Why Fujifilm Survived (& Kodak Didn't)

แชร์
ฝัง
  • เผยแพร่เมื่อ 3 มิ.ย. 2023
  • Links:
    - The Asianometry Newsletter: www.asianometry.com
    - Patreon: / asianometry
    - Twitter: / asianometry

ความคิดเห็น • 1.1K

  • @50PullUps
    @50PullUps 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1725

    I can imagine an engineer at Kodak passionately arguing that the company needs to change direction… and a manager flatly responding with “We don’t do that here.”

    • @seanwieland9763
      @seanwieland9763 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +96

      Same with Xerox PARC when the writing was on the wall with digital publishing and the end of the photocopier business.

    • @IronBridge1781
      @IronBridge1781 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +164

      My Dad worked for Kodak and based on what he’s told me, that was pretty much exactly what happened.

    • @alexkaa
      @alexkaa 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +53

      I live close to a gigantic (ex-)Kodak factory-building here in Stuttgart - even the subway-station is still called 'Kodak'... 😅

    • @c128stuff
      @c128stuff 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +40

      @@IronBridge1781 It is interesting, because Kodak has been very important for starting off the digital photography revolution, and used to be an important designer and supplier of imaging sensors.

    • @mbuhplus7800
      @mbuhplus7800 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +33

      This is exactly what's happening to me right now too. The board are just to clueless than the engineers who understand the technology. I have filed my resignation this month though 😂

  • @MitchFlint
    @MitchFlint 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +942

    I remember in the mid-1980s when a Fuji representative came by the studio and gave me a roll of 35mm Fujicolor to try. He listened to my concerns regarding having to test every new batch of Kodak professional film for color balance.
    Then I saw a Kodak rep at at trade show and told him about the testing problem, but he wasn't concerned and said Kodak's interest was in consumer products. I told him he should pay more attention to pros, because we were often asked by consumers what film we thought was the best.
    The Fuji rep came by a few weeks later with a ten-sheet box of Fujichrome Professional 4x5 for me to try. The quality was astounding and I started using it exclusively. After that, whenever an amateur photographer asked me what film I liked, I always said "Fuji".

    • @Cyba_IT
      @Cyba_IT 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +87

      Granted that's only 2 employees out of the thousands that would've been working at Fuji and Kodak, including hundreds of reps, but Fuji clearly won that one for customer service and I'm sure the individual reps were trained that way so Fuji had a better business structure.

    • @jimpix8019
      @jimpix8019 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +66

      Totally agree.
      Fuji reps were attentive and accommodating.
      And their large format film was very close between batches. Where Kodak could often be out by 20-40 cc every new batch.

    • @studiomwg
      @studiomwg 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +18

      There was a Kodak line that I used in the 90’s that produced gorgeous deep color. I can’t remember the name. I later shot on Fuji and Agfa and don’t think I ever went back.

    • @mersea.714
      @mersea.714 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

      @@studiomwgI wonder what the Kodak film was that had such color. Was it chrome film…maybe the E100V, E100VS, or E100SW? (Vivid, Vivid Saturated, Saturated Warm)

    • @mersea.714
      @mersea.714 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +13

      I remember selling 120 & 220 pro packs and bricks of Kodak film to photographers because they needed the same emulsion for a shoot. (Or they got a few 50 sheet boxes of 4x5.) Fuji Provia and Velvia were my personal faves to shoot. I also liked Fuji’s NPS better than Kodak’s VPS for color negative images.

  • @Muonium1
    @Muonium1 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +426

    Many of us in Rochester NY are actually quite bitter at what happened over the last quarter of the 20th century, and not just with respect to Kodak. Rochester WAS Kodak for decades, and not only Kodak, but the home of Xerox too. The city could have been a major player in the 21st century digital boom that enriched so many, but it was frittered all away. Kodak pissing away its golden opportunity after having invented the first digital camera as explained in the video, Xerox inventing the first personal computer GUI in the 70s and then literally giving everything away with a personal tour of the technology to Steve Jobs and indirectly Gates. Know what else Kodak invented and then threw away? The world's first organic light emitting diode display in 1987. They sold the entire OLED technology portfolio off to LG in 2009. What is Rochester known for today? Our sky high murder rate? Being emblematic of everything that epitomizes a decaying 'rust belt' city? The "garbage plate"? It's simply a disgrace what happened here, or rather, what didn't.

    • @thorntontarr2894
      @thorntontarr2894 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +27

      I share you thoughts as I worked at Kodak and lived in Rochester. I still have friends there - I moved away so I don't feel your sadness.

    • @sshko101
      @sshko101 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +19

      Kodak also diversified into making eyeglass lenses. We ordered one pair of them for my mom just because the seller said they were good enough, and because of the cheap price. It seems like they were actually made in the US and under some odd angle it even says "Kodak" across the lenses. There might be some bright future, in the future.

    • @lqr824
      @lqr824 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      Gosh if everyone was so smart why didn't the investors make any of you the president?

    • @sshko101
      @sshko101 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +24

      @@lqr824 The failure was systemic, it wasn't obvious at the time that any of the decisions made were objectively bad.
      There is this ukrainian company "FED" which started as a miscellaneous manufacturer of all sorts of things in the year 1927. In the 1930-ies it started manufacturing film cameras (that is what the company name is the most famous for). These cameras mostly were some Leica copies, but after that they also started making optics for military equipment. Right before the German invasion into the USSR that company started making aviation equipment, mostly fuel pumps and hydraulic equipment. After the war it went back into making cameras and fuel equipment for aviation and different military equipment. It stopped making cameras only in the late 1990-ies and have produced in total 8.65 million cameras. Now it's one of the few companies in the world that can produce certain specific fuel equipment for aviation, but it now became a lot smaller than it ever was.
      So like Kodak did many wrong moves in the end, but I think that they will move on in some other niches, despite the fact that I also have nostalgia for that Kodak film look.

    • @vibrolax
      @vibrolax 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +16

      I lived in Rochester throughout Kodak and Xerox's decline. I worked in the precision optics industry, which was eternally boom-and-bust due to its ties to semiconductor production and defense spending.

  • @rtbarker
    @rtbarker 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +60

    Regarding the state of the film industry for photography, it's ironic that, as of 2023, Fujifilm is rumored to be selling film products that are made by Kodak in USA.

    • @BetamaxFlippy
      @BetamaxFlippy 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +28

      Those are no rumors, they straight up sell repackaged Kodak Gold 200 because they don't make any film of their own anymore.

    • @mcb187
      @mcb187 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +18

      These are not rumors, it’s been confirmed with data. Fuji 200 and 400 are Gold 200 and UltraMax 400

    • @ARM963
      @ARM963 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      They only sale their new film only in Japan.
      Outside Japan is Kodak Repackaged

    • @poppinc8145
      @poppinc8145 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      @@ARM963 A lot of Japanese electronic companies do this now too. Their Japanese and overseas products are completely different, and often times the name is leased out to a third party to make the overseas products which may even be junk.

    • @paceyombex
      @paceyombex 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      I believe the rumor has been confirmed to be true. The only film that Fujifilm still make is the one sold to the domestic market (rumored) and their Instax Film.

  • @steveducell2158
    @steveducell2158 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +169

    I worked for Kodak in the 2000's . I joined accidentally through a joint venture Kodak was involved in.
    As an amateur photographer I am amazed how much technology Kodak had developed that is now in almost every Digital Camera on the market. It is very sad to see that Kodak was unable to capitalize on its investment while Nikon and Canon moved forward.
    I was not privy to the decision process of upper management, but I can tell you, that middle and lower management had an oversize effect on Kodak's unwillingness to embrace a new corporate strategy. Several CEO's had come and gone, unable to implement successfully implement their strategies to move Kodak away from it's monopolistic lethargy. It is very hard to describe the arrogance, the Kodak long timers exhibited. Part of that attitude is embedded in the culture of Rochester NY, Kodak's "home town".
    Rochester, is a small city surrounded by dairy farms. It is quite literally, a cultural island in a sea of farm land. To the north is Lake Ontario, which provides the city with extreme winters. These to things create a population that is insular and embattled. You have to be pretty tough to survive in Rochester, NY.
    These factors are ingrained in most Kodak middle managers. Their intransigence kept Kodak from evolving, imho.
    I wish someone would do a study on Kodak, from the perspective of corporate psychology.
    Just my opinion.

    • @DrewNorthup
      @DrewNorthup 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      I wouldn't give upper management there a pass either. It is well documented that instead of making use of their ability to fire the non-union sticks-in-the-mud who were standing in the way they instead caved in to the insistence of shareholders to part the company out (short-term jolts of income which benefited the few at the cost of the many) in the same way that Sears, Roebuck, & co. was effectively destroyed by the short-term quest for easy profits and by dumping funds into subsidiaries.

    • @gintasvilkelis2544
      @gintasvilkelis2544 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      Interesting insight :)

    • @terrieterblans7027
      @terrieterblans7027 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +10

      Monopolies are by nature thick headed and prone to fall on their own swords seeing no need to innovate although being in possession of the needed resources. That is why monopolies must be resisted and broken up as soon as possible. Apple anyone?

    • @David-hm9ic
      @David-hm9ic 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      @@terrieterblans7027 Breaking up a monopoly (Kodak wasn't one IMO as a professional film photographer) has nothing to do with the corporate mentality of not being willing to change directions as times change. If a company chooses to fail because of thick headedness, it is their prerogative. I do wish that Kodak had changed and continues to be a major player in photography. The opportunities were abundant.

    • @LV_CRAZY
      @LV_CRAZY 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      So what about all the BIS and EKTACHEM stuff? About every county court, clerk and recorder had RECORDAK microfilmers and then scanners for well over 100 years. Kodak made many moves to branch out, they just needed to not give up. I mean working on an EKATCHEM DT-60 analyzer in a veterinary office is about as diversified as you can get.

  • @irridiastarfire
    @irridiastarfire 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +204

    In Australia in the late 90's Kodak reps went to many independent print labs and told them "If you don't switch to Kodak we'll set up across the street and undercut your prices, even if we have to run at a loss". This caused a great amount of resentment. Since most of those print labs also sold camera equipment it's likely Kodak weren't exactly preferenced by sales reps / purchasing. It probably wasn't a major cause in their demise but Kodak did create a lot of bad will during their later years.

    • @400TX
      @400TX 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +34

      100%. Kodak were absolutely ruthless operators in the minilab game. Forced a whole bunch of labs to upgrade to APS systems at the worst possible time-the rise of digital.

    • @marcusdamberger
      @marcusdamberger 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      @@400TXI had to look up that, didn't realize they had come out with that format, or maybe I just totally forgot about it. I do remember the other failed disc based film format Kodak made. My friend got one in the mid 80's for Christmas present, I remember it didn't seem to produce as sharp a pic on prints and they didn't come in 36 exposure much less 24 exposure, only 15.. It seemed like you paid more per exposure, less value for your money. Why did they come out with APS when it was obvious they were going to discontinue disc based film in only free years by 1999 and had already stopped making cameras for Kodak disc film in 1988!

    • @adityasixviandyj7334
      @adityasixviandyj7334 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      I remember when I was little, Kodak is do well in Indonesia, but somehow Fujifilm & Konica Minolta is the top two choices, and those Fujifilm Frontier Minilab is sprawling across the land, which you can sometimes spot the stores everywhere, and they are easy to recognize with big green & white facade. Nowadays, if you lucky, you still can see those facade. Fujifilm also uniquely not really died in here during the digital camera wars, they do sold digital compact camera, but you will see not that much unlike Kodak, Sony, or Samsung. But After Fujifilm X100 is launch, suddenly they gain branding footing again here...
      And the success with X line-up, Fujifilm bring some of their product as well, Like Astalift, X-Ray devices, and Printings as well. Astalift is the quite shocker in here, as Astalift branding use Fujifilm logo everywhere, so most people see it like "what, Fujifilm make skincare?"; which now help set Astalift as high-end skincare brand in here.

    • @lukelim5094
      @lukelim5094 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      You know this whole topic is worthy of academia and journalistic records. Kinda lethargic of all the WW2 and 1800s history, give me some 90s imaging technology business history.

  • @jasonosmond6896
    @jasonosmond6896 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +696

    This video doesn't say it bluntly, but gets it most of the way there, so this is a good place to debunk one of the internet's favorite myths, that Kodak went bankrupt because they refused to capitalize on their early work in digital imaging in the 1970s, preferring to continue ride the film gravy train to its doom. The fact is, Kodak began the transition to digital as soon as the technology allowed, releasing professional digital backs for Nikon SLR film cameras in 1991 that required a satchel-style battery and storage pack that cost $20,000. As mentioned in the video, they were consolidating their film lines by 2000, and for a few years were the number one seller of consumer digital cameras in the US (everyone I knew at the time, if they owned a digital camera, it was a Kodak. Except me, I owned a series of Fujifilm digital cameras). What killed Kodak was a failure to commit to diversification *away* from digital imaging, not to it, and a disastrous all-in pivot to ink-jet printing right at the same time that always-connected smartphones and an explosion of photosharing apps (Facebook, Instagram, Flickr, etc.) destroyed any consumer demand for printing and sharing photos. They zigged when they should have zagged.

    • @danmenes3143
      @danmenes3143 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +68

      This is much more consistent with my recollection. Kodak digital cameras were everywhere in the early post-silver era.

    • @danmenes3143
      @danmenes3143 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +93

      @@Default78334 I think the video actually covers it pretty well--Kodak systematically got rid of all of their "lifeboats," their high-margin non-consumer businesses like Eastmen chemical, and focused everything on a consumer business--consumer digital cameras--that was moving rapidly from a high-end good with decent margins, through a consumer commodity with negligible margins, and right on to an obsolete good in the face of digital phones. Maybe the move into printers made some sense from the point of view of leveraging the company's expertise in dyes and color chemistry, but it was another cutthroat consumer business with several well-established incumbents.

    • @pretty7545
      @pretty7545 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +28

      Despite what the video says about Kodak's top market share, I cannot remember seeing a single Kodak digital camera in 90s or 00s... and I was near Rochester. All my homies had Mavica's for like a year. Then it was Canon vs Nikon.

    • @dave6526
      @dave6526 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

      @@pretty7545 Jason - I started the comment I just posted before I saw yours (3 hrs. ago) and ended up chopping a ton out when I eventually saw yours. I think a video on the Kodak DCS would be an excellent subject for a follow-on video by Mr. Asianometry.

    • @raylopez99
      @raylopez99 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      @@pretty7545 Maybe they were exported? I recall somebody in a tomato farm in South Carolina saying they could not buy any tomatoes, as they were all exported.

  • @spaceranger3728
    @spaceranger3728 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +89

    A friend spent most of his career at 3M. For a few years, he found himself working at Kodak as a result of Kodak's acquisition of the 3M product line he worked on. He said Kodak's management was utterly Neanderthal compared with 3M's.

    • @davidb2206
      @davidb2206 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      True. Failed leadership causes this. If you ever watched "Undercover Boss," you see that most CEO's are real blundering idiots who can't even do the most common jobs at their own factory. That's morally wrong and people suffer because of it.

  • @allanlmb37
    @allanlmb37 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +136

    In a nutshell....Fujifilm had excellent leadership. Especially their CEO. He recognized and understood what was happening and where things were heading. Thus he took the necessary steps to start transforming Fujifilm long before film sales were going to drop off a cliff.

    • @rikmorel4870
      @rikmorel4870 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +11

      I see this same mentality in many other North American chains, specifically department stores. They're all dinosaurs, failing to recognize the need for change they end up driving their business to extinction, all the while not realizing it's them doing it. In Canada, I saw it with Sears (as in the US), Eaton's, The Bay (barely hanging on currently) and others (K-Mart, Zellers, Woolco, Woolworths, Woodwards etc etc).

    • @bluestar5812
      @bluestar5812 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      It is the modus operandi of many american companies: if it is working now, don't change it. Just like how Game Stop's relevance died as the digital storefronts and instant downloads rose. Like how Sega of American tried to maintain the Genesis with unnecessary add-ons instead of abandoning it in favor of the Saturn.

    • @syjiang
      @syjiang 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      There was also lateral thinking in altering their business model. Instead of being constraint to think what industry they were in, they focused on what technology they have acquired and how it can be translated to work in other industry.

    • @allanlmb37
      @allanlmb37 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      @@syjiang exactly. Which is why Fujifilm now makes medical equipment, cosmetics, and pharmaceuticals.

    • @cck4863
      @cck4863 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Actually both companies go the same path. Just that being American, Eastman Kodak breaks up because it is more profitable and easier to manage by doing so while Fujifilm keep together cause the Japanese like to keep the old name alive(the logo can die however) .
      Japan have many hundred years old companies headed by someone that had nothing to do with the creator and doing something that was nothing to do with the original service.

  • @grizwoldphantasia5005
    @grizwoldphantasia5005 ปีที่แล้ว +363

    I remember how sharp the transition was from film to digital. I had a Nikon F2 with some fantastic lenses. Love that thing. The controls were perfectly placed. I could bang off 2-3 shots per second without a motor drive, focusing and tracking a moving car or running athlete. I bought a small dinky digital camera for experimenting, it was both horrible and liberating. The freedom of seeing shots immediately, of not having to take several shots of static scenes with bracketing exposures and wait for development, that crappy low resolution camera took over from the Nikon for that reason alone. Several companies kept claiming they were working on replacement camera backs which would make the Nikon digital, but none ever came through. I still miss that Nikon, I can still feel the perfect shutter button and winder, but if someone offered me a free one now with lifetime film, I still would prefer the phone camera, because the crappy camera you have is better than the superb one you left at home because it's so bulky.

    • @johnstudd4245
      @johnstudd4245 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +31

      The phone cam is great for spur of the moment stuff, and is amazing sometimes, but for anything semi serious or more...... DSLR

    • @ricardokowalski1579
      @ricardokowalski1579 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      This ⬆

    • @ailivac
      @ailivac 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +14

      I ever really thought about it, but it is amazing how fast it finally took over compared to the overall history of photography. 1850: cameras have just transitioned from a scientific curiosity to a commercialized but still HIGHLY specialized trade. 1900 - Kodak ushers in the consumer camera era. 1950 - interchangeable-lens SLR and rangefinder cameras are professional workhorses, color film is commonplace, automated consumer point-and-shoots are just around the corner. 1990s - every family vacation is documented by every family member's own camera, with the film processed and printed at the corner drugstore overnight.
      Also 1990s - a few digital cameras start to become successful, mostly when instant processing is required.
      2000 - consumer digital cameras get cheap and good enough for most uses, just in time for sharing images on the Internet to become popular. 2005 - image quality and speed rapidly improve, DSLRs become a serious competitor in the professional market. 2010 - digital is better than 35mm ever was (film survives for the most specialized fine art and studio applications), smartphone cameras start becoming universal though still inferior quality. 2015 - new development of film cameras is over with the last models soon to be discontinued, once-iconic emulsion brands go out of production, half a dozen mirrorless systems jockey for position in the race for the enthusiast market, phones catch up to most non-professional cameras in terms of quality, practically all movies are being shot and screened digitally.
      And just like that, film was all but gone.

    • @user-mr3mf8lo7y
      @user-mr3mf8lo7y 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

      The pixelage of Film is 14 megapixel give or take. Nowadays, most cameras have way more pixels than film's. However, they lack deep effect on pictures. And, 'yes', change is always hard.

    • @johntravena119
      @johntravena119 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +11

      @@user-mr3mf8lo7y Maybe the average 400 ISO color film but quite sure a film like Velvia 50 could be scanned at 200 megapixels.

  • @tomschmidt381
    @tomschmidt381 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +223

    I worked at Centronics Data Computer in the late 70s early 80s. I was unprepared for how fast technology companies can go from their best year to out of business. Centronics pioneered dot matrix impact printing but missed the transition to non-impact printing. The Kodak saga is sad but pretty common in the high tech industry.

    • @raylopez99
      @raylopez99 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +19

      Then you have companies like "American Can" who as late as the early 1980s made cans for American canned goods transitioning into...Citibank. That was a smart move...for the insiders, before it 'blew up' like a spoiled can left in the sun around 2008.

    • @tomschmidt381
      @tomschmidt381 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      @@raylopez99 Wow, great item of biz trivia, I had no idea Citibank used to be a tin can producer.

    • @mattbosley3531
      @mattbosley3531 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +9

      I remember Centronics. Every printer used to connect to the computer through a centronics port on the printer, back in the good old days of 8 pin and 24 pin dot matrix printers.

    • @700gsteak
      @700gsteak 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

      As late as thge 90s centronics used to be synomynous with the word printer cable.

    • @tomschmidt381
      @tomschmidt381 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@700gsteak Yup I was annoyed when IBM redefined the Centronics connector from the 36-pin Amphenol 57 (telco style) to a DB-25.

  • @andrewknowles6731
    @andrewknowles6731 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +19

    I worked for Kodak briefly in 1998 and was shocked how they were stuck in 1970's corporate America, we even had a lady bring around the tea trolley mid morning. Then I worked for HP from 2004 in the graphics business and slowly but steadily we took all of the markets that Kodak though they were safe in. ie High end digital commercial printing ( Indigo) Photo Book production ( Indigo) and then High speed inkjet ( HP high speed webpress). The whole time Kodak seemed to be totally reliant on customer goodwill and old technologies that clients in the end couldn't justify in a competitive market no matter how warmly they regarded the Kodak brand.

  • @edwardhewer8530
    @edwardhewer8530 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +61

    Hey Asianometry great video as always. As a 12 year FUJIFILM employee (via Fuji Xerox) this was interesting viewing. Unfortunately it seems a lot of American mega corporations seem to get infiltrated by executives with short term motives and don’t honor the labour of their predecessors in growing their business. I came from the commercial print industry and it has been in a massive tech transition in the last thirty years and huge reduction in volume in certain areas. FUJIFILM has had to reinvent itself even within some of its divisions. It hasn’t been easy. I am looking forward to what the future brings.

    • @MCArt25
      @MCArt25 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +11

      that's because they literally don't value labor - the point is generating shareholder profit, and when no profit can be generated with the existing business model then it's often more profitable to spin off a different company and move capital there than to keep the original one going
      basically the opposite of how japanese companies tend to be run

  • @ricardokowalski1579
    @ricardokowalski1579 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +44

    As a stubborn nerd I resisted the trasition to digital for over a decade.
    I was the "target consumer" that truly believed that digital *did not* have the quality of film. I shot whole rolls of 36 with the certainty that only 4, maybe 5, images would be good enough to print. The wait for developing, the contact sheet. The interaction with the lab guys to get the prints as "just" as I wanted them... was part of the hobby. I loved the grain in the enlarged photos, using a magnifying glass to find the grain when I could not see it. Planning ahead with fast film for night outings. I hauled around my SLR above my head while walking into a flooded cave. The confused looks I got from friends and family when I was geeking with exposure lock or manual focus. Fun times.
    Having said *that*. When digital became "good enough" I switched.
    I still have my lenses and film camera, but they are now part of someone that is not today's me.
    Solid content.

    • @ometec
      @ometec 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Digital finally became "good enough" about 10 years ago. Not it's got to get it's s**t together and stop obsoleting fully functional equipment. I can still shoot almost any film camera ever made. Digital gear hardly lasts a decade.

    • @ricardokowalski1579
      @ricardokowalski1579 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@ometec My digital gear takes my glasses. The lenses last forvever

    • @walterpinkus5534
      @walterpinkus5534 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      They can't make money by selling film and improving that when they can, so now they have to be improving the cameras to keep up the cash flow going. @@ometec

  • @nomadhgnis9425
    @nomadhgnis9425 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +66

    What fuji did with the fuji was brilliant. Re-purposing their base product for other markets. I always wondered about fujitsu corporation. We used their scanners for our document scanning in elections registration forms. I used to be a elections programmers designing software for elections processing. Best scanners i ever used. Strong and high quality components. Their maintenance kits were excellent. Guyana Elections Commission.

    • @Kara_Pabuc
      @Kara_Pabuc 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      Fujifilm and Fujitsu are unrelated companies.

    • @nomadhgnis9425
      @nomadhgnis9425 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      @@Kara_Pabuc I know that. I was just thinking about fujitsu. Similar names.

    • @davidb2206
      @davidb2206 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Well, when you have the whole Japanese government behind you, who help you lock up and protect the large Japanese market, and actively work to keep "gaijin white devil" competitors OUT, it's not that hard.

  • @NickadeeSplit
    @NickadeeSplit 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +90

    I remember my dad coming back from Japan with thousands of dollars of Fujifilm products saying that this is cutting edge technology and then bam digital just came out of nowhere but after my dad passed away you wouldn't believe how much money I got on an auctioned off all of his Fuji real-to-real stuff

    • @mikcnmvedmsfonoteka
      @mikcnmvedmsfonoteka 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      Some shops still sell the film in my country it's now 25 EUR per 1x24 400ISO, a few years ago it was 10 EUR, in early/mid-2000 you could get film for cheap since digital took off

  • @RicciChoi1109
    @RicciChoi1109 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

    I used to wonder why Fujifilm entered the cosmetics market, where I saw an advertisement material featuring Seiko Matsuda in her late 40s (or early 50s) about a decade ago. It was only later when I understood that manufacturing photographic film gives you a shortcut to understand how to manufacture collagen for cosmetics.
    This is a really smart move, it simply gives Fujifilm a very reliable cash cow without much effort.

  • @GlaciaDay
    @GlaciaDay 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +23

    Interesting facts. Fujifilm actually started teaming up with Kodak to produce Fujifilm Branded 35mm film last year as it's getting harder and harder for them to fulfill supply chain here in Japan. These two giant finally joined together after all these years. Also, last year Fujifilm has applied more patents than anyone else in Japan. Reaching far beyond other companies despite being a statistically smaller cooperation. Shows how their technology-related past still derives them seeking for more innovation than others.

    • @josezuniga3747
      @josezuniga3747 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      is that the fujifilm fim just labled color 400? I just got my scans back after shooting a couple as my first rolls ever and I did like the pics.

    • @GlaciaDay
      @GlaciaDay 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@josezuniga3747 yep. The new X-tra400 is just re-labeled UltraMax

  • @ckott99
    @ckott99 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +31

    Excellent work!!! I have 3 collegues who worked for Kodak, and 10 or so years ago I did a case study which I called "A Tale of Two Companies", obviously a play on the Charles Dickens novel. The one thing I would add to your work is that Kodak had what I called an internal civil war. There was tremendous strife within Kodak as to where to focus, and there was a contingent that was thinking along the Fujfilm lines of "We have the capability to make precision multi-layer thin films, so outside of photography where else does the world need this capability?" Top leadership at Fujifilm believed the answer was display technology and today Fujifilm is the world leader providing films for electronic displays, and has 20+ billion $ revenue. There were those in Kodak who had similar thoughts, but never were able to get leadership buy in.

    • @mikexhotmail
      @mikexhotmail 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Luck(randomness)

    • @markkeller8915
      @markkeller8915 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Interesting. How did the age of acetate capital equipment affect both companies? Seemed to me, watching both companies direction, the spin off, Fuji had newer productions lines, therefore flexibility,process control and adaptable efficiency, vs legacy process equipment at Kodak, causing the retooling to meet competitive future drove Kodaks short term spin offs?

  • @cv4wheeler
    @cv4wheeler 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +12

    When in grad school in 1982, I applied for a summer internship at Kodak in Rochester, it was my first choice. When they didn't get back to me, I took a position at Marathon Oil--it was OK, but Kodak would have been great (I figured). Finally, when their first choice went elsewhere, they called me, too late. I thought it might be possible to spend my career working for Kodak, glad now it didn't work out. Whew, a close one.

  • @nondescriptnyc
    @nondescriptnyc 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

    I recently saw that Fujifilm is promoting its anti-aging cosmetics line, Astalift, which presumably applies some of the traditional film-production technology. The flexibility in their strategic planning is truly impressive.

  • @KarlAdamsAudio
    @KarlAdamsAudio 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +35

    I remember when Kodak released Photo CD in the early 90s - you could get reasonably high resolution scans of your images from film, relatively cheaply from your local photofinisher - except they were stored in a completely proprietary format that was utterly unreadable outside of Kodak's ecosystem. It was as if Kodak didn't expect to have to compete in the digital imaging marketplace - they assumed that they would simply own it, and could impose proprietary technologies based on trade secrets that would give them an absolute monopoly. Such hubris...

    • @frequentlycynical642
      @frequentlycynical642 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +10

      Kind of like Apple with their propriatory audio and video formats. They thought the tail could wag the dog.

    • @petermgruhn
      @petermgruhn 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      I got my pics off PhotoCD and put them on the web just fine. My problem was, to quote the guy at the shop, "next time have the sighted monkey do the scan". It can't have been too tough as I was poor and amateur (slr and Painter, not Instamatic and what's-a-computer, but still amateur).
      I wonder if... Yeah, my copy of ThumbsPlus from 2007 knows PhotoCD. I'm betting TP back in '96 was what I used. I recognize the options dialog and since I only ever got the one PCD it would be from back then that I do.

    • @petermgruhn
      @petermgruhn 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@frequentlycynical642 Now, for getting and managing images, Apple can go stick its head in a pig.

    • @KarlAdamsAudio
      @KarlAdamsAudio 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      I believe the file format was reverse engineered in the early 1990s, so Kodak's strategy of publishing no information about it didn't really work for long.

  • @varno
    @varno 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +98

    I think this fall of Kodak is symptomatic of us business and investment culture, to separate growth business to "free investor capital" and allow growth. Another example of this is HP, which since the 90s has split into no less than 4 businesses, HP, HPE, Agilent technologies and Keysight technologies for this very reason.

    • @hypercube33
      @hypercube33 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +19

      This too. Keysight was really what HP was when it was founded, but together they have the opportunity to show knowledge, and learn and spread out into new areas. Investors just want a fat wallet right now though.

    • @paulinegeorge289
      @paulinegeorge289 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      Kodak is typical of many US, Canadian and UK firms- complacent, stagnant, over sized, backward looking, inward looking, corporately inverted and out of touch with the marketplace.

    • @ciello___8307
      @ciello___8307 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      @@paulinegeorge289 that could be said of some japanese firms. Honestly, any company can become complacent

    • @MCArt25
      @MCArt25 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      yea, kodak ended because "kodak" was essentially a profitable shell for investors to pour their money into. when that money was no longer profitable, kodak ceased to exist. fuji by contrast was apparently seen as a business worth preserving for its own sake (even if they now had to seek their profits elsewhere)
      it's largely a difference in philosophy as to what a company is and what it exists for

    • @davidb2206
      @davidb2206 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@MCArt25 And the differences in culture and government. The Japanese are about the most homogeneous, xenophobic people on the planet. The people, the company, and the government operate as ONE to succeed and to keep the "gaijin white devils" out of "their" market. Always. It's official state policy and law.

  • @LatitudeSky
    @LatitudeSky 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +104

    For a while, in the 90s, Fuji audio and videotape was the go-to. Especially their higher end audio. Extremely good stuff for the times and very affordable. Kodak had videotape but it was very poor stuff from what I remember.

    • @bullettube9863
      @bullettube9863 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

      Kodak invented VHS tape, but sold the rights to Fuji because they didn't think they could compete with Beta Max. The Kodak brand VHS tape was made by Fuji and was in fact Fuji tape, so no, Kodak VHS tape wasn't "poor stuff"!

    • @tonerotonero1375
      @tonerotonero1375 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

      TDK was there too.

    • @bullettube9863
      @bullettube9863 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      @@tonerotonero1375 Yes, and their tape was a big improvement over both Kodak and Fuji products, especially the audio tracks.

    • @video99couk
      @video99couk 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

      @@bullettube9863 Kodak branded Beta tapes were made by TDK. This was very easy to spot because the shell is the same as TDK's two-window design, where most Beta tapes have (annoyingly) just a supply spool window. A few tapes were made with a totally clear top surface, but TDKs design was very easy to spot.

    • @rayrooney4656
      @rayrooney4656 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +10

      Kodak exited tape manufacturing when reel tape sales dropped. They didn't want to go into cassettes and dropped all development.
      They never bothered with VHS or Beta. When that market exploded they just contacted with TDK to get tapes rebadged to their name.
      Fuji NEVER made things for Kodak back then. They were bitter rivals.
      I worked with Kodak customers from the 70s to the end of the 90s and they were always two steps behind until they partnered with Samsung. They ruled for a few years but went after the low-end market while the Japanese went high and drove the technology.
      Phone cameras ended Kodak in its low-end niche. Canon, Nikon, Fuji, etc survived above the fray.

  • @Cristian-yj4gk
    @Cristian-yj4gk 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +87

    Amazing comparison, thank you for doing it. Your channel is better than 99% of the MBA programs out there

    • @jameskresl
      @jameskresl 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      You must have attended a large number of programs to have such knowledge.

  • @WesNishi
    @WesNishi 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +15

    A great thing Fujifilm did is application of chemical processes that they learnt in film R&D. You covered some of these area such as pharmaceuticals and cosmetics. Another area is medical diagnostics. Dry Chemistry analyzers for blood/medical testing are a growing area for Fujifilm allowing for medical diagnostic testing. Ironically, Kodak used to own Ortho Clinical Diagnostics which is a major manufacturer of dry chemistry analyzers. And although much smaller in the film business, companies like BASF that really focused on the industrial application could be argued were the more successful of these 2.

    • @duckpotat9818
      @duckpotat9818 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      I am a biology grad student and I've seen many Fujifilm products in our labs.

  • @GhostOfSnuffles
    @GhostOfSnuffles 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +17

    I loved those little Fuji "disposable" cameras. They were cheap and you could drop them off at the local drug store and be back in an hour with all of your photos developed. Best part is that the photos almost always came out looking good. In the days before digital camera were affordable even a complete amateur's like myself could take good photos of important life events. And by important life events i mean photos of my friend flipping me off when we went camping.

  • @joeywall4657
    @joeywall4657 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +11

    I just found your channel a few weeks ago. I really love your work! Economics is usually a stale subject, but you bring it to life and present it like a history lesson. I have found all of your videos to be extremely enjoyable and informative.

  • @mariotraversi5238
    @mariotraversi5238 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

    Great overview of both Kodak and Fujifilm. Having watched the presentation, I think the big difference in longevity is perhaps due to the cultural differences, especially to do with management of the company vs external factors, such as markets and shareholders. The number of CEO changes, each with their own great new idea, seems to have happened more with Kodak than Fujifilm. Certainly Fujifilm managed to stay it's course in it's diversification program, whereas Kodak looks like it flip-flopped, making one change, then throwing it away and making another. When you have a 20 year plan vs planning for your next quarter makes a big difference in longevity.

  • @connecticutaggie
    @connecticutaggie 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +37

    I recall a presentation on how difficult it is for a publicly traded company to change from being an Income stock to a Growth stock. The presenter pointed to Eastman Kodak as a definitive example of that. I think that explains problem most of what you described.

    • @kenoliver8913
      @kenoliver8913 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +11

      This is currently the story of some legacy car companies in the face of the EV revolution. Most notably Toyota who are resolutely focused on their revenue and cost structure while sailing blindly into the tsunami. In a few years time they will still be boasting of their margins on their wonderfully reliable old engines while at the same time wondering where all the customers went ...

    • @neerajwa
      @neerajwa 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      ​@@kenoliver8913this comment will not age well. Come to this space in five years.

    • @synnell88
      @synnell88 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      @@neerajwa Regardless of what will happen in EV future's, Toyota seems to be take a back seat and see which EV technology seems to be promising path, rather than pioneering into one which is very costly. So Toyota may lose the first-mover advantage, but they will not lose money. The real question is, does Toyota capable to transition into EV technology when the opportunity came?
      Toyota seems to bet into another technology which is Hydrogen Combustion Engine (HCE). So Toyota know where their strength lies, which is the engine technology. But if we know anything from Fujifilm and Kodak stories, it may became worthless technology. I don't know if Toyota is using diversification of market as their survival plan, but it is a good plan. It's better than throwing everything into single basket. And of anything, why would Toyota stopped making regular car when they are so good at it?

  • @FlintIronstag23
    @FlintIronstag23 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +33

    Fuji and Kodak teamed up with major camera makers in 1996 to create the Advanced Photo System (APS). They thought it was going to be a great new film format that would replace 35mm. Kodak and Fuji where going make big money selling the more expensive rolls of film while Canon, Nikon, and Minolta could sell all new camera systems to consumers. The problem was that it never caught on with professionals and amateurs didn't see the need to replace their 35mm cameras with more expensive APS. Digital photography finally killed it off in the early 2000s. Even when working together, big companies can make the wrong choices.

    • @TheCyberSpidey
      @TheCyberSpidey 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      The same APS format got its evolution in digital era as APS-C, unsurprisingly Fujifilm stuck with that instead of going Full Frame - only about 15 years later.

    • @hypercube33
      @hypercube33 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Didnt Kodak come up with that to sell smaller film /with/ some features of digital slapped on so higher profit margins, smaller cameras, and locked in film technology?

    • @FlintIronstag23
      @FlintIronstag23 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      @@hypercube33 It was all an attempt by the photography industry to make more money. There were a few small improvements over 35mm, but image quality wasn't one of them since the negative was significantly smaller than 35mm.

    • @PeterEvansPeteTakesPictures
      @PeterEvansPeteTakesPictures 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      ​@TheCyberSpidey They were pretty canny in the end pulled a Nintendo in the digital camera world, refusing to compete with the dominent players. Sony, Canon and Nikon were pushing full frame hard and neglecting APS-C as consumer. Fujifilm developed it by arguing that smaller lenses and mirrorless cameras coupled with improvements in sensors made for lightweight cameras tgat could get professional results. Then when they remade their name as a camera brand they swing to affordable professional medium format in the digital realm, which none of the big three were doing either. As such their imaging department survived, subsidised by the wildly popular instax instant film, and became well regarded.

    • @KRAFTWERK2K6
      @KRAFTWERK2K6 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Yeah i'm still disappointed the APS format was a flop. I loved the ability to shoot 3 different formats on the same film type. But i sadly never had a camera for it. I only saw this format on compact sized cameras anyway and never saw it seriously being embraced in SLR cameras. So it really only remained a novelty. Like these 16mm cassettes for these micro cameras.

  • @wayneyadams
    @wayneyadams 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    Sometime around 2000, I bought an interesting and unique Olympus digital camera. In addition to digital images you could print images on Polaroid film right on the spot. It was really cool to be able to hand out print pictures to friends and relatives right on the spot.

  • @PartyingLemons
    @PartyingLemons 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    I like what Fujifilm is doing in the digital camera market. Currently, most high-end digital cameras all have great specs and fundamentally can all take brilliant images, so other things such as usability, features, lenses and design are what set each camera brand apart. What makes Fuji special are the film simulations and dials reminiscent of the ones found on film SLRs. When I use a Fuji camera, it makes photography fun again, and it makes me want to take more photos.
    I think they carved out a niche in that corner of the market quite well.

  • @Jack-mm3bl
    @Jack-mm3bl 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    I used to work in SG Fujifilm factory in 2008 for a short time. I was astonished to see their document dept fabricating false DHL/FedEx documents for the banks and buyers' LC. The senior document processing executive was promoted not by either good working experience or excellent performance but by joining the same country club and playing golf with the GM. Usually, an rank and file employee was required to give a one month notice for resignation after he/she received confirmation after probation. But in Fujifilm, an rank and file employee is required to give two months notice for resignation after confirmation.

  • @Ascendancer
    @Ascendancer 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    I just wanted to use the occasion of beeing really early to thank you for, what I think is, one of the best quality content on this platform. Huge thanks, I enjoy your analysis so much, I can not put it in words properly.

  • @Klaster_1
    @Klaster_1 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

    My first job in 2011 was at a print shop which used Fujifilm everything, where I printed photos, developed and scanned the films and did tons of photo editing. The conditions were horrible as the owner tended to cheap out on everything, especially safety and machine service, so I quit barely a year after, and soon most of the network shops closed down too. Despite that, I still remember that time fondly, mostly thanks to how many people I got to meet. Fun fact: the head units run Windows, so you could easily edit the amount of prints that day, buy your own paper rolls and print photos on the side, splitting the money between the coworkers.

    • @lqr824
      @lqr824 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      > you could easily edit the amount of prints that day, buy your own paper rolls and print photos on the side, splitting the money between the coworkers
      That sounds like the same kind of corrupt act that has made Russia so weak they couldn't take over Ukraine. Russian units were issued gasoline and the commanders simply sold it for money to spend on whores. Then Putin ordered the invasion and the invasion forces simply ran out of gasoline. In other cases conscripted soldiers made $40/month and had to guard fields full of spare tank. Black market buyers would pay the conscript $100 for the copper wiring from one tank. The copper was worth $1000 on the black market, and meanwhile a $100,000 tank was then useless thanks to this corruption.

  • @ted356
    @ted356 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +11

    Well researched and presented. The strange fall of Kodak, when they had a huge lead in their CCD sensors, remains a case study in corporate lethargy.
    The emphasis on smart diversification at Fuji explains how they continue to find success in the world of the digital image reality.
    Kodak does still make film and has actually seen an upturn in their film business in recent years, yet remain a shadow of their former self. Rumors float that some retail Fujifilm 35mm is now made on contract by Kodak. 😮
    This is a good follow up video to your previous one, where you explained how Sony has ridden their CMOS sensor technology to dominance in the high end consumer and professional cameras. 😊

  • @JDHitchman
    @JDHitchman 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +50

    Fun fact, Kodak is actually ramping up film production in recent months and restarting old production lines.

    • @MrLU2000
      @MrLU2000 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +11

      Most film users couldn’t care less, unless this results in lower prices!

    • @johnpekkala6941
      @johnpekkala6941 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Yes i saw this on a couple of episodes of Smarter Every Day where they walked you through a fully running film factory showing the entire process of making film from start to finish, really interesting stuff. th-cam.com/video/HQKy1KJpSVc/w-d-xo.html First episode in the series and here is a prequel sort of how film itself and the development process works th-cam.com/video/TCxoZlFqzwA/w-d-xo.html

    • @frequentlycynical642
      @frequentlycynical642 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      It's been going on for several years with the new interest in film.

    • @frequentlycynical642
      @frequentlycynical642 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

      @@MrLU2000 Wrong. Kodak is reintroducing old lines; more film choices is good. Film is increasingly expensive, unfortunately. The old cheap consumer neg films now run $12-14 from the big photo houses. Plus developing for about the same.

    • @jamesthigpen9330
      @jamesthigpen9330 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@frequentlycynical642 Wrong, Ecktachrome's new release is a completely new formulation.

  • @campbellpaul
    @campbellpaul 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +14

    Thank you for this fascinating video essay! My first digital camera in 2005 was a Fujifilm S9000 (US marketed). You could go really in depth with the digital camera topic and sensor technology, and it would be greatly appreciated! I sometimes wonder of the odd chance of digital cameras making a comeback.. There are so few people to converse with on this subject!

    • @gan247
      @gan247 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      He made a video on CMOS/CCD sensors. th-cam.com/video/4dX2IsZDBfg/w-d-xo.html

    • @markkeller8915
      @markkeller8915 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Love my Fuji 1000, sold to a friend some years later and bought the Fuji 100, because, SLR and LED viewfinder, still have it.

    • @campbellpaul
      @campbellpaul 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@markkeller8915 Yes, the LED viewfinder was a plus on those cameras. They were great portrait cameras as they depicted nice warm tones.

  • @ToTheGAMES
    @ToTheGAMES 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +37

    If you guys are interested, Destin from Smarter Everyday, did a multi-part video tour of one of Kodak's film producing factories.

    • @th3oryO
      @th3oryO 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      ​@@iridium8341 why bother commenting

    • @BrassLock
      @BrassLock 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Yes, I was gobsmacked that they're still in the business of producing 1960's 35mm colour film. Are people still stuck in the 20th Century in America???

    • @dh510
      @dh510 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      It was really interesting to see how complicated and yet well optimized their production of film is!

    • @tracyrreed
      @tracyrreed 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      This video makes it sound like Kodak died yet Destin did a video on their massive factory operation. I'm confused.

    • @AryaStarky
      @AryaStarky 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@BrassLockfilm is really great and experienced a resurgence in recent years. It shouldn’t die off.

  • @dave6526
    @dave6526 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +9

    Excellent job as usual. I also very much enjoyed your video on image sensors (CCD vs CMOS). A related subject that I found fascinating, and may fit nicely as a chapter to your digital imaging series, is the development and ultimately the failure, of the first DLSR - the Kodak DCS... a cutting edge, yet severely flawed, Frankenstein of a camera. Their technical approach/solution made sense, and serves well to explain what it took to turn an SLR (film) into the first DSLR. Kodak's making Nikon a partner on this almost certainly helped Nikon bring the first successful DSLR to market - and perhaps, Nikon would not have been as prepared as needed to survive the digital transition, otherwise.

  • @tylero8595
    @tylero8595 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

    When I started shooting in the early 90s I started with Fuji film. My photography teacher in high school swore by it. It was the film we used in school. I always shot Fuji Velvia. I didnt realize the quality until I tried shooting so regular Kodak and regular Fuji. I missed the Kodachrome though. That is a bummer.

  • @serafinacosta7118
    @serafinacosta7118 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Fuji in Brazil , early to mid eighties , had a photo and film processing lab in São Paulo. Specifically the city’s south side by the river , around Santo Amaro.
    I did a quick temp there. But as an observant I was , I took notice to a few subtetlies …
    1. Management , all strictly Japanese , or Nissei at the lowest , wore green lab overcoats. Everyone else, including gang supervisors , who were mostly Brazilians , wore different uniform colors.
    2. At lunch break , management assembled in a see through meeting room. We , the peons , could only speculate what they talked about. They seemed to go extensively on passing samples around, shop talk , and shooting breeze.
    3. I was tasked on maintenance with some Italian kid. They had these huge machines where negatives were washed into baths. We processed negatives and print.
    4. Those days , motion video was super 8, 8mm. So honeymooners , in print and in motion , sent their recordings through independent mom pop retail outlets , scattered throughout the country. From remote regions in the Amazon , to large urban centers , no one processed film at the store. Most of these stores were run by Japanese and their descendants , mostly Nissei. They would sell film, process print orders , wristwatches , Knick knacks.
    5. Our lowly rank, most of them were kids , age 18-25 , all non Japanese. . As soon as something spicy came out of the parcel envelopes and got processed everyone in our group got a wind of , and congregated by the “ screening room” , a small room where lights were turned off and all kinds of color comments would fly. All X Rated stuff, no less.
    6. One young Nissei who was closer to us , Akira , was about to leave the company, impatient with the poor outlook on any promotion. As soon as management got a wind of it, they called him in, and gave him the promotion.
    7. One of the many prints we got a wind of , a group of Japanese managers had hired a stripper to perform at their shindig. Everyone of them got a turn at hauling the saucy dancer at their arms, smiling , as if he was holding a big reeled in fish.

  • @YangSunWoo
    @YangSunWoo 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    This is probably the best business related youtube channel out there. So much research and insight!

  • @MithunOnTheNet
    @MithunOnTheNet 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +6

    Great episode! Love watching stories about companies that survived thanks to diversification. Would like to see an episode on one that didn't survive -- Sanyo, once the world's number one producer of rechargeable batteries. I wonder if Panasonic's acquisition of Sanyo gave Panasonic the edge in the battery market, which evolved into Panasonic becoming Tesla's primary battery supplier and an early investor.

  • @makerspace533
    @makerspace533 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +19

    Kodak was the leader in the digital point and shoot camera market, but then came smartphones. Now, because of smartphones, there is no market for consumer point and shoot cameras. In fact, because smartphone cameras have become so good, even the pro-sumer digital cameras are starting to disappear.

    • @b6983832
      @b6983832 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      This is very true in that segment of consumers. Kodak can' t sell to the masses films with their old slogan "you push the button, we do the rest". The folks using their "soap carps" in the 1990's are now shooting selfies with their cellphones.
      This of course doesn't mean there is no use for film, or that "film is dead", as some people have been telling for the last 20 years. There is more demand for film than the remaining manufacturers can supply. Why" Because one medium can't just be replaced by something very different, even though it is easier, and more popular to the common folks. Arts just don't work that way. To get the record straight, you might as well ask, why someone is painting with oil colors, that are expensive, and notoriously hard to use, when you could use your cellphone to make a picture more accurate. This is also the reason people want to use film and print them on silver paper or C-type.

    • @Loanshark753
      @Loanshark753 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Films are often shot on film i.e. Imax 70mm or 35mm

    • @andrewbarnum5040
      @andrewbarnum5040 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      Kodak did file for bankruptcy but that was not their end. In 2023 Kodak is the #1 film manufacturer globally and is even making film for Fujifilm. A dozen or so movies are shot each year on 35mm or 70mm film. Thanks to Kodak film is alive and well in 2023. Kodak continues to grow and expand their film manufacturing capabilities and us in the film industry look forward to what's ahead for film.

    • @glennoc8585
      @glennoc8585 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      For everyday folk I agree but for serious amateurs and professionals you just can't beat dedicated lenses and the motion capture smoothness of a dedicated camera. Using a GoPro is handy but you get a distorted depth and speed capture.

    • @jac1207
      @jac1207 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Social media and content creators do provide winds in the sails for dedicated cameras outside of smartphones. Obviously majority of people don't really need anything more powerful than the cameraphone, but if you need anything a step beyond that, even modern point-and-shoots give better results.
      Don't know the actual numbers, but there has been a big run on Fuji's X100V, a point-and-shoot that clocks in at an eye watering $1399. But the demand of it got so bad, Fuji had to stop backorders because they couldn't catch up. The 2nd hand pricing on those nearly doubled at one point.
      There's definitely still a market for dedicated cameras, just not comparable to per-smartphone era demands.

  • @tactileslut
    @tactileslut 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    You do amazing research. Having Fuji involved in the manufacture of the screens on the phones and non-film cameras that were impacting their core business was a brilliant move on their part that I'd never have guessed. FWIW I still have a Konica camera, though it needs repair.

    • @garyc6183
      @garyc6183 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Amazing research? How did he miss the fact that todays Fujifilm is re-branded Kodak, made by Kodak.

    • @tactileslut
      @tactileslut 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@garyc6183 Hmmm.

  • @tulippasta
    @tulippasta 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    So pleased to see one of my wikimedia commons images (at 9:51) present and, as always, correctly cited in your video. Keep up the great work!

  • @Chronosmaster002
    @Chronosmaster002 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    I think someone mentioned this, but I love my Fuji digital camera because they were able to transfer the feel of their films by using the film simulation. It’s just amazing being able to apply the b&w acros film on digital shots

  • @DanielLopez-up6os
    @DanielLopez-up6os 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +11

    Sad that Fuji has now officially announced that it has ceaced film production, and will focus on chemicals and INSTAX.

    • @FrozenHaxor
      @FrozenHaxor 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      Kodak makes film to this day.

    • @BetamaxFlippy
      @BetamaxFlippy 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      That's right, new Fujicolor 200 is just Kodak Gold 200 repackaged

    • @KarlBaron
      @KarlBaron 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      I wouldn't be surprised to hear that Instax outsells 35mm film

  • @ihspan6892
    @ihspan6892 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

    I love there is no background music. Very well done, very informative!

  • @bartvandenpoel8568
    @bartvandenpoel8568 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Brilliant long form video.Thanks for all the effort making it!

  • @nwestark
    @nwestark 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    I think another major turning point is when Fuji replaced Kodak's 35mm splicers and chemicals in both of Walmart's cine labs in the early 90's. They later replaced all the printers and cutters as well.

  • @Sir_Uncle_Ned
    @Sir_Uncle_Ned 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +8

    Fujifilm really managed to diversify at the right time, finding new uses for things they were already doing as film started to decline. It's quite remarkable.
    The Kodak branding is still around, and they are still making some film, but the company itself is just a shell of what it once was.

  • @zomgneedaname
    @zomgneedaname 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Learned more from this one video than years at Business school. nice work John.
    It seems to me that Fujifilm had a CEO and leadership team where committed to keeping the company alive and in one piece, whereas the (i'm guessing) Harvard MBA type CEOs that ran Kodak in it's final years just did the 'maximise shareholder value' mantra that is taught in B-school, and sold off whichever parts of the business which was profitable for a quick buck, and let the rest of the company die.

  • @yorktown99
    @yorktown99 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +14

    When I was a kid, my mom gave me a long talk about the long-term importance of protecting one's earning power. She directed my attention to various adults that we knew and pointed out how they were always looking to develop their skills to increase their professional value, and thus their earning power, regardless of the large-scale changes they encountered (layoffs, divorce, etc.). The lesson holds for big firms too: focusing on one's "core competency" only works as long as the demand for that competency continues to grow. Sometimes your marketing and business development teams can grow this. Other times, a seismic shift in "how things are done" can unmake your value overnight. It's hard not to think that Kodak kept selling off its hard-earned birthright for one-time cash payments, failed to bring to market the very patents it was inventing, and repeatedly tried to focus on a familiar (but doomed to diminish) business model.

    • @MCArt25
      @MCArt25 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      "Kodak" kept selling off its cash cows because "Kodak" is just a name, a shell for investors and capital; when that shell is not profitable, you move investment and capital where it is profitable, which is what they did, and which is why Eastman exists but Kodak no longer does.

  • @tsuchan
    @tsuchan 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    I really enjoyed this story. Thanks for researching and making the video.

  • @FreeManFreeThought
    @FreeManFreeThought 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    As a photography nerd, I still shoot quite a bit of film. Fuji has been my go-to for as long as I can remember, I still keep a 6-pack of Experia 400 in my fridge for when I get the itch to go on a walk and take some pictures (even if I use my phone for anything else). It has honestly saved my ass, I lost a bunch of photos due to a *ehem* technical failure, but all the photos taken on film survived. Kodak still produces good film, and they seem to have found a niche that works for them post bankruptcy; but fuji still is my favourite.

    • @lqr824
      @lqr824 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      If you're losing photos to technical glitch, that says more about you and your personal slopiness or stupidity than it does about issues with digital. Since the 90s I've had all my photos backed-up off site. No house fire or robbery could cost me my digital photos (which were then scans of film, which I typically then threw away).

  • @SuperIrish
    @SuperIrish 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    As an avid film photographer I really love how this covers the business and technology side of their histories. You could say the Kodak of today has started to follow suit, as while they are still one of the largest film producers (some think they are even covering the production lines for the cheaper Fujifilm films in the US), they have also started marketing their film-developed tech for other uses. For example, Kodak's ESTAR base is now similarly marketed as the FUJITAC base was during Fuji's marketing diversification drive.
    The transition from Film to Digital toppled many giants of the film and camera industry - Konica and Minolta fell in the 2000's by sticking to film (and some other bad investment directions, like pushing APS), whilst other 'Technology-first' companies like Sony mopped up afterwards and became big names in the photography industry with their CMOS sensors and Mirrorless cameras. I'd love to read (or watch!) your take on it!

  • @ytskt
    @ytskt 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    One of the best one on this channel!
    Loved it.

  • @JM_2019
    @JM_2019 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Really nice video! Ironically my first digital camera was a Kodak in 2003 and now I'm heavily invested in the Fujifilm X-System.

    • @Frank-gr7rb
      @Frank-gr7rb 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Fujifilm nailed it with the retro compact mirrorless

  • @ecerulean
    @ecerulean 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    Sounds about right... I worked at Fuji's North American HQ for 7 years after getting out of college. There was so much hype about all the stuff they were diversifying into, especially the medical areas, and even working on an ebola vaccine. Alas they had gotten rid of the blimp by the time I had started working there, most of my old timer coworkers had gotten a chance to ride in it. They also cut a lot of sponsorships with the 2008 recession, which was when I was hired. According to company lore, they had always wanted to sponsor a rollercoaster in the Japan section of Epcot, but due to Disney's prior sponsorship agreements with Kodak it was a no-go.

  • @qtrfoil
    @qtrfoil 6 หลายเดือนก่อน

    This is SO well done. I'm still *carefully* working my way through 500 rolls of RDP III in my freezer. Worth mentioning that Fujifilm's digital cameras are thriving, if anything, in a market in which many other traditional players are flat at very best, and some gone entirely. In part that success is due to the fantastic "color science" in the Fuji system - and that system was developed by the only one of the camera manufacturers who had any experience in photographic chemistry.

  • @Aikurisu
    @Aikurisu 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Very informative as always, mate! Even if Kodak was a much more prominent face around here in Australia, (at least in my neck of the woods), it's sad seeing former franchise pillars from my childhood disappear and I'm glad Fuji managed to survive. It's amazing what the latter has managed to branch off into and I hope they're successful for many more decades to come.

  • @johnkaplun9619
    @johnkaplun9619 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Kodak still makes film in Rochester. I applied for a job and got the tour, it's an amazing place. Extremely smart people and impressive knowledge of the process. Sadly it looks like fuji is discontinuing their last remaining film lines and sell rebranded (get this) Kodak film now.

  • @Sacto1654
    @Sacto1654 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +9

    I think Kodak missed a gigantic chance by dismissing the digital imaging business. They could have invested the big money into digital imaging devices, and could have been a huge player in selling digital image sensors for devices like cell phones. It could have been Kodak, not Sony, that would be providing 8, 12 and eventually 48 megapixel sensors for the Apple iPhone in the last 10 years.

    • @davidb2206
      @davidb2206 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Should have been Kodak on top of the digital image market. Should have never licensed or sold any of the patents to the Japanese. Do what the Japanese do to the rest of the world. Make them buy the U.S.-made product.

    • @filanfyretracker
      @filanfyretracker 2 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@davidb2206 Unfortunately, Wall Street has a one quarter mind. If its not useful with in a quarter its of no use at all, I think short term thinking over long term longevity has caused a lot of dumb decisions in US business since at least the 1980s.

  • @GrigoriyBabenko
    @GrigoriyBabenko 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Дякую за інформативне та корисне відео. Дуже гарна та вичерпна подача матеріалу.

  • @alistairmcelwee7467
    @alistairmcelwee7467 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    You live through these eras of massive change, such as, for me, the ‘70s to the present, but you’re a consumer so you don’t really know what’s going on. Thanks for clearing this up! Good video.

  • @Funlu
    @Funlu 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    I had the kodak home printer that you could dock with a digital camera. I think one cartridge got you like five photos and they were pretty overpriced. It's pretty smart that they figured out how to repurpose the raw materials and byproducts into other products..

  • @5anjuro
    @5anjuro 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    Would be cool if Fujifilm or Canon made a modular sensor+DSP unit in the form-factor of a 35mm film roll or frame insert, so users could convert their vintage cameras into digital ones.

  • @evenzero
    @evenzero 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Videos like this are what set this channel apart, pls keep making them 🙏

  • @weedmanwestvancouverbc9266
    @weedmanwestvancouverbc9266 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +38

    I can shed some light on why Kodak producing lot of patents around digital technology but seldom beyond that. They had a way of incentivize an engineer's they're in their company which was very similar to it Polaroid and a few other media companies. Like today at Google they have a way of starting projects that never come to a fruition.
    One of the first companies to produce a full-frame digital camera was Kyocera with their Contax N1. They thought they had it made, with their Partnership of with Carl Zeiss of Germany. The Contax name is venerated anyway very few names are in a certain industry. What sank them was pure hubris. All these people they could have gotten to migrate to the new camera but were hobbled by a new lens mount. Looking at Nikon, that's another company that got sunk through hubris. However, even their oldest AI lenses still work on their most modern digital cameras. If you want a modern riches to rags story, going to Nikon and how the threw away their lead as an industry leader in photography.

    • @lqr824
      @lqr824 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

      Nikon was sunk, I think, by Canon's invention and patent of silent, strong, slow ultrasonic motors for autofocus. I believe Nikon had 75% of the pro market in 1985 before those were introduced in 1987. After a decade Canon was at 90% of the pro market. Rarely has an entire market leadership changed so phenomenally. Even when other makes started using ultrasonic motors in the late 90s I think they were paying huge royalties to Canon for the license.
      Canon then was beat by Sony, Nikon, and even Fuji into high-quality non-SLR cameras, though Canon dominated the market for non-pro non-SLRs. Canon also was late with in-body image stablization (IBIS) and had worse sensors for several years. They finally played catch-up 2019-2021 and with the introduction of the R5 now had probably the best camera/lens system again, for the first time since about 2015 when their old SLR line started being eclipsed by non-SLRs.

    • @poppinc8145
      @poppinc8145 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      You state they had incentives for innovation at some point but later didn't, but you don't elaborate how or what that is. This comment feels rather ironic in that sense; feels like we're missing something lol.

    • @GatorWinup
      @GatorWinup 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +7

      Interesting thread. There is a disconnection between what a company can do and what a company should do next. The decision makers look at profitability as the drive. But because profitability measures only what has already happened, it is a very bad indicator of what will happen next. This is why Kodak failed and the strategy of diversification (hedging) by Fujifilm worked. Fujifilm knew the market was changing and it had to find another way to make profit. The engineers of these companies had figured out what the next generation products could be (as described in their patents) -- but to make them in large scale requires capital investment by the company (so the numbers are always negative in the first few years). This was why the long term games could seem surprising afterwards. Same stories for Xerox, IBM, Blockbuster, etc. They all missed what they could have done by focusing on existing profitability and eventually lost golden opportunities.

    • @weedmanwestvancouverbc9266
      @weedmanwestvancouverbc9266 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @poppinc8145 if you look into Tom scholz of Boston, he detailed some of the inner workings at Polaroid and how their corporate culture stymied innovation

    • @triode1212
      @triode1212 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      The Contax N1 was a 35mm film camera not a digital camera. Contax never made a full frame (35mm) digital SLR camera.

  • @rafski123
    @rafski123 ปีที่แล้ว +13

    I would love to shoot a roll of Kodak's kodachrome film, but sadly I don't think there are any labs around that can process that film. Irony is that Fuji's high end X-Series digital cameras have a simulation for this film called Classic Chrome. I do also recall that when Trump was president there was a big talk that Kodak would copy Fuji's medical business and somehow do something in that space, but guess that was all talk. Oh, and the museum in Tokyo's Fuji HQ is wonderful, showing many of the historical cameras and how much they love the idea of taking pictures.

    • @weedmanwestvancouverbc9266
      @weedmanwestvancouverbc9266 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      As professional photographer from the late 80s to the early 2000s, Kodachrome was my go-to for image fidelity. Wii sensors like Fujifilm gfx series of cameras, you can now mimic the look of Kodachrome film on these large format sensors. Some of my favourite images I took were off of 70 mm film I got from a friend who worked at a film studio who would save up little pieces of film that were not useful for motion picture camera, but we're fine for a 250 frame Hasselblad magazine.

    • @jasonosmond6896
      @jasonosmond6896 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

      No one develops Kodachrome any more, but Ektachrome is still sold and developed.

    • @weedmanwestvancouverbc9266
      @weedmanwestvancouverbc9266 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      I also have a big Fuck You for Hasselblad and how they went and screwed over all the people that bought their film equipment and made sure that you had to buy new lenses for it. Great way to get adoption for your new standard

    • @mecon92
      @mecon92 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Mama don't take my kodachrome

    • @evanlevitan6835
      @evanlevitan6835 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Trump was going to make Kodak, using the national defense act, make all sorts of pharmaceutical material. Bought stock the moment he said it, it went up maybe 200%, then dumped it. Kodak turned into Carestream for digital medical Imaging and xray

  • @chuckvoss9344
    @chuckvoss9344 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    Very well done. My first camera was a 35mm Konica range finder focused camera in the early 60's. It was hard to watch kodak die.

  • @e020443
    @e020443 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Well thought out and excellently presented study -- well done!

  • @DAVID-io9nj
    @DAVID-io9nj 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    I owned a small camera store from 1996 to 2014. I can reinforce the idea that everything Kodak did was with their film segment as a priority. Their early digital products, good as they were, got little support, and little further development.

  • @PositionLight
    @PositionLight 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    People forget that Eastman Kodak spun off most of its profitable product lines into their own companies and left the debt and pension obligations on the old legacy firm's balance sheets. Those new companies like The Eastman Corporation, are still doing well and returned a lot of shareholder value.

    • @meshackgaolathe6492
      @meshackgaolathe6492 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Interesting

    • @FTW23-qq8nb
      @FTW23-qq8nb 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Was Kodak sacrificed for their successful spinoffs.

    • @PositionLight
      @PositionLight 5 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@FTW23-qq8nb Yes, over the past 20-30 years, investors have taken an increasingly dim view of internally cross-subsidized companies. If one part of a company if growing quickly and another growing slowly, the pressure has been to split them apart.

  • @wertywerrtyson5529
    @wertywerrtyson5529 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    Young people take digital photos for granted but it has been a huge change in how cameras are used. I’m young enough that digital cameras were already a thing in the mid 00s when I became an adult but old enough to have plenty of memories as a kid in the 90s of wanting to take photos and mom telling me photos are expensive and we couldn’t waste any. She would take less than 100 photos in a year on a cheap camera with no zoom or any other functions. These days you can take 100 photos in a few minutes.

  • @markkeller8915
    @markkeller8915 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    In the early 1990's I experienced first hand what you excellent video portrayed-- Fuji was in love with the magic of photography and could be seen and felt. Fuji's advertising collateral, textured surface finishes on their products, and personally their photographic Papers and Fujitrans high contrast emulsions reflected this passion. Kodak papers and Duratrans printing film were inconsistent over 25 prints of the same neg.
    I owned and worked in photographic printing and photography business from 1988 to 2002. Making color prints of marble for architectural bid packages revealed a major difference in Kodak Paper and Fuji. In the marble and granite quarry's, no standard names exists for marble and granite products I was told by one architectural firm. In highrise buildings, only the common areas receive surface treatments, marble flooring, elevator facades, and exterior skins. Textiles to some degree were part the need for exact color prints of surface materials. In order for accurate bids from major contractors, they needed accurate depictions of material colors. I photographed and printed these material samples and provided critical color match 8 x 10 prints to include in all bid packages, typically 25 sets. As these were full frame close ups, with Bronica 6x7 camera and PG 110 mm Bronica flat field lens, printing from Durst enlarger and rodenstock lenses, the detail and color match were my product, and all the chemistry control monitoring with a Colenta RT processors, start to finish I dialed in my controls. To me, everything Kodak did had a "profit" first stigma, and quality enough to meet margins, which left a bad taste in my mouth.

  • @Xeonerable
    @Xeonerable 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    I feel like I'm lucky as a millennial (and that feeling does NOT happen often) to have experienced both film cameras and the rise of digital ones. When you think about it, the progression of old physical film took so long and then semiconductors and chip fabrication came around and basically pimp slapped it into submission and took over.

  • @feelincrispy7053
    @feelincrispy7053 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    I feel as though we as humans have lost so many digital photos due to corruption, lost or forgotten tiny SD’ cards, broken or formatted phones ect. Film never really got lost being a physical medium or destroyed unless being completely careless. I’ve got my grandpa’s 1060s -70s vacation negatives and rolls in my drawer and they arnt going anywhere. I hope we get back to using film just like books that are a timeless invention

    • @glennoc8585
      @glennoc8585 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      I sort of agree with you about having the physical medium but with digital it's easy to back up to a cloud in real time and also copy to a backup drive or DVD/Bluray disc.

    • @baobaolovely
      @baobaolovely 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      Print them. I select the best photos to print and keep the hard copy.

    • @glennoc8585
      @glennoc8585 7 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

      @@baobaolovely yeah I used to do that but with film you pay for those photos you would otherwise delete on digital format. I still print some photos for my albums but I like to know I've got backups in case of fire. I had a relative lose photos and negatives from generations it was devastating for them. I'd advise people that shoot with film to scan their negs over onto a cloud just incase

    • @davidb2206
      @davidb2206 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Wonder if this is going to make it harder for historians and researchers 100 years from now? How much digital will be lost? Or no machines to convert the medium, like with old disks, VHS, and 8-tracks now?

    • @baobaolovely
      @baobaolovely 7 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@glennoc8585 agree, I take all photos from film camera from the 90s and store on SD and HardDisk.I have both soft and hard copies.

  • @svenllr
    @svenllr 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    My first digital camera was a Kodak DC-280 in 2000. I loved it. When it was time to upgrade, Kodak's offering was lackluster compared to the competition so I purchased a Canon PowerShot G2 instead. It's too bad, Kodak played a large part of my life with its film and I was hoping that it would have been part of my digital life, too.

  • @davidk8184
    @davidk8184 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    This was an very interesting subject this week. Well done.

  • @bbirda1287
    @bbirda1287 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

    Sometimes in a race it's better to run in 2nd place until the last lap, so you can ration your energy for that final push. It's hard to see your competition from the front.

    • @serafinacosta7118
      @serafinacosta7118 8 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Émerson Fittipaldi, the former Formula One racecar driver , in his winning years, was known for running behind the lead racers.
      He certainly did not always have the best car setup to lead a race wire to wire. So he waited in the wings , at the top pack , gambling that others would end up with car trouble as they did.
      He then would close out winning the race. Not the fastest, but the savvy .

  • @centillionandone
    @centillionandone 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    "survived"
    in 2019 a 3 pack of 35mm 36 exposure superia 400 cost $9.99 at B&H
    currently (June 2023) is is listed as discontinued on the B&H (this stock's discontinuation is not confirmed it is just listed as that on B&H) but a few months ago I saw it at around $30
    I don't heavily use film, its mostly an expensive novelty to me, its just fun using the different more mechanical equipment, creating a heavily stylized image only possible through film but every year there is more pushback in terms of price. The camera market has its own issues with a large switchup in the asking price of anything still working, I believe that this is largely due to film photography becoming "trendy" with celebrities and it trickling down. Though this does support the film industry and gives new life to cameras that would have been sitting on shelves. I think because of price increases I might just switch to exclusively black and white film for the foreseeable future where the budget options hover around $5 for a roll of 36 35mm frames or a roll of 120, Fujifilm does not offer any black and white only budget options. It is a real shame that I didn't get into photography before Fuji discontinued their FP-100 peel apart film, though I recommend to any photographer to do a psychological evaluation first before purchasing large format equipment. 15:19 I have to commend the Fuji higher ups to committing to preserving legacy photography, it may be niche but I believe film still has much artistic value, the future of film seems rocky but maybe one day it will get better, Ricoh - Pentax announced that they are working on a completely new point and shoot camera with even potentially more complex models in the future.
    "I haven't forgotten what you've told me boss, we have no tomorrow but there's still hope for the future. In our struggle to survive the present we push the future further away. Will I see it in my lifetime? Probably not, which means there's no time to waste. Someday the world will no longer need us, no need for the [camera], or the hand to pull the [shutter release]. I have to drive out this demon inside me, build a better future. That's what I, hmm, what 'we' will leave as our legacy. Another mission, right boss?" - Venom Snake
    Thank you @Asianometry for covering another topic I hold dear

    • @glenyoung1809
      @glenyoung1809 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      Never write off a technology just because it’s not ‘current’ or trendy.
      How many people wrote off the archaic phonograph record format, some saying digital will always be superior.
      Only to find that the vinyl record’s popularity are actually growing again and so are sales of record players!
      How many audiophiles trashed their expensive record collections in favor of CD’s?
      The same goes for the old 1960s-1970s vacuum tube stereo amplifiers and stereo components which many are now saying give a much ‘warmer’ sound.
      I think an equilibrium will be reached between digital and analog technologies.
      Phone cameras are very easy to use, quick and very convenient but they’re also very easy to misuse if you’re looking for high quality or artistic work.
      There are many digital professionals who are now pickup up old analog cameras precisely because of the quality they can yield.
      The trade off is skill, high artistic quality requires skill and practice something most amateurs by definition don’t have and which digital can’t easily replace with in-built ‘settings’ or fancy AI driven fake images.

  • @dummatube
    @dummatube 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    My company ‘David Myers & Associates’ was the very first Digital Photographic Imaging Systems retailer in Australia in the early 90’s. We sold Kodak and Fujifilm $30,000+ dye sublimation photo quality digital printers, scanners and cameras. I can only say, “Guess which brand needed the most repairs and service calls?”

  • @camfocus8888
    @camfocus8888 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Best video I watched this year so far! Thank you!

  • @PhD777
    @PhD777 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    Fujifilm's 35mm film had very vibrant, saturated color, but Kodak had unsurpassed slide film that digital still can not touch and rich, more natural color print film... so very sad they're gone. (Agfa fell somewhere in-between.)

    • @frequentlycynical642
      @frequentlycynical642 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      When Fuji came out with Velvia many decades ago, photographers loved that unnatural saturation. The counterpoint was that it was exactly that, unnatural.

  • @Erik-gg2vb
    @Erik-gg2vb 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +13

    Kodak's manufacturing technique for film has just been covered in a 2 part 120 min you tube by Smarter Everyday. I watched them both last month. He also stated business is picking up with movie makers opting for the look of film over their digital counterparts.

    • @Sacto1654
      @Sacto1654 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +5

      But it will still stay a niche business because there are so few film-process labs still available in 2023. Director Christopher Nolan had to spend a gigantic fortune to get both color and black and white IMAX size film stock for _Oppenheimer_ , something that most filmmakers can no longer afford to do.

    • @lqr824
      @lqr824 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

      That's BS. You can achieve "the look of film" with digital filters.

    • @poppinc8145
      @poppinc8145 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@lqr824 I'm sure that has its limits where the look varies by the software brand used.

    • @pbjandahighfive
      @pbjandahighfive 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@lqr824 No, you actually can't and there are physical reasons why. You can get a close approximation, but you cannot perfectly emulate actual film in digital.

    • @pbjandahighfive
      @pbjandahighfive 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@Sacto1654 Kodak does more than just film these days, they also produce pharmaceutical materials, production of various chemicals, printed circuit boards, aerial imaging, sell process monitoring analytics software, custom material coatings and fabric inks. They got out of bankruptcy back in 2013 and have been a pretty steady business since with their diversified offerings.

  • @lucashinch
    @lucashinch 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Thanks for the great video! excellent work.

  • @mikekemsley1531
    @mikekemsley1531 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +1

    I worked at a K14/E6 lab back in the 80's. Back then it was Kodachrome vs Velvia. Velvia pretty much won hands down. It was a moot point as digital was just around the corner. My boss who designed all the processors had already written off silver and was deep into digital.

  • @dennis8196
    @dennis8196 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    It kind of helps to have your fingers in more markets thank your competitors. Fuji only needed to pick up the phone and ask for money from a motorcycle and car division to boost the kitty for the shareholders benefit.

  • @EyesOfByes
    @EyesOfByes 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    I brought a single-use film camera to a party trip with my friend back in 2005. Viewing the pictures after coming home is priceless. We had no idea what we'd find. Me chugging a redbull can. Not just the liquid. The whole f*cking can stuffed.

  • @jrherita
    @jrherita 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    This is an amazing rundown on the two companies. Thank you.

  • @davidluftig4644
    @davidluftig4644 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Great video and history, very comprehensive! Thank you. Another "simple" explanation of Kodak's failure is: (This was told to me by a friend who had been an engineer of some kind at Kodak)...Kodak used professional photographer's as advisor's and they consistently said the the "image" quality wasn't "good enough". That's the jist... the correct mind set was the image quality once it got to 1.4 megapixels was "good enough". . . for the typical amateur. . . who is only taking "snap" shots and printing 4x5, 4x6 prints...or who doesn't even need the print. That mindset of "good enough" made the Sony Mavecia a monster hit...using a "floppy disk" as the memory "card". It, the Mavecia , promptly put Poloroid out of business. I worked in a camera store/film developing during the transition and saw this first hand. Also I studied "History of Sociology and Science" at U. of Pennsylvania and am versed in the basic history of the industrial revolution from the beginning to this day...one of the themes is that there are always "new developments" /technologies/"ways of doing things" that "destroy" the previous business leaders...always. It is rare for an established "large" business to "transition".
    This documentary has the insightful point that the company was able to identify its root as technology company vs an "imaging or "photographic" and painfully get through the transition to great success. BTW an example of "successful" transition from a "cash cow" to another business is Steve Jobs being able to stop the development of the Ipod and put all the effort into the Iphone.

  • @tamninja
    @tamninja 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    One thing special about Fuji is how she targets a small niche market to stay alive. If you can’t fight the giants, just avoid them
    Even for their X series cameras, the selling point is the old dials and film simulation which the big three brands refuses to do. That’s how she survive and now Fuji is gaining market share

    • @petesmitt
      @petesmitt 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      Fuji is a she? whodathunk it..

    • @tamninja
      @tamninja 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      ​@@petesmitt Those with a name but no inherent gender (countries, companies, boats etc.) usually use the feminine pronoun

    • @petesmitt
      @petesmitt 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

      @@tamninja
      nope.. just 'they' does it, no gender for a company; boats, churches and countries traditionally use the feminine pronoun.

    • @tamninja
      @tamninja 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

      @@petesmitt ah thanks!

  • @wv_
    @wv_ 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +4

    There is some irony here in that Fujifilm is whithering away in the film industry and Kodak is becoming a monopoly after years of underinvestment where Fuji is no longer able to produce film and now has to sell Kodak film packaged as Fujifilm

  • @DataWaveTaGo
    @DataWaveTaGo 9 หลายเดือนก่อน

    Asianometry = excelence every time. Thank you!

  • @iggytse
    @iggytse 8 หลายเดือนก่อน +2

    I remember doing my 3 month backpacking trip to USA, Europe and Japan. I assumed I could easily get Fuji Film in the USA just like in Sydney Australia. I was wrong. Kodak was very dominant.

  • @yackawaytube
    @yackawaytube 9 หลายเดือนก่อน +3

    That was a Kodak moment.