I wonder how many of these petitioners have ever worked for a multi-billion dollar a year corporation....let alone run one. I find the whole effort exceedingly naive at best.
Originally Posted by MikeSeb
Good luck fellas.
When you are a corporation like Kodak that sells mostly through a dealer network, it never hurts to have additional end-user input.
It may be that with enough interest, you may see something like the ULF special order for B&W film.
And at worst...? Do you really think that the individuals who are rallying to have their voices heard by a large corporation don't understand this? Your critique reveals nothing other than the Schadenfreude that begat it.
Originally Posted by BradS
Mike, Brad, I think that you have badly misunderstood something.
The purpose of this kind of petition is to tell what we want. It is not the same as saying "I know better". No one has claimed to have worked for a multi-billion dollar a year corporation; we are all individual consumers who just use the products. This is completely normal business; client telling what they want to a vendor, and then the vendor makes its decision. There are of course many ways to tell what we want, the most important being what Mike said, buying the products. But it's not the only way in certain situations. We can also talk to the manufacturers, tell them what we want.
So, I think that in fact, your approaches are quite twisted, not our petitioners. This is just communication.
Ouch! Zowee! Are we in the schoolyard here?
Originally Posted by Greg Davis
90% of my work is shot on film, but I do "enjoy" my digital camera when it's the right tool for the job. What I enjoy even more is doing useful things---as opposed to empty feel-good gestures like protests and petitions---that might materially advance the cause of analog photography. Things like demonstrating to others via my own work---or so I immodestly hope---what is possible with an analog or hybrid workflow; how such methods can produce work of a beauty and permanence that puts digital to shame; and why others might want to do likewise in their own work. And I buy the materials I need to make it happen, which does my part to keep the manufacturers making those things.
So Greg, you might want to learn more before you pronounce upon anither's "passion". My "passion" is for results, not gestures.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I've been reading APUG quite actively this year, surfing also through the old threads. The incredible thing here is that there are almost no trolls or troublemakers like on many Finnish internet forums! I really love APUG for this particular reason and that's why I also became a subscriber.
Now I feel that I bumped into the first troublemakers at APUG. It's not about what you think and believe, but about how you treat your fellowmen. Mocking other people, especially when you are wrong to begin with, is just the wrong way to discuss; and if you have nothing to discuss about, then don't post. It keeps APUG a place I want to subscribe in the future, too.
Over and out; thank you.
Last edited by hrst; 10-21-2009 at 03:16 PM. Click to view previous post history.
There are two points of view on this and they come up every time we go through a realignment of products. Hashing it over hasn't, and won't, chance either sides opinion. I don't think there is a right or wrong side to this issue.
For the record I'm one of the telling a company what products you like is OK, but in the end dollars make the most noise. I've kind of mellowed out that petitioners are going to petition. I'll still fill the freezer with products I use, extra full if they make the realignment list.
Worst case, I'll find a new product/process, even if it is mixing my own chemistry or cutting sheets from rolls.
Speaking of that, think I'll get the hassy out and burn some Tri-X.
My sentiments exactly, Mike, and why, independent of this forum, there are prominent artists and printers who are, as I write this, petitioning Kodak to keep this product alive.
Originally Posted by MikeSeb
I think you guys might give some consideration to the simple fact that Kodak is a publicly held company with some 268 MILLION shares outstanding. The comapny lost more money (earnings per share) last year than the whole company is currently worth (market cap).
Think for a while about the following....
1) What do you think the share holders want?
2) How do you think an internet petition with 100 (or, even 10000) signers compares to the demands of the share holders?
Suppose for just a moment that a large portion of your personal fortune were tied up in Kodak stock....or, that a majority of your earnings were paid in the form of Kodak stock options....what would you want? and how would that want compare in force to this petition drive.
As consumers, the only vote you have is the dollars you spend. Your time to vote has passed. Get over it and move forward.
Last edited by BradS; 10-21-2009 at 03:35 PM. Click to view previous post history.
I buy their paper. I make my living from using their paper and teaching other people to use their paper. This may be a hobby to you, but it is my livelihood. I am very passionate about traditional photography and the creative possibilities it provides. By eliminating our access to these products, we no longer have a very important tool for visual communication. It is not simply a matter of one product going away, but having other options to go to. This eliminates access to all RA-4 printing at home and even schools. Even if we can find a workaround with the new emulsion, it is not available in sheets. That means we will have to invest in very large amounts of paper in roll form. Not everyone is able to make that investment.
Originally Posted by MikeSeb
This petition is to let Kodak know that their decisions impact more than just their bottom line. At the scale they make products, I can't see how any of it turns a profit. And nobody wants their digital cameras or printers, either. I don't know how they are going to survive at all unless they make changes.