Kodak webpage for film?

Michael Scarpitti wrote:

"Ron Baird" wrote in message ...
Greetings Mike,

Thanks for the review.

Actually, the discontinuance of these products is likely due to declining
demand as noted.

...caused by poor marketing, I believe....

The discontinuance of a product is really based on you, the
consumer/user. I have used all of the papers you have mentioned and sadly
miss them especially Ektalure. The films will be missed as well.

Kodak sales reps used to call on pros, as well as people working in
technical fields at hospitals and univerities, and educate them about
products...the very produts we are talking about...Kodak does not, to
the best of my knowledge, have field reps anymore. Probably someone
thought they could 'save money'.

I spoke with some at the main pro lab I use, last year in San Diego. This year I have not
heard of any visiting reps from Kodak, though the Fuji reps visited again.

I should mention that the product samples Fuji gave me have resulted in me buying and
using three of their products that I had not used, or rarely used, in the past. The
previous Kodak reps visit did not involve any product samples.

. . . . . . . So, Kodak's decisions have no impact on Kodak's success?

Ektachrome vs Kodachrome ?? The dilemma there is again what the customer
wants.

If he has a REAL choice. Take that choice away by refusing to keep
products advancing and closing labs, and you can predict what the
reaction will be.

I will definitely agree with Mr. Scarpitti on this one. I used more Kodachrome in the past
for some of my work. The turnaround time, and general pain in the ass of processing
largely made my usage of Kodachrome less. Then when the price became quite high for the
Professional Kodachrome, that mostly pushed me to only Ektachrome, or to Fujichrome.

Unfortunately, I think it is too late for Kodachrome, unless something changes in the
technology to allow local labs to develop it. I can get Ektachrome processing in under an
hour, or at worse three hours locally, at several labs. I have also done Ektachrome
processing in the kitchen, something not possible with Kodachrome.



Where do you put your money in the research and development process.
I am sure if you were a businessman you would put your efforts where they
made a difference for your customers. Like you I also loved Kodachrome 25,
but it was you and I, and a few others that made up the buying public. Not
enough to support the costs involved, just not possible.

Poor marketing.

I think also to a little extent poor cameras. The shift in camera gear went from a
standard 50 mm lens of f1.8 or f2.0 (or faster), to a standard zoom of f4.0 (or slower).
This dictated that more people were using faster films, since ISO 25 gives some shooting
restrictions. To the credit of modern film, there are improvements with newer ISO 100
emulsions.



The ads you see are the result of a lot of research on the part of large
advertising firms.

I could do better.

I like some of the ads in PDN and other professionally oriented publications. However, the
general public ads seem to play towards an unintelligent public, which is somewhat
insulting. People who get involved in photography generally seem a little more intelligent
than the average beer drinker (comparing beer ads on television), and I would like to see
them treated better.

. . . . . .

Ron Baird
Eastman Kodak Company


Thank you Mr. Baird for listening in on the group.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio
http://www.allgstudio.com/gallery.html Updated!

Michael Scarpitti wrote:

"Ron Baird" wrote in message ...
Greetings Mike,

Thanks for the review.

Actually, the discontinuance of these products is likely due to declining
demand as noted.

...caused by poor marketing, I believe....

The discontinuance of a product is really based on you, the
consumer/user. I have used all of the papers you have mentioned and sadly
miss them especially Ektalure. The films will be missed as well.

Kodak sales reps used to call on pros, as well as people working in
technical fields at hospitals and univerities, and educate them about
products...the very produts we are talking about...Kodak does not, to
the best of my knowledge, have field reps anymore. Probably someone
thought they could 'save money'.

I spoke with some at the main pro lab I use, last year in San Diego. This year I have not
heard of any visiting reps from Kodak, though the Fuji reps visited again.

I should mention that the product samples Fuji gave me have resulted in me buying and
using three of their products that I had not used, or rarely used, in the past. The
previous Kodak reps visit did not involve any product samples.

. . . . . . . So, Kodak's decisions have no impact on Kodak's success?

Ektachrome vs Kodachrome ?? The dilemma there is again what the customer
wants.

If he has a REAL choice. Take that choice away by refusing to keep
products advancing and closing labs, and you can predict what the
reaction will be.

I will definitely agree with Mr. Scarpitti on this one. I used more Kodachrome in the past
for some of my work. The turnaround time, and general pain in the ass of processing
largely made my usage of Kodachrome less. Then when the price became quite high for the
Professional Kodachrome, that mostly pushed me to only Ektachrome, or to Fujichrome.

Unfortunately, I think it is too late for Kodachrome, unless something changes in the
technology to allow local labs to develop it. I can get Ektachrome processing in under an
hour, or at worse three hours locally, at several labs. I have also done Ektachrome
processing in the kitchen, something not possible with Kodachrome.



Where do you put your money in the research and development process.
I am sure if you were a businessman you would put your efforts where they
made a difference for your customers. Like you I also loved Kodachrome 25,
but it was you and I, and a few others that made up the buying public. Not
enough to support the costs involved, just not possible.

Poor marketing.

I think also to a little extent poor cameras. The shift in camera gear went from a
standard 50 mm lens of f1.8 or f2.0 (or faster), to a standard zoom of f4.0 (or slower).
This dictated that more people were using faster films, since ISO 25 gives some shooting
restrictions. To the credit of modern film, there are improvements with newer ISO 100
emulsions.



The ads you see are the result of a lot of research on the part of large
advertising firms.

I could do better.

I like some of the ads in PDN and other professionally oriented publications. However, the
general public ads seem to play towards an unintelligent public, which is somewhat
insulting. People who get involved in photography generally seem a little more intelligent
than the average beer drinker (comparing beer ads on television), and I would like to see
them treated better.

. . . . . .

Ron Baird
Eastman Kodak Company


Thank you Mr. Baird for listening in on the group.

Ciao!

Gordon Moat
A G Studio
http://www.allgstudio.com/gallery.html Updated!