A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Digital Photography » Digital Photography
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

better Kodak reorganization



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old May 7th 13, 09:36 PM posted to comp.soft-sys.matlab,sci.engr.color,sci.image.processing,rec.photo.darkroom,rec.photo.digital
Alfred Molon[_4_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,591
Default better Kodak reorganization

In article , Martin Brown says...
Most users of PhotoCD bought
a Nikon scanner after one experience of getting useless PictureCD
confusion after asking for PhotoCD and *NEVER* went back.


I also bought a Nikon scanner years ago which is now catching dust on a
cupboard. Haven't used it for years, because using it is so complicated
and the quality is poor compared to digital.
--

Alfred Molon
------------------------------
Olympus E-series DSLRs and micro 4/3 forum at
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/MyOlympus/
http://myolympus.org/ photo sharing site
  #12  
Old May 7th 13, 09:38 PM posted to comp.soft-sys.matlab,sci.engr.color,sci.image.processing,rec.photo.darkroom,rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default better Kodak reorganization

In article , Alfred
Molon wrote:

I also bought a Nikon scanner years ago which is now catching dust on a
cupboard. Haven't used it for years, because using it is so complicated
and the quality is poor compared to digital.


try different software, such as vuescan. nikon's software was pretty
bad.
  #13  
Old May 7th 13, 11:47 PM posted to comp.soft-sys.matlab,sci.engr.color,sci.image.processing,rec.photo.darkroom,rec.photo.digital
Scott Schuckert
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 368
Default better Kodak reorganization

In article , Alfred
Molon wrote:

I also bought a Nikon scanner years ago which is now catching dust on a
cupboard. Haven't used it for years, because using it is so complicated
and the quality is poor compared to digital.
--

Alfred Molon


Well, then., sell it to me or put it on eBay. The Nikon scanners (all
except the lowest-end model) are sought after. Used with Vuescan or
Silverscan, they do a great job.
  #14  
Old May 8th 13, 09:02 AM posted to sci.engr.color,sci.image.processing,rec.photo.darkroom,rec.photo.digital
Martin Brown
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 821
Default better Kodak reorganization

On 07/05/2013 21:36, Alfred Molon wrote:
In article , Martin Brown says...


Most users of PhotoCD bought
a Nikon scanner after one experience of getting useless PictureCD
confusion after asking for PhotoCD and *NEVER* went back.


I also bought a Nikon scanner years ago which is now catching dust on a
cupboard. Haven't used it for years, because using it is so complicated
and the quality is poor compared to digital.


But without a full frame sensor you can't easily use your slide
duplicator with a digital camera without cropping the source image. I
grant you that it is a lot easier to do this and that the Nikon software
was a bit quirky as was the hardware from time to time.

But the point I was making here was Kodak pretty much set out to annoy
and alienate its high value customers by muddying the waters with two
products of radically different quality both acronymed to PCD!

Had they called the new consumer grade "PictureCD" say "ImageCD" or
"SnapshotCD" the confused dealer problem would never have arisen.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown
  #15  
Old May 8th 13, 10:20 AM posted to sci.engr.color,sci.image.processing,rec.photo.darkroom,rec.photo.digital
Neil Ellwood
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 493
Default better Kodak reorganization

On Wed, 08 May 2013 09:02:49 +0100, Martin Brown wrote:

But without a full frame sensor you can't easily use your slide
duplicator with a digital camera without cropping the source image. I
grant you that it is a lot easier to do this and that the Nikon software
was a bit quirky as was the hardware from time to time.



You could have a look at the Ohnar side copier. It is available in two
versions - full frame and aps-c.
--
Neil
Reverse ‘a’ and ‘r’
Remove ‘l’ to get address.
  #16  
Old May 8th 13, 11:40 AM posted to sci.engr.color,sci.image.processing,rec.photo.darkroom,rec.photo.digital
Martin Brown
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 821
Default better Kodak reorganization

On 08/05/2013 10:20, Neil Ellwood wrote:
On Wed, 08 May 2013 09:02:49 +0100, Martin Brown wrote:

But without a full frame sensor you can't easily use your slide
duplicator with a digital camera without cropping the source image. I
grant you that it is a lot easier to do this and that the Nikon software
was a bit quirky as was the hardware from time to time.


You could have a look at the Ohnar side copier. It is available in two
versions - full frame and aps-c.


I still have one of the old 35mm design (hence the 70% crop). It is less
of a faff than firing up tetchy SCSI peripherals on an old machine.

--
Regards,
Martin Brown
  #17  
Old May 8th 13, 06:10 PM posted to sci.engr.color,sci.image.processing,rec.photo.darkroom,rec.photo.digital
nospam
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 24,165
Default better Kodak reorganization

In article , Martin Brown
wrote:

Most users of PhotoCD bought
a Nikon scanner after one experience of getting useless PictureCD
confusion after asking for PhotoCD and *NEVER* went back.


I also bought a Nikon scanner years ago which is now catching dust on a
cupboard. Haven't used it for years, because using it is so complicated
and the quality is poor compared to digital.


But without a full frame sensor you can't easily use your slide
duplicator with a digital camera without cropping the source image. I
grant you that it is a lot easier to do this and that the Nikon software
was a bit quirky as was the hardware from time to time.


what does a full frame sensor have to do with using a scanner?

if you're thinking of slide duplicators (lens, bellows, slide holder),
those work on fx or dx, but it's not as good as a scanner.

But the point I was making here was Kodak pretty much set out to annoy
and alienate its high value customers by muddying the waters with two
products of radically different quality both acronymed to PCD!

Had they called the new consumer grade "PictureCD" say "ImageCD" or
"SnapshotCD" the confused dealer problem would never have arisen.


having both photocd and picturecd was stupid.
  #18  
Old May 8th 13, 06:49 PM posted to comp.soft-sys.matlab,sci.engr.color,sci.image.processing,rec.photo.darkroom,rec.photo.digital
Bowser
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 265
Default better Kodak reorganization

On Wed, 8 May 2013 00:24:01 -0700 (PDT), RichA
wrote:

On May 7, 12:48*pm, Bowser wrote:
On Mon, 6 May 2013 19:13:46 +0200, Alfred Molon

wrote:
In article , Bowser says...
Keep one thing in mind: Kodak's past management wasn't very bright.
These are they guys who once tasked their people with finding a way to
kill the digital revolution to protect their film business.


... really they did? Almost too funny to be true. What plan did Kodak
devise to kill digital photography?


OK, not a CEO, but a product manager:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/es...k_eulogy.shtml

Still, what a moron...


There are numerous examples of large companies being wholly and
illogically resistant to change. Sony, GM, Bell, the list of
casualties and soon-to-be casualties goes on.


Yeah, and that moron at Kodak was probably representative of the
culture of the company. Kodak never "got it." Until now, that is.
worst part is that they were really well positioned for digital, but
choose to screw it up. Morons.
  #19  
Old May 8th 13, 09:49 PM posted to comp.soft-sys.matlab,sci.engr.color,sci.image.processing,rec.photo.darkroom,rec.photo.digital
J. Clarke[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,273
Default better Kodak reorganization

In article 79bf218c-4aab-4dce-8f0c-
, says...

On May 7, 12:48*pm, Bowser wrote:
On Mon, 6 May 2013 19:13:46 +0200, Alfred Molon

wrote:
In article , Bowser says...
Keep one thing in mind: Kodak's past management wasn't very bright.
These are they guys who once tasked their people with finding a way to
kill the digital revolution to protect their film business.


... really they did? Almost too funny to be true. What plan did Kodak
devise to kill digital photography?


OK, not a CEO, but a product manager:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/es...k_eulogy.shtml

Still, what a moron...


There are numerous examples of large companies being wholly and
illogically resistant to change. Sony, GM, Bell, the list of
casualties and soon-to-be casualties goes on.


Bell was not done in by "change", it was done in by lawyers.


  #20  
Old May 9th 13, 03:45 AM posted to rec.photo.darkroom,rec.photo.digital
Jean-David Beyer
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 247
Default better Kodak reorganization

On 05/08/2013 04:49 PM, J. Clarke wrote:
In article 79bf218c-4aab-4dce-8f0c-
, says...

On May 7, 12:48 pm, Bowser wrote:
On Mon, 6 May 2013 19:13:46 +0200, Alfred Molon

wrote:
In article , Bowser says...
Keep one thing in mind: Kodak's past management wasn't very bright.
These are they guys who once tasked their people with finding a way to
kill the digital revolution to protect their film business.

... really they did? Almost too funny to be true. What plan did Kodak
devise to kill digital photography?

OK, not a CEO, but a product manager:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/es...k_eulogy.shtml

Still, what a moron...


There are numerous examples of large companies being wholly and
illogically resistant to change. Sony, GM, Bell, the list of
casualties and soon-to-be casualties goes on.


Bell was not done in by "change", it was done in by lawyers.


In my opinion as a former employee of a Bell System subsidiary, the
company was not done in by change, and lawyers may have helped do it in,
but were not the primary cause.

My perception is that the old timers from the time of Theodore Vail
onward, who understood the business, had all died or retired, or were
forced out by their age. They were replaced by business administration
types whose principle achievements in college was their abilities on the
football teams of second string leagues. They were all cheering, slogans
(Ready, Fire, Aim was a pet peeve of mine) and win the next quarter.
They did not understand the business, they had no vision beyond the next
quarterly report. They wanted to boost the value of their stock options
and they did not care what happened to the company afterwards. Après
moi, le déluge. And that is what they got. It was so sad to see this
over 100 year old institution destroyed by the rot from within. A tragedy.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Kodak reorganization Dale[_2_] In The Darkroom 3 May 6th 13 09:54 AM
Reorganization CFV James Silverton Digital Photography 2 October 9th 04 11:12 PM
Vote *NO* on reorganization Robert McClenon Digital Photography 26 September 13th 04 04:55 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.