Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2012/02/23
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]There's an article on the web comparing why Fujifilm survives and Kodak does not. First Fujifilm did a lot of promotion in the 90s to move the slide film users to their new vivid Velvia/Astia/Provia. By the time Kodak counteracted with Ektachrome, it's too late. The Yellow Wall sprung a leak. When the digital onslaught came, Fujifilm's CEO acted more like an innovative American company executive and kept adopting to the new fangle technologies while Kodak consistently tried to "stop digital," acting more like a traditional Japanese company trying to protect their iron rice bowl. Too bad the iron bowl rusted, but that's too many bad analogy for a single post so I should stop now. On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 1:54 PM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote: > Fujifilm I think is still doing well and I think in a much stronger > position > than Kodak. In the 80's and 90's I used their stuff way more than I used > Kodak stuff. Also Ilford I was more fond of than Kodak for my black and > white. > But I never thought like most photographer did that Fuji left Kodak in the > dust. I thought the Kodak stuff for the most part was about as good. > The last black and white films I used the most of was made by Fuji. Neopan. > I don't expect those to last. But I don't expect myself to care. If and > when > I do more black and white film work it will be done with color neg. C41. > > -- > Mark R. > http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/winterdays/ > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information > -- // richard <http://www.richardmanphoto.com>