Ask HN: Insider history of the demise of Kodak? • Hacker News Board

Re: Ask HN: Insider history of the demise of Kodak?

#171

Post by gchpaco » Mon, Jul 18, 2016, 9:29 AM UTC

Finnucane wrote: post #102

Laforet wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've looked into these processes years ago but backed off because they seemed to require some really stringent temperature control. Is it no longer the case?

It is mostly the case. Some of the kits are designed to be more manageable at home--not requiring lab-level controls. But still a little fussier than b&w, no matter what. Personally, I haven't looked into too much, because I am color blind and have a hard time with the printing. I stick to b&w now mainly. I just traded two Mamiyas for a Hasselblad 503. The Mamiyas are fine, but I have too many systems to feed now.

The printing is the fun part, anyway.

Re: Ask HN: Insider history of the demise of Kodak?

#172

Post by porsupah » Mon, Jul 18, 2016, 9:31 AM UTC

afian wrote: post #57

From the warren buffet autobiography ... “What about Kodak? asked Bill Ruane. He looked back at Gates to see what he would say. “Kodak is toast,” said Gates.8 Nobody else in the Buffett Group knew that digital technology would make film cameras toast. In 1991, even Kodak didn’t know that it was toast.9 “Bill probably thinks all the television networks are going to get killed,” said Larry Tisch, whose company, Loews C…

Even amongst more technically minded folk, there were some having difficulty accepting that the technical challenges facing digital photography would, in fact, be overcome. Here's quite an interesting thread from rec.photo, Dec 1990 onwards, discussing just that.

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.photo/ZnqcQVzAln...

Re: Ask HN: Insider history of the demise of Kodak?

#173

Post by TorKlingberg » Mon, Jul 18, 2016, 9:38 AM UTC

intrasight wrote: post #141

dredmorbius wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was somewhat staggered in the late 1990s reading John Sealy Brown (former PARC director), in The Social Life of Information , which is otherwise and excellent book and one I'd still recommend, that the grand-daddy of technical reproduction businesses completely failed to mention its biggest competitor, the Apache Webserver, anywhere in the book (there was brief mention of the World Wide Web). I've worked with some…

Rent-seeking behaviour is not sustainable in a functioning capitalist society. But it can be very lucrative while it lasts, and it only has to last until you retire.

How is selling printers rent seeking?

Re: Ask HN: Insider history of the demise of Kodak?

#174

Post by DoubleGlazing » Mon, Jul 18, 2016, 9:57 AM UTC

I worked for Kodak UK for a few months in 2002. I was a contractor working on their ERP systems, specifically reporting and BI tools. I wasn't privy to anything strategic but I could see some odd things.

The oddest thing was that they were still trying hard to push the APS format, despite the fact that is was a pretty poor format when it first came out it was now looking even worse when compared to early mass market digital cameras.

There was a certain arrogance amongst higher up managers. A sort of "We're Kodak, we're the best, we dictate the market!" There was a noticeable staff churn problem as a result. I was on a team of 20 of which 14 were contractors.

I can see some interesting parallels between Kodak and Nokia. Two giants who dominated their sectors and just didn't anticipate changes in consumer demand and then couldn't/wouldn't adapt.

Re: Ask HN: Insider history of the demise of Kodak?

#175

Post by verinus » Mon, Jul 18, 2016, 9:59 AM UTC

T0T0R0 wrote: post #113

maxwell wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But what could they do? Could they have bought NeXT in the mid '90s? Then maybe we'd all be walking around with a "smartcam" that also makes calls.

I mean, yeah, coulda, woulda, shoulda... but those sorts of alternate histories require some kind of A Priori knowledge that NeXT might become an incredible company, beyond that, augmenting the path of a company like NeXT will contaminate the timeline, provoking unpredictable ripple effects in the subsequent continuum. If Skynet kills John Connor, what will the machine world look like? What happens if Marty listens t…

If I hat to bet on any of the two, I would bet on Microsoft. They have standard Products used in businesses all over the world. Corporations moving much slower than trends I think Apple is in much more danger...

Re: Ask HN: Insider history of the demise of Kodak?

#176

Post by dredmorbius » Mon, Jul 18, 2016, 10:22 AM UTC

TorKlingberg wrote: post #173

intrasight wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Rent-seeking behaviour is not sustainable in a functioning capitalist society. But it can be very lucrative while it lasts, and it only has to last until you retire.

How is selling printers rent seeking?

Possibly exploiting patents.Though Xerox lost out on much of that to IIRC Toshiba.

Re: Ask HN: Insider history of the demise of Kodak?

#177

Post by syats » Mon, Jul 18, 2016, 10:42 AM UTC

Just thought it make the thread more interesting if I mentioned the fact that Kodak used a non-standard calendar up until 1989.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Fixed_Calendar

Re: Ask HN: Insider history of the demise of Kodak?

#178

Post by ekianjo » Mon, Jul 18, 2016, 10:47 AM UTC

ohazi wrote: post #58

ekianjo wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Film is expensive but its still unbeatable in terms of dynamic range and details, especially if you go to larger formats than 35 mm.

That's not really true anymore. While large format film may still have a slight resolution advantage IF you have high resolution lenses to match, most high-end sensors have better dynamic range than film (~14-15 stops vs ~13 stops).

> While large format film may still have a slight resolution

For 4x5 format it's not "slight resolution" advantage, it's a major resolution advantage. The most expensive sensors these days go in the range of 50~80 M pixels, 4x5 goes way beyond that if you want to use pixels to reproduce the kind of details it provides. That's why film is still used for stuff like very large posters.

Re: Ask HN: Insider history of the demise of Kodak?

#179

Post by tmaly » Mon, Jul 18, 2016, 11:10 AM UTC

I was at RIT during the later half of the 90s. Most of my professors had done work at Kodak, and the mantra was that if you had a job there, you were set for life.

I think the digital camera and the market crashed from the dotcom bust worked in tandem to take down Kodak.

They had some really smart people working there, and they invented some really important tech that was used beyond cameras. Think image processing for satellites etc.

Re: Ask HN: Insider history of the demise of Kodak?

#180

Post by arethuza » Mon, Jul 18, 2016, 11:38 AM UTC

porsupah wrote: post #172

afian wrote: post #57

From the warren buffet autobiography ... “What about Kodak? asked Bill Ruane. He looked back at Gates to see what he would say. “Kodak is toast,” said Gates.8 Nobody else in the Buffett Group knew that digital technology would make film cameras toast. In 1991, even Kodak didn’t know that it was toast.9 “Bill probably thinks all the television networks are going to get killed,” said Larry Tisch, whose company, Loews C…

Even amongst more technically minded folk, there were some having difficulty accepting that the technical challenges facing digital photography would, in fact, be overcome. Here's quite an interesting thread from rec.photo, Dec 1990 onwards, discussing just that. https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/rec.photo/ZnqcQVzAln...

"No doubt, my recent $8000 35mm camera investment was a safe one."

Ouch!