View Full Version : Writing Kodak to voice opinions

Tom Westbrook
11-Jul-2004, 06:02
I've seen a couple of people recently mention that they would like various Kodak films, especially Tri-X, to be available in Readyload form. I thought I'd share an address I got at a John Sexton Workshop I attended last February. John said that to voice one's opinion on Kodak film products write a reasonable letter (minimizing swear words will likely make your vote count) stating your desires & opinions and posing it to:

Ronald Corn
Marketing Manager, Photographer Segment
Kodak Professional Imaging Solutions
Eastman Kodak Company
343 State Street
Rochester, NY 14650-0403

Including a few words of thanks for a cherished existing product is a good idea, too.

A letter has an impact that emails and opinions on internet fora do not. Of course, there are those who'd rather be disemboweled than do business with Kodak, but for others writing is the best way to get your opinion in front of those who make the decisions.

Frank Petronio
11-Jul-2004, 06:27
Kodak has made a lot of mistakes, but they will listen - and this is a good strategy. Thanks for the tip. Perhaps we should all concentrate on one subject at a time - Tri-X in Readyloads would make me happy too.

Verizon responded to an online petition to carry the PalmOne Treo cellphone, so it can work.

Alex Hawley
11-Jul-2004, 07:07
I would just like to have the old Tri-X back.

austin granger
11-Jul-2004, 08:25
Strangely, I was just thinking about this very subject last night, as I stood in my darkroom muttering to myself, desperately attempting to coax good prints out of some new t-max negs. (I had decided on a recent desert trip that the advantages of readyloaded t-max outweighed the drawbacks of carrying/loading/unloading holders) How I wish now that my beloved tri-x had been in those holders instead!)

In any case, thanks for the address; Kodak will get my letter.

Yes, I know there are T-max lovers out there; I meant no disrespect. I'm sure it is a fine film but it's just not my bag. There could at least be a choice, no?

Sharon S.
11-Jul-2004, 09:42
...just as long as they don't discontinue the loose sheet boxes of Tri X. Not everyone wants to spend the extra $$$ for readyloads. Wouldn't it be nice if Kodak could make a system where they provided the "ready load" envelopes that the photographer could preload from their own stash of TriX film at their need? The best of both worlds? (Grafmatic backs excluded).

Hmmmm, any engineers out there???

Erik Sherman
11-Jul-2004, 10:38
>> Wouldn't it be nice if Kodak could make a system where they provided the "ready load" envelopes that the photographer could preload from their own stash of TriX film at their need? The best of both worlds? <<

I think you'd end up with the same dust issues that drive some of us to use Readyloads or Quickloads. The big advantage is that they are loaded in a cleanroom, and no room in my house is *every* going to be that clean...

And, by the way, thanks for the address - I'm also going to send a letter. I have recently been quite happy with a test of Porta 160VC, but would like the option of the faster version as well.

tim atherton
11-Jul-2004, 10:40
"I would just like to have the old Tri-X back."

Alex - looks like you are going to have to open your own plant then... (BTW - I find the "new" tri-x just fine)

Shmoo - the Mido I system did just that (and quite well too)

11-Jul-2004, 11:31
I just printed off my plea for Tri-X in ReadyLoads. But I am going to sit on it for a month and mail it in August, so he doesn't get all the letters on the same day.

Herb Cunningham
11-Jul-2004, 14:50
My letter goes out tomorow. If this works, maybe Royal Pan is next-I loved that film

Jim Rice
11-Jul-2004, 17:49
Tim, it was my understanding that the Midos were somewhat problematic. If that isn't the case, then my issues with the cost and flatness of readyloads may be mute. I've never had that big an issue with dust, though I'm sure that's got to change now, with my having said it.

Jim Rice
11-Jul-2004, 17:53
moot, too

Sharon S.
11-Jul-2004, 18:19
Tim - I'm always learning new things on this forum. That's what I like! Never heard of a "Mido", so I guess I'll start researching. I'm just afraid that I'll end up buying more "stuff". On the other hand, one can't have enough "stuff" as far as I'm concerned!


Frank Petronio
11-Jul-2004, 20:58
We could ask for 620 TMax 400 for our Medalists...

tim atherton
11-Jul-2004, 21:38
I had a Mido i system fir a while. It was a bit fiddly but actually seemed to work fairly well.

The Mido II system seemed a much better way of doing it, with the thin "tdaitional" style holders, but there always seemed to be light leak problems. I have a whole bunch of Mido II 8x10's I have a love hate realtionship with. I wish I could get them to work just that bit better (I think Geoffrey James has a set off 8x10 that works well, but he spent some time with Shin (sic) Mido getting them working well). I can easily carry 8-10 of the 8x10- holders in an over the shoulder satchel as compared to say 4 regualr holders - both weigth and size wise, with the camera on a tripod over the other.


Leonard Metcalf
12-Jul-2004, 19:25
My favorite black and white film from kodak was t400CN... only ever managed to get a few boxes of it in 4 x 5... have taken some stunning images with it, and was disapointed to see it go from 4 x 5 sheets, and sadened even more to see it dissappear completely. I'd love a chromogenic film in readyloads...

12-Jul-2004, 19:51
Good riddance to Kodak!!! More power to J and C, Efke, etc. Thank you for seeing the light - be the vinyl to Kodak's compact disk.


Bruce Watson
12-Jul-2004, 19:58
I hope everyone writes. I wish us luck.

I wrote them a four page business plan on why Tri-X in readyloads was good business for Kodak, complete with executive summary (figuring no one would actually read the details). Several months later I got a reply back from and assistant's assistant assistant that said simply that Tri-X in readyloads wasn't in their marketing plans. Bugger off, in other words.

Really, my experience with Kodak is that they are marketing driven, as opposed to market driven. Their marketing people are interested in digital, not film. I don't think they care a whit the market wants. But if we don't try, they surely won't change. Here's hoping they prove me wrong.

Frank Petronio
12-Jul-2004, 20:47
Big corporations need to make such huge margins on new products, it's hard for them to expand in a category that they (CFO's POV) see as dying - but they often don't realize the intangible benefits that come from goodwill and loyaty that result from listening to their customers. My friend owns the last commercial photo lab in Rochester - the three larger competitors closing down in the past 2-3 years - and his business is booming. Sometimes having 100% of a shrinking market is better than 33% of a growing one.

Perhaps another question to ask is how restrictive are the patents on Readyload and Quickload? Or would Fuji or Kodak license the technology to a smaller film company. Hmm... FP-4 and HP-5 in Readyloads...

Alan Davenport
13-Jul-2004, 00:15
Really, my experience with Kodak is that they are marketing driven, as opposed to market driven.

IMO, that pretty much describes the business world today. There are very few companies left that are driven to produce what their customers want and Kodak doesn't seem to be one of them. The truth is, a large publicly traded corporation probably can't afford to be that connected to their customers. Chances are, nobody in Kodak's marketing department today has ever used a large format camera, much less do they care about consumables for them... That is why the day will come when Kodak no longer produces any kind of LF film: when the bean counters decide the company's investment will yield a higher return elsewhere, we will be abandoned without a backward glance. Maybe there will be some mavericks who will step in to fill the need. I hope so.