast amateurs shooting film that are willing to pay a bit more for decent quality.
It would be great if Kodak could cater for the needs of that market by setting up one large scale, central service where photographers could mail in their films and have them at least developed and scanned with reliable quality and at an relatively affordable (not necessarily cheap) price point. It doesn't have to be top-notch high quality (individual) service. Kodak should know this market in and out and must have the know-how to set up such a service easily. It would maybe kill some of the remaining independent labs but it would at least help to keep film users from turning digital by providing quality results and give film a perspective of medium or long term survival. Just my 2 euro cents...

 

[removed account4]

I don't think that it would help much if Kodak built film cameras. There are so many excellent film cameras around, new and used. The biggest problem for film users like me is affordable quality development, scanning and printing services. Modern film is capable of remarkable, outstanding results, but most film users nowadays are left with a choice between poor to mediocre development and scanning services at the big commercial labs on one side and (for amateur use) prohibitively expensive high quality pro services on the other. It seems there is nothing or little in between. This can be very frustrating and is one factor that has turned away a lot of people from film in recent years or kept them from returning. Most of the people who count every penny when shooting have turned to digital long ago anyway. But I am convinced there is a considerable number of enthusiast amateurs shooting film that are willing to pay a bit more for decent quality.
It would be great if Kodak could cater for the needs of that market by setting up one large scale, central service where photographers could mail in their films and have them at least developed and scanned with reliable quality and at an relatively affordable (not necessarily cheap) price point. It doesn't have to be top-notch high quality (individual) service. Kodak should know this market in and out and must have the know-how to set up such a service easily. It would maybe kill some of the remaining independent labs but it would at least help to keep film users from turning digital by providing quality results and give film a perspective of medium or long term survival. Just my 2 euro cents...

selling the camera with film,
having the camera sent back to kodak
and images sent back to the customer,
and the camera filled back up with film
is how kodak started ...
i agree with you !
they should build eastman's business ( and business plan )
again, from the rubble of what is left ...
small scale ..

or if they don't do it, someone should ..
localabs are dropping like flies !