i was reading an article (The Demise of Kodak: Five Reasons by Kamal Munir) from the Wall Street Journal about the bankruptcy of Kodak (article here) and i can't help but write my insights of its reasons.
1. caught in time:
kodak never thought that things would change. they never really tried to keep up with the developments that came with time and technology. they attempted to prolong the film-based photography for as long as they could, but now with all those digital cameras everywhere, they couldn't anymore, hence the filing of the bankruptcy.
it could be said that Kodak only thought of digital photography is nothing but a substitute for the film-based photography. but, as some would say, a substitute could take the place of the so-called permanent, because nothing is permanent.
2. every picture tells a story:
while i find it true, being stuck with the stereotype that Kodak is and will always be THE one trusted in traditional photography, which is THE main point why they are collapsing, if they hadn't collapsed fully yet. and for further emphasis on this point and to avoid redundancy, read again my conclusion number 1.
traditional cameras are viewed as a purely photographic equipment, whereas a digicam is both a photographic equipment as well as an electronic gadget. they may have built a legacy in the film photography business, but with the changes the times and technology has brought, they should have gone on with the flow. they shod have realized they could still collapse and that they are not as invincible as they think they are.
3. back to the future:
from what the wsj article implies, Kodak is stuck in the yesteryears. back in the day, they were after the women as their target market. it is because of the women that those Kodak moments were made. how? the women are the ones Kodak made in charge of documenting gatherings of family and friends, babies' firsts, special occasions, etc. name it, Kodak moments were created by women.
men during those times were stuck in photography studios being the professionals making formal portraits, and basically that was just it. now, digital photography has made the men the main customers. *this is probably the reason why there are all those sex scandals circulating the world-wide web now. sex scandals = perverted man + digicam + sex + hot girl. sounds like (toot) and (toot).
4. the camera never lies:
technology was also an undeniable reason of Kodak's demise. they were half-hearted with embracing the evolution of the camera and were unwilling to let go of the film business. after all, with reportedly 70% gross margins, what fool would let go? but then, things change. if you cannot embrace it fully, you adjust to it because it won't adjust for you.
with digital photography, you can easily find out how the photo you took looks like. unlike the film-based, you will have to wait for a print out (which could take an hour to days or weeks, even months) before you can see that your eyes were actually closed and you were actually drooling when it was taken. with digital photography, i find that it could actually capture the atmosphere of when the photo was taken. it would show how a person is actually feeling. or not, if the person is good at hiding what they feel. nevertheless, you don't have to wait until forever to see that Kodak moment with a digicam.
5. over-exposed:
it struck me, i actually had quite a lot of wasted films because of exposure, thanks to those film cameras and me being a kid-who-owns-a-camera. lost were those moments i tried to capture. i don't even remember whether i should use the term "exposed" or "over-exposed". oh, well, it's a thing of the past. no pun on Kodak intended.
the article said Kodak does not know it's limitations. it's CEO even said it's gonna be like Apple, but Apple adapts to change, they don't. and so there goes their demise. Kodak is trying for world supremacy. like the stories of historical people in books end up, no one ever lived to see themselves succeed in dominating the world, and now Kodak has suffered such fate. nice try.
No comments:
Post a Comment