The Decline of Kodak...What Happened?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 12 มิ.ย. 2018
- The name Kodak was once synonymous with cameras and film. They were innovators in the industry and the leaders of it for 100 years. Yet a few years ago they experienced such a decline that they were forced into bankruptcy. This video explores the decline of Kodak and attempts to explain what happened to them.
Twitter: / mikecompany17
Patreon: / companyman
Website: companyman.squarespace.com
Recent Video: Beanie Babies: • The Beanie Babies Fad ...
Other Company Declines:
Kmart: • The Decline of Kmart.....
Blockbuster: • The Decline of Blockbu...
RadioShack: • The Decline of RadioSh...
Solo Cups: • The Decline of Solo......
Toys "R" Us: • The Decline of Toys R ...
hhgregg: • The Decline of hhgregg...
Pan Am: • The Decline of Pan Am....
ESPN: • The Decline of ESPN......
Gibson: • The Decline of Gibson....
iHeartMedia: • The Decline of iHeartM...
Bon-Ton: • The Decline of Bon-Ton...
Intro Made By - / @jombo1
My uncle started working at Kodak at age 19, and retired after 40+ years. He still talks about how they were an employee friendly company and really took care of their people.
Rochester never really recovered after Kodak and Xerox went under. Its honestly kind of sad the impact it had on such a small city. Imagine how much different the place would be if they had embraced the digital technology early on and made Rochester and the fingerlakes the Silicon Valley
@@teddycourtney5692 Everytime I go visit family and friends in Rochester I can't help but grieve over how much has changed. Kodak Park was demolished a few years ago. The city's heartbeat is barely there anymore.
Yeah, they had a whole building just for employees to relax in their headquarters
They helped build Rochester.
@@teddycourtney5692Xerox is still around. Kodak too, but they are barely relevant nowadays.
I worked for Kodak Business Imaging Division for 18 years. Kodak declined when started been run by MBAs instead of engineers. The digital technology that eventually led to their demise, Kodak had it first, but decided NOT to develop it because it was addicted to the profit margins generated by the rolls of films and chemicals and were afraid of losing that margin to digital products.
American corporate philosophy is to focus on the next quarter results and maximize stock option values to the the company officers. Long term view is seldom considered because lots of CEO knows that 5 years from now, they be doing something else.
I so agree with what you said. This is true of almost any company. CEOs are only thinking of short term gains. There are few businesses that consider a 5 or 10 year plan.
True
Aircraft, automobile and tech companies always decline when they let hedge fund managers, accountants and MBAs takeover from engineers...
I've been in journalism for a couple of decades. We shifted from promoting our publishers from the journalism ranks to promoting them from the marketing ranks. Thank God THAT hasn't backfired on us yet. 🤣
I could not agree more. When Kodak had CEOs that came up from the Technical side of the business, they did well. As soon as they hired non technical CEO's and turned the company over to MBA's from the Simon School, the end was near.
I'm currently working at a small commercial darkroom. We rely heavily on Kodak chemistry, which to this day is still some of the cheapest (if not the cheapest) around. True as it is that Kodak failed to adapt - one thing they did not do, and so far have not done, is neglect their base. To this day they are still pumping out the chemicals that you would find in nearly every darkroom around the world. They have made huge sacrifices to be able to provide what little of their product is still in demand.
Are you out of your mind? Kodak stopped making darkroom papers way too early and discontinued product after product after product with little or NO warning. They put a a big middle finger up to their traditional base. They made it very plain to all of us we didn't matter to them anymore. Illford ,on the other hand made it very plain to us we mattered to them and that they were dedicated to traditional silver based photography. Now that it's making a comeback, I encourage everyone to remember who was stabbed us in the back (Kodak) and who didn't (Illford) and make your purchases accordingly.
noneof yourbusines their business setup may had made it hard for them to keep supplying all the products they once did. Sometimes big companies can't afford to turn the spigot down and instead have to turn it off, which in turn may cause people like yourself some issues. I think Kodak had some tough choices to make but made them half heartedly which in turn cost them. No matter what, Kodak was destined to see revenue reduced because film was for the most part on its way out.
....STILL DUMPING ALL OF THOSE FUCKING-CHEMICALS DOWN THE DRAIN FOR SOMEONE ELSE TO DEAL WITH....WHAT A GREAT WAY TO LIVE....MOTHER-EARTH LOVES YOUR ASS....
@@donaldpedigo296 you do know that film chemicals are recycled, right?
@@donaldpedigo296 Apparently you don't have much contact with contemporary darkroom technology. First of all fixer is taken to a recycler so that the silver can be reclaimed (at least in B&W technology) and the rest are designed (for the most part) to become inert when mixed together prior to being disposed of (nearly certain that at least Ilford chemistry is this way). You might in addition try to not shout -- this kind of already accentuates the message that you are conveying -- IE -- Lack of knowledge...
My father worked for Kodak (Recordak previously). They treated their employees incredibly well. He had a great retirement plan, a bonus every year (in the 60s his bonus was about 1k which was A LOT of money). When they moved out of Manhattan up to Rochester, he retired early. They gave him a full retirement plan even though he wasn't eligible for it. He got jobs at Kodak for numerous people and most of them spent their entire careers there.
Great video, I think I get the picture now.
FutureNow lol
FutureNow lol
TURBO BACON ikr
Camera company goes out of business due to lack of focus, makes sense.
Lucas Bowering lol
well. i guess you could say that Kodak had its moment...
couldn't of said better myself, and I remember that campaign
It’s a Kodak moment yuh bought it cuz I want it yuh
i got pubs. that's a kodak moment!!
They tried suing a youtuber called Kodak wk so that they could get money.
👏👏👏
funny how kodak was assimilated to one of Philippine's local languages. when we say take picture we say " kodaki" and the person who takes photo is a " kodaker"
I'm a Filipino, I have heard nobody said that what the hell are you on about?
I am a filipino and I approve this. This is common among Visayan languages. Kodaki means take a picture
@@yi_hou3092 cebuano does
@@umbrellawitch504 there's even a song from song from Yoyoi Villame "Mr kodaker" are you a bisaya bro?
@@sushitraxh6736 yes im bisaya!
From what I've heard, Kodak was a wonderful company to work for back in its heyday. Great benefits and pay, and a real sense of community.
EVERY company was a terrific place to work until legions of MBA's came into the workplace and made it 110% about money, and saving every last nickle. Business used to be fun (I mean really, really fun), but after 2000, the game changed to "Save money, save money". Bad deal.
@@rds990 this
Weird calendar though
@@rds990 yeah and another big change for the worse in business was all of these private equity firms taking public companies private and then trying to make them slightly more profitable QUARTER BY QUARTER so they could flip them and make a quick buck. Totally shortsighted with no interest in the company's future because they just want to pump up the value and sell it, or just loot its assets and dissolve the company. When this started happening around 2000, a lot of companies became terrible to work for. Real Office Space kinda stuff...
@@rds990 I completely agree with you: just look at Boeing yesterday and today!
As a Rochester, NY native and son of a (former) senior Kodak engineer this one was close to home. My dad worked in the medical device division (x-ray equipment and portable x-rays). Luckily his division was bought out and is now owned by Carestream Health.
I live in Rochester also! (well, outside the suburbs of rochester)
Useless information I could of done without.
then just scroll past it?
I live in Buffalo
yo Alex........'have'
You left out one of their biggest sectors; film (as in movies).
Kodak's big bucks was made in not selling consumers a 4 pack of 24 frames of film, but in selling movie/tv/ad studios film by the millions of frames.
A typical theatrical film would require something in the range of $50k in film (90s). That is the cost today of a whole Red Camera package with lenses.
It was right around when they went bankrupt that digital movies quality cameras and projectors started to dominate.
That's really interesting, thanks
Nice insight.
Thats a really really good point. A lot of people forget how much money bigger companies make from Business to Business (B to B) sales. I mean Kodak alone handled at one point multiple types of commercial printing services (for signage and such), as you mentioned TV and Movie film and tech, medical imaging , and much more. The consumer side of things was still a big part of Kodak's revenue, but it wasn't all of it.
IMAX cameras are made by Kodak
Exactly! Digital quality for film(as in movies) was garbage in 2002 and the film makers and studios that wanted to use Digital were laughed at because of it. But the quality just kept getting better and better year after year and way more affordable and easier to work with than film.
Still there are movie makers fighting to keep the film industry alive but it's become a very hard fight. In my opinion film still has a much better quality than digital.
I believe the quick growth of digital in the movie industry vs the passion some people in the movie industry still had/have for film was a major reason Kodak didn't see digital being the future. The rapid growth of the digital technology and the rapid abandonment of film especially for movies/tv caught them off guard.
Just think, most older people, like me, has most of their whole life's memories captured by Kodak.
I was born in 1992. I remember Kodak still being relevant until around the Great Recession-same thing with Sears and Kmart.
J. Garner born in 1993 and I remember Kodak being huge and CONWAY was still around
Kodak is like Blockbuster and Toys R Us. Although it failed to keep up with market trends and is irrelevant nowadays, it's a very nostalgic part of many people's childhoods.
Yep
Remember those horrible 'soft focus ' photos made with a fixed lens instamatic camera - until the Japanese camera industry set us free.
Rochester NY native here. Kodak was truly a titan of it's industry and was a crown jewel of a city. As the vid said don't look at how the company fell, look at how it led an industry for a hundred years. Many people I know made good stable livings working for Kodak. One monumentally bad business decision may have brought down a giant but that giant made and strengthened families and a countries economy for a hundred years. how many companies can say that?
Exactly. I grew up in Irondequoit. My dad spent over 35 years at Kodak. They were good for Rochester
Not only were they great for the city of Rochester itself, but also for the Rochester Institute of Technology.
But they were naive in not thinking about change in the innovation. And ignoring the changes that were happening around them. They should've considered about all the possible outcomes in the future and should've been ready about them. I think their board of management was a bit too naive and that they should've have changed to a new CEO or something like that if that was the case.
Kodak helped Rochester grow and I would always ask my dad why was Kodak so big and what happened. Remember Friendly’s, it also was a good for Rochester but it’s declining and I want a vid on it
That was the problem, they changed to a CEO who was let go from HP and he wanted to show the world that he could beat HP in making printers. People still can't figure out why the board went along with him.@@varunthoudam
There was also a very expensive lawsuit they lost to Polaroid.
josephgioielli shake it like a Polaroid picture.
Wich would also be a very interesting subject (Polaroid, that is). They were huge in their market segment, lost it all in very much the same way as Kodak did, but the product survived by a group of former employees taking the gamble and buying the old machinery to keep producing the film. And they recently re-aquired the Polaroid name to put on their products.
True for copying instant Photography and now Fuji is doing the same thing on Polaroid.
And now Polaroid sells cheap phones, though I ignore if their sales are good. Still, a clamshell phone sounds good for a backup phone.
The lawsuit was definitely a decline for Kodak, but it started before that. Kodak made several bad decisions over decades, starting in the late 40's. They praised their film and development of film so heavily, it clouded a lot of their judgment. Starting with the reverse engineering of Polaroid cameras and getting slapped with patent infringement, and then anti-trust lawsuits for the processing of film. They invented the TWAIN driver, for which they didn't think it was an important enough technology that they didn't even name it, let alone come up with a name for it. TWAIN stands for Technology Without An Important/Interesting Name. Their feeling towards digital photography was just another bad decision. Kodak is not riddled by just 1 or 2 blunders. It spans decades of numerous poor decisions.
In the early 90's, I loved those "disposable" cameras made my Kodak that came with 27 or so pic that you'd take then drop off at Walgreens/CVS to get developed in an hour. It was always fun to see how the pics would turn out that you took, especially if it was some party where the camera was passed around. It seemed more genuine than digital pictures cause you couldn't look at it immediately then just take another if you didn't like the way the first one looked. What you got was what you got. It was like buying baseball cards. A lot weren't all that great so the good ones really stood out.
I remember my frustration to, when I going with school student exchange program most of my pictures are not developed or our we say burned negative what a sad time.
Remember the waterproof ones encased in a clear plastic shell that you could take underwater pics with? Seemed so cool at the time. I miss those days of being easily impressed and amused by technology, especially the early internet. I may have only connected at 14.4kbs and the web was a lot smaller and just one of many online services (I was really into Usenet, and may have been the only person who actually used Gopher, which was already outdated by 1995) but it was so radically new that it felt like magic. Everything now just feels like an incremental upgrade on what came before it, evolutionary but not REVOLUTIONARY.
Yeah, and helped fill the landfills with the empties, nice going Kodak.
When I worked at Kmart in 1985-1989 if you didn't like all of the pictures you could get a 6c refund on those. No, it wasn't a complete refund but it kept people buying film and getting it developed through Kmart. (The markup easily covered the difference.)
@@russellhamner4898 I worked in a camera store / lab and we HATED those waterproof disposables. They were a serious PIA to take apart. Esp the Fuji ones.
In my country, people above 30 still use "Kodak" as a word for taking a picture.
Eg. "That bird is beautiful, let me kodak it real quick."
Are you from Bermuda
I live in Rochester, NY (the place kodak is based in) and although the main business of Kodak is disappearing, the museums (mainly George Eastman's house) are still pretty popular as tourism spots and a fun activity for a day out with friends. I'm not sure how profitable they are, but they are pretty cool
Sageth Did going there give you a *Kodiak moment*
I live in Rochester also! (well, outside the suburbs of rochester)
Sageth I live in the WNY area, maybe those museums would be a good day trip
My favourite band is from Rochester and has made reference to Kodak a few times in their visual stuff (album covers, etc). It's pretty cool.
Jaspirita what band is that
Growing up in Rochester in the '90s meant having Kodak's decline be constantly around you in some way or another. You always heard about people getting laid off, family bitching about the management, what new business they're trying now. Many of the Boomers have stories about the days when just about anybody could get work there. Kodak ruled our economy in the '70s, and Eastman was a philanthropist that really did a lot of good for the city. There's the school of music that's very respected and a school of dentistry, both bearing his name. I forgot about Strong, but there's the Strong museum and Strong hospital. The neighborhood where Eastman lived is full of stately houses and is really beautiful. Many now I think are split into rentals or condos. Outsiders get a good chuckle when they hear Kodak these days, but it's something much more than a flopped company if you grew up in its hometown.
I love working with some of the old school kodak people who are ancient as hell an just running shit. I had one old boss who used to be an engineer at kodak, not just him but everyone I encounter that used to work for kodak are vary intellectual and empathetic. Rochester an a lot of western NY (not Bataviva/Holley/Albion/Kendall and Attica) is an amazing and enriching place to be able to grow up in/around and be able to call home.... while I'm at it, garbage plates and zweigles are the fucking best!
Kodak did leave an optics legacy. A lot of small optics company are still in Rochester. As well as the Laboratory of Laser Energetics and Institute of Optics. And one of the Phonetics Centers will be built in Rochester to. So Kodak may have dead but's investment in optics education gave Rochester a lifeline into the future. Though the city sure did take a beating. The economy is just starting to come out of it.
I went to an engineering college in upstate NY in the 70s with a lot of people from Rochester. While I wanted to head to Calif they all couldn't wait to go back to Rochester. I thought they were nuts but now understand what growing up there during the good years must have been like for them.
Didn't they have a lot of blind employees?
they tore down midtown plaza. that still breaks my heart. the fast ferry completely fucked the city and put it into massive debt.
Just wanted to say, when I am in the mood to learn something useful, I head to your Channel.. thank you for being here I have learned SO MUCH!!!👍❤️
Remember that Pitbull rhymed Kodak with "Kodak."
I worked for Kodak in the early 2000’s. It was clear to everyone at that time technology was passing us by. The company was so large and stuck the old ways of doing things that innovation was stagnant. We all saw the bankruptcy coming. While I worked in a plant that made Kodak X-ray film, it was exactly the same issue. Digital X-rays has taken over the industry.
Why did kodak discontinue echtachrome and kodochrome? I shoot analogue konica 35mm and mamiya 645 120 film and would like to see a comeback
I know echtacrome is coming back in 35mm but i wan't to shoot it in 120.
I was packaging X-ray film packets, in summer of -- 1978. I saw (in my head) the product,(s) going away. But, my managers (very old) just looked to retirement, and only wanted to hear -- produce it.
I told my story (believe me, I was young EE forming) that this will all change.
Never knew, that Kodak knew. Inside, somewhere.
And then, came the era of MBAs -- know. Everything.
Kodak phones would be interesting
nicholas kloster
It wouldn't have been to far a stretch, the problem with Kodak is that the executive management was stuck in their ways and flat out REFUSED to listen
the younger mid level management, also the shareholders should have REACTED and removed the executives. Shareholders are very culpable.
It's not a success. Already tried it.
Thomas Myers
Yes because Kodak exec management waited forever to get involved...problem with the company was rigid and unresponsive execs refusing to listen to underlings..
I wonder if Kodak would have no headphone jack and a crappy notch.
They tried phones already.
Kodak is actually making a huge comeback in recent years. Their film sales in 2019 actually surpassed their total film sales in 2011 right before they went bankrupt. Although film is only a small part of their business now, they're actually putting in the effort to revive and improve film stocks for a modern age. In contrast, their competitor Fujifilm has been slowly killing film in order to make way for high end digital cameras. Polaroid? Well they exist but their film is too pricey and quality isn't that great. They're making a comeback as well but pretty slow compared to Kodak
Sadly I do think it was just Kodak's time. Even if they had gone full digital, the revenue would had been way down since they were bound to lose the revenue from film. Digital cameras are a one and done deal with a company after all, compare to film that was a constant revenue stream.
The only thing I could think to save them is if they had invented and patented the storage method for the camera to move their profit from film to it be camera + storage medium.
The new Kodak is more a niche, which is the only way to survive if you are a 'camera' only company right now.
They tried something like that in the mid 1990s - the Advantix 24mm film format. It could, with the proper camera, record what is basically the meta-information (Time/Date, Location, exposure conditions, etc.) in a digital format. (I was running a section of a major Battery Manufacturer's R&D Lab at the time, and we were dealing with determining what trends were going to be in battery use, and determining requirements to fill these upcoming needs, and thus, how the various emerging technologies worked)
The Advantix film nearly drove us nuts - Kodak would supply cameras and samples, but no technical specs. It took a while, but were were able to determine that they'd found a way to incorporate iron oxides into the film emulsion, basically turning the film itself into a magnetic storage device.
There was no way that they could have patented the data storage - digital storage is digital storage, and handily predates the CCD Camera. It also is a on-time thing - you get the storage, you fill it up, and either print out the images, or transfer them to other storage to archive them, clear your camera storage, and fill it up again.
Data storage doesn't have the "Use It and Lose It" quality that film does.
Kodak Alaris is definitely taking advantage of the fact that film has had a rising popularity on social media. Even though film is like 2% of what the company does now more and more people are getting back into film. I don't see film dying in the near future
Kodak could of when the same route as Fujifilm and they would still have a large presence at the moment.
When is facebook gonna fail so we can see rise and fall of facebook
Hopefully soon! Since everyone's grandma is on there
Stasibook of the Stasi-media.
An American citizen, not US subject.
Hopefully not. I've been on Facebook since 2005. But it wasn't until I got a smartphone in late 2014 that I really started using it a lot. My use went up even more after the beginning of the Donald Trump campaign two years ago. For anything to happen, someone has to come up with a viable alternative. Twitter, although again my reading of it has increased recently, is not a viable alternative. Frankly I'm not sure how it took off as Facebook was already well established and Facebook does everything Twitter does.
It will happen soon. I would bet most people under 30 have moved on and are using everything else by now...Twitter, Instagram, Snapchat...
+chris corona Why does that matter? You don't have to be friends with them.
The best way I can see an alternate-universe Kodak surviving in something like its original form through the modern day would be a transition to selling digital cameras over traditional camera film, then transitioning from selling digital cameras to the consumer to selling them to smartphone companies-going from a company selling directly to the consumer to a part in other companies' assembly lines.
Yeah this would be the only way I could see them sticking around, and even then I don't think they would have lasted too long doing that either.
I beg to disagree a bit on that. I think it would have been interesting to see cameras on phones be similar to Snap Dragon. Imagine the flagship phones with flagship processors and flagship cameras. Sure Nokia tried it but it was on a Windows phone so who really gives a shit.
Film is actually making a small comeback within the photography community. Like how Polaroid disappeared and is back from a similar situation
Kodak cameras but the film is a film/digital hybrid which takes up the same space as a film canister but saves photos digitally so the storage space is ludicrous
This is the way I imagined it as well. Kodak could have embraced the industry of the digital sensor much better, and then branched into digital displays, and digital printing.
It could have definitely worked, if they had leveraged their reputation for stunning colors in the chemical photography realm, and properly transitioned that reputation into one of stunning colors from digital sensors, and stunning colors on digital displays, and digital prints, etc. etc.
With that in mind, it's not hard to imagine every cell phone having a Kodak sensor, a Kodak screen, and every 4K TV or home movie projector having Kodak technology in it.
But the company was just too heavily invested in film itself, despite the truth in the assertion that they had built their reputation on visual memories. Indeed, they had "Kodak Moments", and their ability to create precious memories was entrenched in pop culture, from Calvin & Hobbes to Paul Simon. (Bonus points if you get BOTH of my references!)
With such a huge investment tied down to physical, tangible things such as film production and chemical technology, transitioning their reputation from film to digital would have required innumerable billions of dollars in cannibalization, I bet. Exponentially bigger than Canon or Nikon's cost of transitioning from film cameras to digital cameras, or anything else in the history of photography, I bet.
In the end, Kodak was doomed to experience a massive shrinking, period. They are lucky that film photography has stayed popular at least on a small scale, and they were lucky to have owned so many patents on both film and digital technology. Otherwise, it might have been an even more complete vanishing of such a monumental company, which we all have to thank in many ways for making photography what it is today.
Two different things, one: I work at cvs and our photo department runs on kodak still. A lot of companies still do. Additionally kodak has branched out and has 26 different kodak companies, only 1 of them dealing directly with photography (kodak alaris.) At least that's what I was told by a kodak employee
I'm a year late for this particular video, but I think "Kodak" being a completely unique word was a smart move. You can't really associate it with anything else, and the brand practically becomes its own word, which basically means the company itself.
If anyone's wondering, Kodak still makes really great film and in the last couple years film sales have been on the rise. My guess is it will probably end up being like vinyl records today. Small market, but strong. I love shooting on Kodak and would recommend it even as just a fun hobby.
Logan Bush Films you sadly guessed wrong. Most of their stuff is either abandoned or was sold toMCC
Regardless of what you're talking about, they still make film and I buy from them regularly.
I've been shooting Kodak Colorplus 200, just got some Portra 400. Cant wait till they (re)release Ektachrome!
M Dat I just bought 10 rolls of color plus, I'm excited to try it out.
Yeah another film enthusiast! I was hoping to find one in here somewhere EKTACHROME 2018!
This is where the razor and blades model falters. If people don't have to go to the store routinely to replace something they need, they will do it. Cameras, electric razors, laser printers, all of these things have alternatives that don't require consumable accessories that can be up charged and can thus become more popular than alternatives with consumable accessories. It happened to Kodak, and it can happen to any other company banking on razor and blades business models. Their number one threat is market innovations.
Thank you Micheal for the insight and new perspective towards Kodak. I like your video. Well done.
Thanks Rosalina.
I bought some Kodak 35mm film the other day for an Olympus camera that I have. It's still reasonably priced at about $4.00 a roll and it's still made in the U.S.
Yea, Kodak is still kicking and they are coming out with Ektachrome. I use it every now and then and the quality is excellent. Ektar is by far my favorite.
@@UrielX1212 I've been using Kodak Gold, it gives my pictures that 80's look. Might have to try the Ektachrome when it comes out.
My favorite was Kodachrome which they no longer make nor will they ever probably.make because of the complexity of the processing when it is developed.
I use a digital camera. And photoshop the effect.
There was also the Kodak, Polaroid lawsuit, which cost both of them a lot of time and resources. Polaroid won, costing Kodak a lot of money but Polaroid is basically non-existent today.
Its actually surprising the recovery that Polaroid has made. Under the new owners Polaroid Originals has turned the corner to be a viable business. I've even seen their cameras and instant film for sale in Best Buy. And I'm told it is also available in many Barnes and Nobles and Urban Outfitters.
Please do dutch east india company video was bigger than most fortune 500 today combined
Yes Please (as an English Man)
Great idea! Now that I think about it... even I, a modern day American, am familiar with the Dutch East India Comapany. That really says a lot, doesn't it?
Man they so big, they be owning what now is the countries in some part of asia.
Evil company
The British East India Company was pretty big too. Videos on both would be fun.
ITS OFFICAL im addicted to company man videos. cannot stop learning! thank you.
"Kodak Moment" went from being a marketing phrase to a lifelong thing. It's still used today as just a thing.
Also, I prefer film cameras over digital. Digital is great for like, quick pics of things, but if you're making art or capturing moments, it takes a real artist to get that with film. where as a digital artist just snaps 1000 pics and chooses the best option, you can't do that with film. I'm not trying to say digital photographers suck, but anyone with a digital camera can market themselves as a professional, when I got married i only looked for a film photographer, someone who looks for the perfect moments, develops the pics, and then I have the negatives to use for life.
I also love my Kodak printer, HP makes cheap printers that fall apart quick but my Kodak one is top quality.
I agree, I own a digital camera for convenience but I mainly shoot on film now. Shooting on film is slow but that's exactly what gives it life. 1000 photos on my DSLR means nothing to me but a roll of Velvia 50 at the beach means life long memories.
I feel compelled to add that a great deal of Kodak’s business was amateur photographers. The processing fees on film for home pictures was huge. That is the specific market that cell phone cameras eliminated. Many professionals still use film but that is a tiny market by comparison to amateur photography.
X-ray at small businesses still sometimes have a dark room.
Small Chiropractors who take their own x rays; they are a private and a small business, not saying you are wrong or what kind film and from what company, but he used large x-ray machine it could have been at least 40 years old and an x ray room. You think he paid company to do it, no he didn't. That would have been like insurance accident patients.
That's just plain false. Plenty of professionals use film for a variety of reasons, and some still use it as their primary capture medium for large-format images. Kodachrome was discontinued because the development process is very complicated and the machinery is expensive, rare, and difficult to maintain. Once the film photography market shrunk below a certain level it was no longer enough to sustain such a large-scale industrial process. Many professionals shooting film today still use slide film developed with the much simpler E-6 process. I recently was in a meeting with representatives from both Fujifilm and Kodak and film sales have increased 15-20% per year for the last two years, as film photography has become something of a hipster fad recently. Your point that digital is superior from pretty much all technical and practical aspects at this point stands, of course, but there's a romantic mystique about film photography and a ton of cool old (and relatively cheap) gear around that will keep film alive for the foreseeable future.
I like dark rooms, and sometimes all you have to do is ask yourself, which is easier to fake?
Don't forget about the raw chemistry for developing the film. Amateur or professional, 50 years ago or today - odds are your film, even though it may be a different brand from Kodak, is touching Kodak chemistry at some point along its journey. Their are a number of alternatives, but many artists working today still rely on at least one concoction of powder or goop with a red Kodak label on it.
as I grew up in Rochester New York this is a topic oh so near to my heart and also very sad. The Rochester I remember from my youth is all but gone today and so much of that is a direct result of the decline of Kodak. so much that Rochester has was built by George Eastman and we were so proud of Kodak. Kodak was so much a part of all of our lives and indeed part of the identity of our city thank you for this
Mr G I’ve been scrolling through comments for 10 mins to find one I can relate to. Not sure if you still live round here, but they have sold most of their property to mcc
hello meme child I do not live in Rochester anymore like many I had to go elsewhere however my family is still there and I go back often of course and driving down 104 and seeing what remains of Kodak it's heartbreaking when I was in college I worked delivering construction materials and had to go to Kodak Park all the time and that place was amazing it was like its own City it's sad to see how many things that were great in Rochester are gone now but also great to see so many of the things that remain and the legacy of George Eastman lives on and will hopefully live on for centuries to come
I live in Rochester also! (well, outside the suburbs of rochester)
im from the other rochester, you know the one with the hospital. its funny how 2 cities with the same name could be influenced by 2 very powerful families
Sominboy27 what other Rochester
Kodak executives neglected to ask themselves the most important question: "What does the consumer want?" The answer to that might have lead them in the right direction.
People will always gravitate to 1) new technology, regardless of cost (we see that clearly whenever a new iPhone is released -- lines at Apple stores everywhere), and 2) consumers also want things that are easier to use -- less fuss.
Digital cameras remove the expense of purchasing film and having it processed. Think about the last time you went on vacation: Wasn't it easier when you didn't have to load up your suitcase with multiple rolls of film, carry them with you on touring excursions, then have to quickly switch out the film in the middle of a "moment" to capture the wanted image? (or have to buy more film, as I had to do in Israel in 2000 -- what a waste of precious time).
Kodak was not only guilty of turning a blind eye to the evolution of picture taking, it was guilty of having a big ego.
J Smith they made their own lenses, I think I’m right in saying: lens quality was Kodak’s outstanding feature in cameras. I think they could have explored this in digital terms with perhaps another company
I believe that other than digital cameras, camera phones were a big nail in the coffin. Cameraphones were having their time in the 2000s, when Kodak was really starting to suffer. And just like smart phones, they were an all-in-one device. So a lot of people that just had cameras to take casual pictures here and there would just get a camera phone.
Absolutely, cameras were always a loss leader for Kodac, and consumer level digital cameras were never going to catch on.
It was technically digital cameras that was the downfall of Kodak, but it wasn't standalone cameras it was cameras in cell phones. The mid-2000s were the time when you started to have cameras in every cellphone, smartphones, easier phone connections to computers and email on phones. With that in mind, digital cameras started to go more towards specialty cameras, and having a camera for general use became impractical.
Additionally, it was the rise of the internet and email during this window that helped the decline. Between 1995 and 2003 folks slowly started to add computers to their homes, subscribe to AOL, and get used to email. Around the same time as '03 switching from modem connection to high-speed internet became reasonably priced. By 2005 many people had high-speed cable or DSL making sharing photos viable over the net. Kodak's belief that everyone would still want a physical copy of their photos (developed or printed) was lost to the convenience of email.
Kodak was caught in a perfect storm but failed to look outside to see what was coming.
BTW @CompanyMan , in Jr High (early 90's) my history teacher taught us the Kodak name came from Eastman's impression on how the first camera sounded when taking a picture... Ko-Dak.
If I recall correctly, Kodak didn't have a substantial market in the development of film, only the production of it. I know they decided to try and have home photo printing with their own brand of photo paper after a while, but that was too little too late.
Well can't blame Amazon for this one...
İ Got a Canon ad
I love the subtilty in your videos. Basically explaining not everything is black and white while showing a roll of black and white film... Excellent
This is definitely a blast from the past! I feel like Polaroid stuck it to them, too, when it came to instant pictures. I've had 2 Kodak EasyShare digital cameras in 2011 & 2012 for my nail work. I really liked them and my feelings were hurt when they stopped supporting the software. I moved on to using my phone after that.
Glad I grew up in the age of film and photography.
This was a great video and brings back some fond memories.
You should have let the video go for an hour, your voice is so soothing and the subject material and presentation is awesome. I always think of ideas and innovation while viewing your material. It's thought provoking material.
Your Channel deserves a much higher viewer-ship.
Just come out as a Butt Pirate, no one cares and leave the sentimental hogwash to yourself
@@tp9270 Dude u dummy dum dum
Really enjoy your videos! As far as I'm aware there is no other TH-cam channel dedicated to the rise and decline of companies and brands. There's Brand Sins... but they are way too goofy (and not funny) for my taste. I like the analytical style of your videos, keep up the good work!
I been binge watching your youtube channel. Damn great stuff keep it up!
I love this channel. These videos are all so interesting...
The decline of Kodak Black, follow up video.
Sam Amirault i'd love watching that
He's a awful rapper
it's possible since he is in jail
Brayan Nexon Still? Kodak Black is still in jail?
"I support breast cancer"
The younger generation doesn't have the emotional attachment to this. In the 50's and 60's, Christmas was Sears and Kodak. In WWII, when the government needed something concerning photography, Kodak invented it immediately. We have lost so much.
I'm in the in-between generation (25yo now). I think I am one of the last generation to remember Kodak. "Kodak Moments" was ingrained, and even now I still internally think "This is a Kodak Moment" if I take a good picture on my smartphone. And even though we have lost a great company, I feel like we shouldn't be dwelling on the past. What we have lost, we've gained more. Companies like Google, Amazon, Tesla... They are absolutely changing the world. This decade has been completely different than the last decade due to these companies, and all for the better. I can't even begin to imagine what the next decade will bring us. It's a little scary sometimes to see how fast the world changes, and reminiscing the past can help. But just because we are reminiscing doesn't mean we should stop moving forward!
Sir you must be the coolest fossil in the retirement village.
I hope one day to sit with you and listen to all your stories about the 20th century
Charles Watson
Well i am from India and we had kodak as well i was born in 1998 and all the pictures taken of me are from kodak camera i know how good it feels now to see them and know what a legend the company behind these pictures was
wavey61
The 90's and the 00' kids are are last mate idk what you but in India the children's who were born in year between 90's and 05's are the last to have their pictures taken from Kodak
Charles Watson its not lost!!!
Its achieved...hopefully
I worked for Kodak for about 9 years on High Volume Copier / Duplicators . . . I worked on the Ektaprint 100, 150 and 250's. We were in head to head competition with Xerox. The Copiers were a Major part of Kodak! The last I heard, some German company bought them out.
No idea why I love watching your content so much
Digital
Damn, I jumped the gun on that one... Company Man taking me to school!!
I rem when Kodak went bankrupt... it felt personal... like a gutshot. They made their ad campaigns and product results (our pictures) feel very personal. Hard to describe.
Was it like a -Kodak Moment?-
Bingo, how come Kodak moment has a line through it, like it's crossed out.?
Chuck Keough a gutshot? That does sound painful
Chuck Keough put two dashes in between a word or phrase - < -I'm dead inside- > -
-testing-
Do the history of the animatronics at Chuck E. Cheese. Sounds like a silly video topic but they are actually beginning to remove them from locations.
Chuckster CEC Fun fact, the creator of Chuck E. Cheese was also the creator of Atari.
Correct.
Show biz pizza was better
@Joe Smith fun fact, Showbiz actually bought Chuck E. Cheese and changed all the Stores to CEC locations for brand recognition. This was around 1989. I worked for one location in Columbus OH while going to college. I worked at CEC, but the parent company was Showbiz Pizzatime, Inc.
Tim Germer yeah I knew. Lol. That's why I made comment. And actually it was pizza time theater that owned cec and showbiz bought pizza time and renamed to showbizza pizza time inc. Then rebranded stores to cec. Show biz was originally started by former pizza time top guy and pizza times annimatronics creator company I believe.
Great video, you are right and it got me thinking, that we have Kodak to thank for all those memorable moments we grew up in. I think the way things turned out is for the best, they had a fantastic run, nowadays the choice of digital cameras is huge and no one manufacturer has a monopoly on that. Thank you Kodak for your contribution.
this pretty much Blockbuster didn't embarrass the future and just fell over, but sad Kodak was the one that made digital camera, how stupid not capitalize on it
Could you please do the decline of yahoo? It'd be cool to see their rise (and subsequent downfall)
Justin Y. That would be amazing
You have my vote.
Justin Y. How are you here already?
He must do it for the mystical ninja: "Justin Y."
It’s the legend Justin Y.
Also, do something about Lunchables and CapriSun. They used to brainwash my childhood mind with their commercials. Looking back on them, they were a bad tasting, unhealthy, ripoff.
Did those decline? My wife still buys those...
I won a Sega "tips and tricks" VHS from a lunchable back in the day. As an adult now, they're so expensive for what you get. I stock up on the little pizzas when they're on sale.
They both still exist. Since I don't watch TV anymore, I haven't seen any current commercials for either.
But Lunchables still have their own refrigerated section in the grocery stores I go to.
I haven't noticed CapriSun in stores, but they were in Germany in 2010-2012, as "CapriSonne".
I think caprisuns are pretty good but lunch bales are meh
very helpful and to the point. great work
I worked as a photographer in the late 90's. I started my photographic interest in 1989 and Kodak Tri-x was the film that i used in the beginning. And then there was Ektachrome and Kodachrome. I really loved the looks of the Kodak film. And i truly miss the film days. And i miss Kodak. I am not usually sentmental about compaies missing new trends or new tech but this really makes me sad.Thanks for great videos Company Man. It would be great if you covered more companies that not just big in the US.
Kodak had serious competition long before the digital camera put them into eclipse. Kodak cameras were no longer the "industry standard" by the 1980's; replaced by Canon and Nikon at the high end, and Minolta and others at the lower, consumer end. The 1980's also saw the rise of Fuji film, which, due to its lower cost, usurped more and more of Kodak film's market share over time. Kodak was very big, but hardly invulnerable.
Fuji sold for less because our government passed laws making it possible. They have consistently worked against American companies. That is why we need the Trump revolution.
Charles Watson You're waiting on a pipe dream. trump's only allegiance is to his billionaire owners- Mercer, Adelson, Ross, Icahn, Hendricks, and others. They will profit; we'll continue to be screwed.
What laws made it possible for Fuji to sell for less? The reason Fuji sold for less is that they needed to in order to compete with Kodak's marketing prowess. Both companies made HUGE profits from the sale of film. In the words of Jack Thomas, one-time VP of Research at Kodak "Film is the most profitable product - that's legal".
Yeah, I agree with a lot of this. Kodak was really at it's consumer camera peak with it's Instamatic cameras during the 1970's. They used a proprietary film cartridge which brought in regular sales of the film cartridges. They tried to innovate in the 1980s with a new system, the Disc. It failed. Lower cost and easier to use 35mm point-n-shoot cameras started to come to market a few years after that failure, and all camera makers where players. Now you had mostly Japanese cameras being sold to consumers, they were buying 35mm print film made by Kodak, Polaroid, Fuji, or even generic. Price was a definite factor. Film processing became a 1 hour thing at the drug or grocery store. Kodak had simply lost the control of the supplies the consumers were buying. They were relying on their commercial and industrial product divisions more after that.
Kodak was afraid of cannibalizing their own film sales and eschewed seriously developing digital as the replacement. So I don't blame rivals, the government etc. but rather the decline fell squarely on the company executives themselves. Kodak ironically acted like a Japanese company in the 90s while Fujifilm acted more like an American company. Fujifilm diversified, survived and is now thriving. They've even made instant "polaroids" popular again.
DO BRITISH EAST INDIA COMPANY. So much to talk about. You can make it to a half an hour video. He’ll even a 2 hour documentary!
Culture Vulture *opioids in China*
Do it as though you are explaining it to a tea leaf.
You know for full Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy glory.
This is a really good idea.
The Bay department stores are struggling. Do the Hudson Bay Company.
You mean the giant bubble that woulr have devastated the royal family in th 18th century? One of the biggest bubble bursts of all time that England is still trying to recover from? Yes please. Extra History did an excellent job but I would love to see his version.
Great video! I sold my first photograph in 1968, put myself through college with a Nikon camera and Kodak Ti-X. Over 50 years later, my much loved Kodachrome is long gone, but along with my digital cameras, I still have my Nikons and Tri-X! Thank you, Kodak, and thank you, Company Man for another excellent video!
Great video. Very insightful.
Yahoo! A new Company Man video! BTW, Yahoo! would be a great video topic, with their big fall from grace.
You did not comment on their divestment of Eastman Chemical. This turned a diversified company into one that depended solely on one technology. The chemical side of the business had the foresight to diversify into various technologies going back to the sixties and seventies. This was the same time period that the Kodak management developed an arrogant and myopic view of their business,
Yeah, I was disappointed in the analysis in this video because it wasn't very knowledgeable of the details of the company's history. Cutting Eastman Chemical loose at precisely the moment the company needed to be diversifying its holdings and revenue stream was a pretty huge mistake. By the time they tried to remedy that by turning to consumer printing and scanning the company's culture was incapable of succeeding in these new areas. I worry about the future of the company after they announced a confusing crypto-currency project in order to juice their stock price during the recent cryptomania. Fujifilm, on the other hand, did everything right when facing the same challenges and has developed a really great company culture.
I agree, Kodak was a chemical company that happened to take pictures. Then they sold the chemicals, and had nothing left.
Eastman chemicals was not part of kodak, it was a separated company.
@@BakedDrLuny I sold industrial meters to Kodak Park and knew many of the people who were all first class, especially the chemical engineers. The fundamental problem was the directors, like most in the USA, were chasing short-term profits to satisfy Wall St. They did have long-term planners but failed to listen to them. While they did invent digital photography, they did not foresee its true potential. Kodack could have been more creative than IBM or Apple but short-term thinking sank the Kodack ship.
I grew up in the 70s, Kodak was a staple of everyday life.
My first camera was a digital Kodak Camera gifted to me in 2007. Great video.
Since you did Kodak, you should probably do Polaroid
That was just hubris and corporate dysfunction. Polaroid was quickly leading digital but when the founder died they simply fell into mismanagement, essentially taking his process to the grave. Then those same managers robbed the company during their Chapter 11 and never recovered.
Polaroid was way ahead of the digital game, and the founder wanted to conquer that market (and use the ability to print in addition to digital as a selling point....which would have been quite interesting).
I bought a Polaroid TV in 2008 and had it until like 2013. I think they still sell TVs even if they're not a big market player.
You should make one of these on Sports Authority.
Mitt Romney saved them....
Not in Texas they came and went
When they stopped selling guns and ammo I stopped going into on.
Fascinating video. I suppose Kodak was effectively an early tech company. And they showed us how if a company does not continue to innovate and stay ahead of trends, they will become obsolete. Something tells me this is a challenge that will take down many tech companies going forward, regardless of their size / perceived dominance.
My grandma was starting to move out of her home, and she was getting rid of most of her stuff, and she gave me my deceased grandpa’s old Kodak camera he used to carry Around in the mid 70s, leather case included with it. It doesn’t work, but I still keep it.
You missed the part where after the 2012 bankruptcy, the UK Kodak Pension bought the scanner division and consumer film division (the photo kiosks) and that company is known as Kodak Alaris. The black and red “Kodak Moments” slide you used is actually Kodak Alaris and NOT Eastman Kodak ( I would know, I worked for Kodak Alaris)
Yup, and now Kodak Alaris has gone bust
@@northotagogolf Huh?
I received my paycheque yesterday.
Kodak Alaris is not bust.
@@garymcintyre3640 Yes Gary, I still get my pension from them but in the UK the company is being moved into the UK Governments pension protection scheme coz" the company cannot continue to meet its obligations to the pension fund.
If you get pictures from CVS, Kodak makes the system, printers, and paper for the pictures.
Alway enjoy Company Man videos and this hit home. From 1971 to 1994, I was a commercial photographer in Chicago and all we used for years was Kodak products. In OakBrook, a Chicago suburb, there was a huge Kodak warehouse and an equally huge Kodak training center next to it. If I had to describe Kodak's demise in one word, it would be arrogance. Kodak was shocked when bidding for "Official Film" for the 1984 Los Angeles Olympics, their paltry offering was more than doubled by Fuji, resulting in the Fuji blimp hovering over the stadium. About that time, our downtown studio started to get visits from Fuji and Ilford photo reps, selling their products. In most cases, the competitors were better and sometimes cheaper. Fujichrome film had brighter colors and our clients started asking for it. Our film and paper storeroom that formally was a sea of Kodak yellow was now filled with white Ilford and green Fuji boxes. They did so much right and just assumed they would always be right. In my home, I have a big display case filled with Eastman Kodak cameras, from 1916 onward; even have a Kodak spoon from that training center. I read they killed their digital camera because no film would be sold. Their digital cameras were good but all their competitors were better with new innovations each year. Like a buggy whip manufacturer, I guess their time was over. When I moved to Orlando in 1994, we went to Walt Disney World often and saw signs marking a "Kodak Photo Spot" at various locations. Like the "Kodak Moments", they're gone forever.
I literally grew up 2 blocks from their main and original location, much of my family and friends family, worked there. It literally was THE employer for my home city for a generation. You did a great job explaining the actual reasons that they fell from glory. Their digital cameras were good for their time..but they definitely didnt put the resources required into innovating their technology. Much kudos sir. Thats my home.
20% suggestions
20% Answers
60% Kodak Black jokes.
Exquisite Elephant accurate
NOTE: Indeed. Kodak should have Clearly Invested in the Cell Phone Revolution. But Hindsight is always 20/20. LOL...
@Cobb ETL PROGRAMMER: Funny you said that in the Year of The Optometrist, 2020! LOL
10:50, wow that Black and White film brings back memories in photography class in high school.
I worked for a printing company that actually had a kodak pro color laser printer. It was VERY rarely used because of how much it cost to run and because we had to hand mix the inks after kodak went under. But the damn thing was a marvel, able to print just about any color only high end poster paper in a single run. It was also the only machine that worked with the preferator (no one knows why but the thing could just feed directly into it) in the 6 months i was there it was used twice.
What happened to atari?
Ian Hawks E.T. - that's what
A string of DoA consoles backed up with awful games. They were struggling when the 2600 started losing market share, and their attempts to get it back were weak at best.
They make groovy wojak memes now.
Nintendo happened
Atari got greedy and then crash happen.
Kodak's management was just old Fossils. Yea I go back to Super XX, MicroFile and ASA 10 Kodachrome days too.
In the early 1990's I used a Kodak DCS digital SLR to shoot digital images. This allowed rapid changes in communication, transferring visual info from Southern California Engineering to Singapore and Thailand. The transfer was via CC mail (pre email, pre internet ) and our system would move files overseas about 4 times per day.
In about 1993/4 I bought a Casio VGA (480x640) digital camera, it was about 600 plus bucks. Realtors in SoCal had BBS's that could show digital images of homes for sale, each directory has the digital photos for each home for sale.
**** The Kodak Fossil Management never really understood the utility of "not printing" ie just quick transfer of images.
ie they never ever understood how many of us used early digital images.
Even at mid 1990's trade shows, Kodak's inbred management was hell-bent on APS cameras. ie new bastard format to get folks hooked on a new bastard film system. It cost more to develop, had lower quality. The film processing unit had to have an extra gizmo to deal with APS.
In Kodak Films in the 1990's , Fuji came out with 4 layer color negative C41 films. I shot Kodak films my entire life until the mid 1990's . Yea I flirted with GAF 500 slide film, Great AGFA films, special Kodak 103af astro films too.
The mid/late 1990's Fuji 4 layer films shot radically better colors under mixed lighting. ie shooting indoor basketball or hockey under a mix of "uncontrolled" lighting types.
In one business I worked at we bought 1 to 2k per month in big sized Kodak films and papers and later went to Fuji since it was better.
I still have today a stack of KODAK professional booklets that can stack say 3 feet tall , spanning many decades in vintage.
Kodak should have canned Antonio Perez for cause after he was there a year. ie end the golden parachute fossil management style. Bring in some young blood with new ideas, learn how folks are actually using digital images.
A trade show about 25 years ago a Kodak fossil said that digital cameras would never replace film cameras. In a later one about 14 years ago a Kodak fossil told me that a cellphone will never replace a camera ( I owned a 1.3 megapixel cellphone then, it shot an acceptable VGA image in reality). Today the ancient Point and Shoot digital camera industry is about dead, ie folks used their cellphones.
Bought my 1st digital compact camera in year of 2000. It was a Canon together with a software that can create your own albums of pictures via the computer. It was fun and liberating experience to print your own pictures via a desk ink jet printer on photo papers but its quite costly when the ink runs out. These days printers Cos make money from the ink Cartridges much as Kodak made theirs from camera films.
Actually printers will be the next thing to go the way of film cameras. Even though I still have a printer, I don't use it anything like as much as I used to, and therefore Canon isn't making any money from me in ink. In fact, I bought the printer 3 years ago, and it still has 70% of the ink that came with it. In 7 years time, I'll probably replace the whole printer rather than get ink for it.
Great video. I think once technology allowed for a top rate camera embedded within the same smartphone we were already carrying, it was a game changer. Only way Kodak could have survived it is if they managed, early, to patent the technology to get those cameras into phones and then license it, a la Intel in a majority of PCs.
Finally Kodak! Hope you do Polaroid next - pretty much a similar story 🙂
George Asamoah-Awuah they owe Outkast so much for keeping them relevant a few more years lol
In fact, the camera and photo film industry is pretty much a treasure trove of dead or overshadowed relics thanks to the Canon/Nikon dichotomy. Konica, Agfa, Minolta, Fujifilm, Pentax, Olympus etc.
Yep. He can also talk about how Polaroid was able to cheat death by branding many A/V products under the Polaroid label
Frank Winkhorst Polaroid is still around? What do they do nowadays?
Where I live, polaroid is getting quite popular...
This was awesome. Blew my mind with the idea kodak could have been Samsung if they went into phones
Amazing VIDEOS !
So inspireing!
Great series. Just found you today. I am old enough to remember and often bought products from these companies. I think that KODAK needed to invest in higher quality optics and higher quality products. I say that having owned 620 format Kodak cameras, 120 format and 135 cameras. (Basch and Lomb optics would have made a difference. Yes, I know that I mispelled B&L)
NASCAR has had one of the largest downfalls in the last 10 years. Hopefully it’s on your idea list.
DrivingBackward That’s because NASCAR turned into a motor sports game show with stages, knockout rounds, bonus points, etc. It’s more like reality tv than it is a sport at this point. 😂
TOM CRUZ give me a Torino vs superbird battle any day
I can turn left faster than you!
i still use kodak film
BXT media me 2
Tmax!
Tri-x!
Portra is life
Give me Tri-X or give me death.
I'm still saying Codak moments. I also remember that in 2001 I bought an expensive system camera, after studying photography. In 2001, analog cameras with film were still better than digital cameras. Two or three years later, however, it was almost only digital photography that mattered, so it went fast and my camera quickly became useless. A little sad as darkroom work was an art in itself. Although sad that Kodak did not keep up with the change, I have heard that it was a good company that took care of its employees. Even its founder George Eastman was a great philanthropist at the end of his life. I read on wikipedia that he took his own life, does anyone know why?
I'm watching this after Kodak got $750M to start making medicine in the US.
Haha I thought that would end up better than it did 😂
I still buy fujifilm stuff for their instant cameras.
Something refreshing and magical about a pic that wont immediately go on social media
What if I told you that you don't have to upload your pictures when you take them?
What if I told you that some people are more comfortable with posing for an instant film camera, and the novelty of a 'developing' instant film portrait, regardless if the photo taker 'promises' not to upload the photo or not.
Ironic that. Instant cameras were the equivalent of posting on social media back then. It made the process of shooting, processing and sharing that much quicker than traditional film.
A here you are preferring them for their slowness. Just an observation.
GloomGaiGar
To quote an Instant Camera Review article:
Although digital cameras have made the instant camera obsolete in almost every way, there is an undeniable charm and whimsy to pressing the shutter button and watching a physical print emerge from the camera and then an image develop right before your very eyes. Even for photographers who remember spending hours in the darkroom, the whole process still feels like magic. No, you don’t get the brilliant colors and wide range of highlights and shadows that even an entry-level digital camera can offer, but each print is a one-of-a-kind memento that you can physically pass around and share in a face-to-face, rather than virtual, environment.
The big draw of instant cameras is that they’re fun to use. A great conversation starter, an instant camera gives you an easy way to coax even the most camera-shy subjects into posing for a portrait. And you’re likely to draw a crowd of curious onlookers as you wait for the prints to develop. Think of kids who have been raised on digital cameras: For them, watching an instant print develop is far more exciting than scrolling through images on the LCD screen of a digital camera.
instant cameras are well-suited to capturing the moment in a casual and inclusive manner. The toy-camera-like appearance of instant cameras puts people at ease more than a serious-looking DSLR. Add to that the fact that you can’t share these images on Facebook at the touch of a button, and people are only too happy to offer up great, uninhibited poses. And in this age of digital files that are easily duplicated, there’s nothing quite like taking someone’s picture and then moments later sharing the only version of it in the world with them as a gift.
I think I read somewhere that the Japanese gov't subsidized Fujifilm to drive Kodak out of the film business.
I feel the end of this could be said about Sears. Sears should have been Amazon as we know today.
Sears had no vision for it, and the organizational structure was never designed nor would have ever adapted to equal what it needed to become Amazon. Case in point, the retail side still uses an archaic and obsolete point and sale system.
I agree that they had no vision, but their organizational structure WAS designed for it. BI (Before Internet) they were the place you could get nearly anything by mail order to urban, suburban and rural areas and their catalogs were 4 inches thick. They had stores and distribution points all over at one time. They even had their own certified installers (subs) for appliances, siding, and roofing products for your home. They were once a one stop shopping, either in store or in the catalog for lots of things. You are right though, that ancient POS system is laughable, even thrift stores have a more up to date POS system. For me, a DIY'er/part time mechanic is the bastardization of the Craftsman brand. It once was a quality and affordable alternative to the Tool Truck brands. Now its a Harbor Freight quality with a premium price. And in some areas like hand tools the Harbor Freight brand is a better tool, and that is really saying something (negative).
Sear was famous for their catalog. They should have simply changed their printed catalog to an online website.
Sears and Kmart suck! Any company that FORCES their employees to work on Thanksgiving (other than vital emergency personnel) should go out of business!
I know really, I hate the fire department and the police for forcing their employees to work on Thanksgiving /s
My sister, who worked as an inventory planner for Kodak digital division, told me that when camera phones achieved the picture quality which we now know they knew they were finished. Unless you saw it for yourself it would be difficult to imagine the massive installation of production buildings devoted to film making. In essence, it was a giant chemical plant putting silver on paper. At peak, the company employed about 55,000 in the Rochester, NY area. The employees, especially professionals, became very entrenched. Accountants were titled "cost engineers". Many skills trained for there were not transferable to other industries. For the most part, young college graduates who were ambitious and energetic avoided employment there while those who valued stability and predictability gravitated there. Parents who had grown up in the Depression wanted their college grad kids to get a job there while to many working there was a stigma.
Excellent video. I find your reasoning quite solid and logical. Some of the old boy companies like IBM also thought that their way was the only way.
Basically phones happened
TheRiverOfStyx nah, basically digital cameras
TheRiverOfStyx iPhone
>kid who has no memories before mobile phones
tohopes I was more joking, but yes I have only seen one Kodak camera for a road trip I went on.
TheRIverOfStyx
Kodak actually invented the modern digital camera, the problem was that the executive management didn't believe it was the future...disgraceful.
Do a video on Nokia
No do a video on temesak holdings
Aye yo company man!! love your vids ! very educational. Hey, i know this may be a stretch, because of age requirements and such, but if at all possible, id like to reccomend a video on cigarette advertisments and the death of them (im a former smoker so i think itd be interesting to see the downfall of tobacco products from when they were first popular). idk if thats possible but, food for thought Man. Keep up the educational vids, again i love em, found u by researching the downfall of K mart. Stay blessed and amazing Company Man!
Having worked for Kodak through the 90s and in Digital Imaging, I agree with you. We struggled with the new business model. We had trouble getting people (including share holders) to think in terms anything other than “give them the camera, sell them the film”. The only thing that I would add would be the impact of the internet. The one thing that Kodak could have done was buy HP, Apple, or Adobe and spin the new company off. But who knows what would have happened with that...good analysis!