Go Back   Steve's Digicams Forums > Digital SLR and Interchangeable Lens Cameras > Pentax / Samsung dSLR, K Mount Mirrorless

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Dec 27, 2007, 1:28 AM   #21
Senior Member
 
Robert Barnett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 323
Default

I mean no offense to anyone that does like Kodak. But, in my opinion Kodak has really lost a lot of their luster. Their cameras aren't that good and neither is there photo printing. Their hayday was in the world of film. They have had a very hard time with digital. Shame reallly one of the founding fathers of photography shouldn't end up this way.

Robert
Robert Barnett is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 27, 2007, 8:56 AM   #22
Senior Member
 
tjsnaps's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sacramento, Ca
Posts: 652
Default

Robert Barnett wrote:
Quote:
I mean no offense to anyone that does like Kodak. But, in my opinion Kodak has really lost a lot of their luster. Their cameras aren't that good and neither is there photo printing. Their hayday was in the world of film. They have had a very hard time with digital. Shame reallly one of the founding fathers of photography shouldn't end up this way.

Robert
It is a shame indeed. Kodak is a photographic and an American icon. I must admit I used fuji film for most of my picture taking but stuck with Kodak for B&W and color people pictures.

I read an article about Kodak in the 80's. The police had found a car at the bottom of a lake. The car and driver had disappeared some ten year earlier on a stormy day. Apparently the driver had lost control of the car and plunged into the lake. It was one of the runners that takes the film from the drug stores to the Kodak lab. Kodak took the ten year old water logged film that was in the trunk processed it the best they could and made prints. Then hired private detectives to find the curent whereabouts of the people it belonged too so they could deliver the prints. Now that's dedication.
TJ
tjsnaps is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 27, 2007, 10:14 AM   #23
Senior Member
 
Robert Barnett's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 323
Default

No doubt about it for film Kodak was the top. They had some flake ideas like the disc camera. Nice concept but a nightmare for people that want to scan the negatives to save now.

But, when they started using plastic lenses in their digital cameras (a practice that I believe they have moved away from) and other less than impressive digital camera releases they just kind of sunk themselves.

What I think Kodak should have done was go full in to disposible or one time use digital cameras with many options. A wide panoramic one, an underwater one, etc. With each camera came a mailer that you dropped it in to and sent off and you got back your prints and a disc with digital files. I think they could have made a very good market for this. The film dispossible's are still quite handy to have. Digital versions with a wide selection of uses would be just as useful. They could easily recycle the mailed in cameras.

Oh, well. Like what Photoshop did to darkroom support companies (chemicals, paper, equipment, etc.) digital cameras have done to Kodak and other companies. I don't think Fuji does all that well in the digital camera arena either. They seem to be more a nitch than a real contender. Again a shame. I hate to see multi-decade old companies loose it.

Robert
Robert Barnett is offline   Reply With Quote
 
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:34 AM.