You do know they said the same thing about the typewriter, right?Originally Posted by Brian C. Miller
You do know they said the same thing about the typewriter, right?
O tnx 4 dat! dats realy QL 2 knw. i thort txtN wz deth 4 en.You do know they said the same thing about the typewriter, right?
(Lingo2Word)
Lol
Indeed, language is always changing. It's just that the people who are most worried about it don't read enough (any?) historical literature to understand that.You do know they said the same thing about the typewriter, right?
Definitely—but while I'm fine with English changing, I certainly don't feel the same way about color film availability!
But the film-originated images don't have to be shared through a digital medium, therefore they don't have to be digitized.
Your point seems to be that convenience and popularity of a digital medium leads to devolvement. I agree. That's why I'm glad film doesn't have to be digitized. If I want to share my prints, there are a number of mechanisms available. For example, USPS, UPS and FedEx.
Mos def!
No, the point is that users in the mass market prefer to display and share photos using digital means. You don't have to be sensitive to that fact in the decisions you make, but the manufacturers whose business model depends on the mass market do. For you it's optional, for them it's not. And Kodak as a manufacturer has always been rooted in creating and responding to the mass market. The whole point of this thread is to ask whether they can and will change to the reality that the mass market displays and shares their photos digitally, so that film can survive as a niche production rather than die as a mass-market production.But the film-originated images don't have to be shared through a digital medium, therefore they don't have to be digitized.
Your point seems to be that convenience and popularity of a digital medium leads to devolvement. I agree. That's why I'm glad film doesn't have to be digitized. If I want to share my prints, there are a number of mechanisms available. For example, USPS, UPS and FedEx.
Rick "not thinking this thread is about what Sal has to do" Denney
It seems that HARMAN, with a smaller plant and more flexibility to meet the demands of various non-photographic coating applications, is doing fine marketing film and gelatin silver paper in its niche market. The mass market has no interest in film, regardless of whether it's from Kodak, Ilford or any other manufacturer. It never again will.
It's very unlikely that Kodak is able or willing to change so that its remaining films can survive as niche market items.
Sal "who only used his practices as an illustration of the type of customer a niche film and paper manufacturer ought to target and never thought this thread was about himself" Santamaura
I fear you are correct. It is just not in the American corporate DNA to devolve to a niche market. That's not how those Harvard Biz School graduates keep score.
Rick "wondering if the HBS and its progeny are to blame for the foolishness of corporate America" Denney
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks