But who knows...
Heck, he could even talk generic shooting and printing techniques without missing a beat. Always enjoyed his visits. He had a deep reservoir of photographic knowledge. For obvious reasons he sold lots of product too.
Boy have times changed...
Yep. That explains it then. My timeframe would have been in the early to mid 1980s. That guy really knew his stuff.
Stephen I guess my point is that, as zsas said, this is obviously a Kodak Australia issue specifically. You need to consider how much a threat title and some non reading nobody can result in sensationalist news due to rumors.
Is Kodak Australia an independent entity from Eastman Kodak?
Kodak Express do C41, for B+W and E6 they post it to Atkins.
B+W are independent, they do B+W, C41, and E6.
Atkins claim to have the only Dip'n'Dunk, and the only Kodak Q-lab, in Adelaide, and they do up to 8x10s. They claim to be the best, they're certainly the most expensive.
Everywhere else around here that offers 'film processing' just post it to one of these three (mostly to Atkins).
I don't know about the other major cities, there's surely more labs in Sydney and Melbourne? We're only a small capital of maybe 1.5m people, Brisvegas/Perth are maybe 2m, Melbs 3-4m and Sydney 5-6m by now, so there's probably at least 10-20 labs spread amongst them.
As far as I am aware, with the exception of commercial movie film, Kodak doesn't sell directly to any retailer or commercial photographer or processing laboratory.
Stephen's problem order wasn't actually filled by Kodak.
Kodak entirely dismantled its distribution network. Replacing that is a network of independent third party distributors who fulfill all wholesale and commercial orders. The distributors vary greatly in their quality and consistency.
The customer service responsibilities seem to be poorly distributed between Kodak employees and employees of Kodak's agents (the distributors).
This is Kodak's problem, and it is far more important than Stephen's problems with one or more problem orders - it is a systemic problem.
Kodak isn't the only one with the problem. Ilford (for example) is also forced to deal through a network of distributors. The difference though is:
1) Ilford has always had distributors in North America and other parts of the world. Kodak used to be its own distributor; and
2) Far fewer labs use Ilford materials than Kodak materials.
Hi Matt, seems that we are saying the same thing? I said the Kodak AU is its own entity (which you are saying is a network of further third parties). So if there is a QC issue in AU, and the OP received apology and resolution from Kodak AU, I advocated that the OP contact Kodak Global, instead of merely posting such issue on an Internet forum. All that does is cause come-out-of-the-wood-work discussions about how "Kodak wronged me too".....
I am saying OP contact Kodak AU (which was done to resolution), and contact Kodak Global re these issues in AU. Then and only then, should one get a cold shoulder, take-it-to-the-net.....
I think we agree this is an issue Kodak Global should be concerned with, regardless if there are 2,3,4 or 10,000 agents between the OP placing his order and the ultimate responsible party....
I really don't care if there are middle-layer folks in the process, Kodak AU and by extension Kodak Global put their name on the box and are ultimately the responsible parties...
Are you saying that since Kodak AU has many layers between them and the customer that they are somehow less responsible? They are responsible for the whole life cycle, regardless if they've more "middle layer" than say Kodak US has?