The Decline of Kodak...What Happened?

Share
Embed
  • Published on Jun 13, 2018
  • The name Kodak was once synonymous with cameras and film. They were innovators in the industry and the leaders of it for 100 years. Yet a few years ago they experienced such a decline that they were forced into bankruptcy. This video explores the decline of Kodak and attempts to explain what happened to them.
    Twitter: twitter.com/MikeCompany17
    Patreon: www.patreon.com/companyman
    Website: companyman.squarespace.com
    Recent Video: Beanie Babies: ruclip.com/video/QiVTgNksdOs/video.html
    Other Company Declines:
    Kmart: ruclip.com/video/1__Qg1toSSs/video.html
    Blockbuster: ruclip.com/video/5sMXR7rK40U/video.html
    RadioShack: ruclip.com/video/JFivtOmXPPM/video.html
    Solo Cups: ruclip.com/video/YjzGKc4mynU/video.html
    Toys "R" Us: ruclip.com/video/4JYUo9WKkao/video.html
    hhgregg: ruclip.com/video/g6j4aoHbWdw/video.html
    Pan Am: ruclip.com/video/YInewzLzc78/video.html
    ESPN: ruclip.com/video/bt-4PbhpGYE/video.html
    Gibson: ruclip.com/video/apQ9SO7uF60/video.html
    iHeartMedia: ruclip.com/video/BImjay9KfYc/video.html
    Bon-Ton: ruclip.com/video/buWiH5_ru2Y/video.html
    Intro Made By - ruclip.com/channel/UCqi0-4XRvQLBo8E5r8bvPsA

Comments • 2 585

  • Chris Antoniou
    Chris Antoniou 23 hours ago

    Like the chicken's and the pig's attitude to breakfast... the chicken was INVOLVED in making the eggs while the pig was actually COMMITTED to the bacon. In other words, Kodak's revenue was derived mainly from film sales with camera sales being secondary. Other camera manufacturers were committed to camera manufacture and when film was taken out of the equation, flourished with digital.

    Kodak's failure on the other hand can perhaps be stated, not so much as they didn't pay attention to the digital medium enough, but that they paid TOO much attention to film and chemical print media and refused to accept the change that the digital medium would bring to that aspect of their business. Kodak was too used to being in such a dominant market position that when the collapse of film became a certainty, they no longer had the wherewithall (with the demise of film sales) to stay competitive in the digital camera market.

  • OG James
    OG James Day ago

    idk what kodak music is still fire you must not be listening

  • David Austin
    David Austin 5 days ago

    In 2005 the decline of Kodak was definitely going on BUT you failed to mention the CEO's that lead to a faster decline. One was Antonio Perez who came from HP thought that Kodak should be a printer company and not a film or visual capture company. So he sunk most of what profits Kodak made into printers. Digital X-Rays? Developed by Kodak and sold off to fund printers. OLED lighting? Developed by Kodak, sold off to LG to fund printers and to keep it afloat.
    So bull-headed management with one thought process pushed Kodak over the edge. Not just the wave of digital technology.

  • Rosalina Pina Iosia - Wadlow

    Thank you Micheal for the insight and new perspective towards Kodak. I like your video. Well done.

  • Kourosh Daneshi
    Kourosh Daneshi 7 days ago

    Could you do A video about Canon or Nikon, and Canon vs Nikon?

  • Chandler Broderick
    Chandler Broderick 16 days ago

    Young enough that I only know Kodak for their printers.

  • Paul McQuown
    Paul McQuown 18 days ago

    They simply ignored the digital age. Stupid as hell.

  • Joshua Lawrence
    Joshua Lawrence 26 days ago

    9:25-9:34
    Funniest transition in this video
    😂

  • Elizabeth Montgomery

    They could’ve started focusing on digital cameras and developing the technology even if our phone would still not have been necessarily “Kodak” phones they could be selling us on the idea that the lens is or whatever component they developed to its best. Also the printers only just the pictures we recently bought a printer that just prints photos. Also their paper I still wish I could print on Kodak paper it was and in my opinion still is better quality I am bummed I can’t find Kodak paper I would buy that for my home printing if I could get Kodak paper or the software to do picture editing so many options for them to focus on even now they could make a come back by focusing on those products. If someone told me tomorrow that Kodak developed a new photo only printer I would gladly buy it or an app to help me better digitally edit my photos. Because I grew up in the 90s I still have a lot of trust of the name.

  • N0rdman
    N0rdman Month ago

    Yes, you hit the nail squarely on the head.
    There is a ton of what they could have done instead to get new revenue streams but isn't hindsight a marvelous thing?
    If they had realised how it was going to change in the modern world, that content is created by everyone in their phones and shared on the Internet they could have started selling storage online (cloud based) with service like printing and hosting like Flickr and other combined.
    But that takes a magic chrystal ball or a prophet to see in the future.
    What of Kodak had been the Facebook and Flickr of today with you storing your images with them instead of Google or Apple?

  • Stuey Griffith
    Stuey Griffith Month ago

    1:46 "George Eastman is the man to focus on...."

    I see what ya did there! 😉

  • B Johnson
    B Johnson Month ago

    I worked for Eastman Kodak and the company was not all about film. What happened is the stockholders wanted more money and greed happened. Thus Kodak sold Lysol, Cholesterol testing machines, office Huge Copiers and was left with film and movie film. Obviously, the competition for film and movie film was less expensive and that is when the company could not spend to compete.
    If you understand the in between message I'm stating is that when greed hits and the stockholders own the company all they want is money and by selling off divisions made the stock rocket from the 30's to the 70's per share. Look it up from 1994 to 1997. Those stockholders then sold their stock and made tons of cash. And, that was the start of the downfall as the stockholders ruined the company just fir their own greed!!!

  • jesus rico
    jesus rico Month ago

    Scott D. Anthony said

  • jesus rico
    jesus rico Month ago

    Kodak’s Downfall Wasn’t About Technology

  • Ozi Landmark Norsk Fitness & Bobybuilding

    Now this was a Kodak moment

  • James Edward
    James Edward Month ago

    Cell phone killed them mf

  • TrollForce
    TrollForce Month ago

    I'm extremely convinced that Kodlak Whitemane had his name inspired by this company.

  • Kyle Chang
    Kyle Chang Month ago

    Kodak sponsored Journey Into Imagination at Epcot from 1982-2010.

  • barby dolly
    barby dolly Month ago

    There are Kodak Lens eye care stores now.

  • AlexXx
    AlexXx Month ago

    DIGITAL HAPPENED

  • dacypher22
    dacypher22 Month ago

    If Kodak had really run with digital cameras and put in serious R&D into the technology, they could have been the provider of high-end cameras and lenses for smartphones today. Most manufacturers outsource the camera manufacturing to a specialist, and some phones even use the company providing the camera and lenses as a feature in advertising. And Kodak obviously has a powerful brand that would have helped with that. The way a lot of people trash their smartphones for an upgrade every year or two, this could have been a good business for them, versus the standard digital camera market where people tended to buy one and use it for years without upgrading.

  • kiymberly1990
    kiymberly1990 Month ago

    My first digital camera was a kodak, it would have been around 2003 or 2004 when I got it for Christmas. I was so disappointed because I thought I was getting an iPod.

  • LilPnutDollMom526
    LilPnutDollMom526 Month ago

    In 2007-2008, I worked in an amusement park, taking pics of guests for a company owned by Kodak called Qualex. We used Canon Cybershot cameras. I always thought it was weird that we didn’t used Kodak. So when I asked, they told me that their strong point was film, they were weak on digital.

  • Abdul Rockman
    Abdul Rockman Month ago

    Because of GoPro.

  • Meagan Roth
    Meagan Roth Month ago

    Been repairing One Hour Photo equipment since 1981, I saw it all happen

  • BubbaSteve Garcia
    BubbaSteve Garcia 2 months ago

    No idea why I love watching your content so much

  • selym aguio
    selym aguio 2 months ago

    Do Fujifilm, please!

  • Jez I AM
    Jez I AM 2 months ago

    Great video, you are right and it got me thinking, that we have Kodak to thank for all those memorable moments we grew up in. I think the way things turned out is for the best, they had a fantastic run, nowadays the choice of digital cameras is huge and no one manufacturer has a monopoly on that. Thank you Kodak for your contribution.

  • MasterFobai
    MasterFobai 2 months ago

    I work for this company now as a contractor. It's sad how out of touch it still is to this day. The employees who are left have an incredible air of "waiting for it all to be over". I'm probably going to quit pretty soon, before it sucks the life out of me.

  • DannyDaDuffyDucking Daffer

    Black

  • Darth Poptart
    Darth Poptart 2 months ago

    In a way, they killed themselves.

  • Hector Cassells
    Hector Cassells 2 months ago

    i love my kodak printomatic camera

  • Aim_Col Tony
    Aim_Col Tony 2 months ago

    Mobile cell phones bringing cameras kind of made it harder for kodak

  • Aim_Col Tony
    Aim_Col Tony 2 months ago

    I remember both of my parents taling me to a Kodak location to take pictures and all that

  • Timothy Schaefer
    Timothy Schaefer 2 months ago

    As you alluded, pictures was a dead end no matter what happened. I would not be surprised if the entire current industry of cameras, lenses, digital photo sensors, and printing was a fraction of the business they enjoyed in the heyday after adjusting for inflation. The world moved on to a MUCH cheaper way to enjoy “Kodak Moments.” In the picture space, milking it as long as they did was probably the smartest thing to do. I have often thought their big failing was not getting into films for non-photographic purposes. Precise layering of thin films (their true expertise and how film and photo paper is made) continues to this day, just in the form of electronics, displays, medical appliances, and beyond. But maybe that as well pales in comparison to the industry they commanded before.

  • Florida Trailblazer
    Florida Trailblazer 2 months ago

    It's simple digital photography. The first digital camera I had was in 1999 it took photos onto floppy disks. The first digital photo I was in was in 1985 at a state fair when they snapped my photo and scanned it into the computer that was very hi-tech for the time.

  • Mel Enriquez
    Mel Enriquez 2 months ago

    You have 90% of the facts and assessment correct. Let me provide you some other info which you may not know.
    1 - Kodak knew of what the future will be in 2 instances. The first was a research they commissioned in early 1980'2 (ca 1982-84). The key question they wanted to know was WHEN digital cameras will start making impact. The short answer was in about 15 years. That was equal to the end of the 20th century. It is also informative to know, that as early as that time Sony saw a potential for this. But the R&D cost to overcome many problems was high. Digital imaging was just new, hardly 10 years old by then, plus the patents by Kodak are going to be hard to break. Patents was about 17- or 20 years before they lapse. If a patent was granted in 1978, so the end would be around 1998. That study was kept secret and an internal matter only to be known only in the 2000's.
    2 - The 2nd instance was in the mid 1990's or just about the tenure of George Fisher at Kodak, a former executive of Motorola who took over when the previous CEO was not doing much in pushing digital. That study now asked a simple question - WHEN will digital finally take over? The short answer of that when digital cameras finally breech the 50% mark was around 2008-2009. They had 10 years to work on the transition. By 1998, they already knew that film was kaput in just 10 years. Of course the study was wrong. But not of its conclusion. It was wrong by around 4-5 years. The year digital camera sales overtook film was in 2005! Instead, 2008-2009 was the start of the rapid downfall of Kodak.
    3 - In the 1990's, Kodak partnered with Canon and Nikon to build mock up and prototypes of DSLRs. They used their bodies and built the early DSLRs. They were only 1mp at first, had massive bodies and batteries. So, yes, Kodak was doing R&D in digital cameras!
    upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/9a/Digitalback_dcs420_01.jpg
    upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/0/0b/Kodak_DCS_560_Front.jpg
    upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f2/Early_digital%21.jpg/1280px-Early_digital%21.jpg
    So, in spite of all these R&D (they produced the first 1.4mp sensors, etc), partnered with reputable camera companies to help them make them and iron the problems, why did they still fail? FYI, if their P&S were no 1 in the overall digital camera market in the mid-2000's, their Pro14n or Pro series DSLR was even more impressive! It was outselling Canon's 1D and 1Ds combined! But just like that, in 2005, the DSC 14n/c was discontinued!
    So what happened?
    Even if they were selling more pro cameras, they didn't have efficiencies of production. My guess is they couldn't keep the cost down. In the early 2000's, 35FF rejects were probably in the 80% of the wafer. So, you get maybe 20-25% or 30% usable to build a sensor. The yields were way too small and they were not profitable or profitable enough. Without an aps-c or smaller sensor to re-use those unusable wafer areas, you basically throw them away.
    The 2nd reason I see is that Kodak was an analogue company. Chemicals, paper, ink, film, are all analog. Kodak as 100+ years experience in this, but no experience in running a semi-conductor business, with hungry and more capable competitors at their heels. You run your R&D, production and mg't differently in a digital product.
    3rd Reason is - culture and not knowing real failures. It's the same story as to what happened to IBM, Nokia, Motorola, etc. You can get too comfortable in your old ways that you cannot change anymore or know how to change. Apple almost fell into that trap also in the 90's. You can have deep pockets but if you don't have the leader/CEO to have a clear vision of that future and know how to steer to it, you are going to die. I am afraid, Apple now is slowly getting into that rut as well as its current CEO does not have that vision
    4th is lack of gumption or political will of the CEO. George Fisher knew what was going to happen. He tried his best to maneuver Kodak into the future. But I think he compromised too much, and tried to appease the short term interest of investors. That divided the energy to transition properly.
    What could have Kodak done differently?
    Many things, and it is not the first time it is done.
    1 - Get a strong CEO at the helm who had vision and will be ruthless in executing that vision.
    2 - spin off the sensor and processor as a separate entity with no contact and interference from the main business of film/chemicals. House them separately in their own building or factory far from the rest of the company. Belll labs in the 70's spun off many business and one of them became successful - Luscent. By being free from the main business, they can chart their course, do the proper R&D and not be bullied by the rest of the company.
    3 - If you don't want to spin it out, make it a separate cost center. This is what Sony did about 3 years ago. The sensor division became a cost/profit center, to chart its own course and get its own customers, clients, do its own R&D, and planning and vision. It is no longer under the imaging or camera division. What is the significance of this? It means now it has to justify its existence. Be aggressive. Be proactive. It's R&D and marketing will be different. It will be open to using the sensor not just to cameras, but smart phones, medical application, industrial use, security, even automotive uses (the future of cars).
    Regardless of point 2 or 3, the head of that spun off company or division must also be strong, a visionary, and can execute.
    The reason why Canon or Sony can do this well is because they are basically a conglomerate. They know diversity in business. Sony for example, is not just about cameras. They have movies, games/playstation, medical, financial services, music, etc. Each of these cost centers have strong leaders/heads that can chart their own future. That goes for many others like Panasonic and Canon.
    What you have left out is one detail that is easily overlooked - Fuji.
    Fuji is still alive today and did not fold. Why is that? That is a long story. My response is long enough for Kodak. Let it just be said that Fuji understood the critical technologies needed and they were willing to work on it through the years. They focused on the sensor and processor and quietly moved. They discarded those that are useless and dead ends and pursued those that make sense. Also, they were patient to learn and change. They also know how to pick the proper format, and where to pick their fights. This is the same mindset and culture they used to slowly eat into Kodak's market share in the film era. But as I said, that is another story. What is significant is this - Kodak, Polaroid, Ilford, etc. basically are all gone.Fuji is still here and moving in strong with their XT-3 and XT-30.
    I hope this clarifies some of the points you missed in your video. Thanks for posting it! :)

  • Gunner Gunter
    Gunner Gunter 2 months ago

    It's worth mentioning too that early digital cameras weren't amazing. Kodak may have assumed they had a quality edge that would keep film relevant.

  • B Mockler
    B Mockler 2 months ago

    To this day I know they still make Kodak batteries because there in stores

  • Family Friendly Person
    Family Friendly Person 2 months ago

    Is it just me or is Panasonic dying?

  • Jason Fidanza
    Jason Fidanza 2 months ago

    Awesome video

  • TheForsakenEagle
    TheForsakenEagle 2 months ago +2

    Kodak's bankruptcy was a Kodak Moment.

  • The Misunderstood Assassin

    I've already seen this video before but it will be the first video of yours that I'll watch in 2019.
    EDITS- 9:08 P.M.: *finishes video 15 minutes later*
    9:10 P.M.: This video was as interesting as I remembered. I don't know why I lost interest in your channel before. 🤓

  • James
    James 2 months ago +1

    I remember selling digital cameras from the start of hitting the market. Kodak had crap cameras compared to say Canon. It made sense for Kodak to start making printers as the home printing market went off at the same time. Canon was ahead of the pack as they made home printing solutions at the time. HP and EPSON were also making strides. Meanwhile, Kodak was like the IE of digital cameras. They never really caught up to the quality of Canon, Sony, Nikon etc. They lived off their name for a second rate product.

  • Mega Mijit
    Mega Mijit 2 months ago

    these videos sound how they are SUPPOSED to sound at 1.5x speed

  • ZeoJader
    ZeoJader 3 months ago

    1:11 kodak black?

  • jackelofnar
    jackelofnar 3 months ago

    Kodak like Fuji are still making though

  • Federico Pedroza
    Federico Pedroza 3 months ago

    Is this mr beat?

  • SWLinPHX
    SWLinPHX 3 months ago

    Linda McCartney, Paul‘s first wife, was an Eastman and associated with her family‘s company.

  • Vincent Cheng
    Vincent Cheng 3 months ago

    Kodak's film business was very profitable and brought in so much recurring (chemicals, printing papers and mini labs' supplies) cash flows that they could not admit to themselves that film's days were over. Digital camera had a totally different business model and delivered no recurring cash flow - not even printing papers. Spending the money to buy Sterling Drugs showed how lost Kodak had become.

  • Brandon Vaughan
    Brandon Vaughan 3 months ago

    Let the past die. Kill it if you have to.

  • gkiltz0
    gkiltz0 3 months ago

    You can count on your fingers the number of companies worldwide that are
    1) more than 100 years old
    2) still linear to the original company in a management sense
    3) Still in the same industry they started out in
    4) Still a market leader in their biggest revenue producing industry
    I'm convinced that the normal and expected lifetime of a company is around 100 years give or take
    Not too many make it past that as arguably the same company

  • gkiltz0
    gkiltz0 3 months ago

    So they believed their own bullshit.Just like the NFL is doing now

  • gkiltz0
    gkiltz0 3 months ago

    Xerox invented the mouse, but sat on it until Steve Jobs saw it, and bought it for almost nothing

  • gkiltz0
    gkiltz0 3 months ago

    Kodakchrome was a slide film. It DID have excellent color saturation and very lifelike color, but it was different from their print film

  • Tom Scott
    Tom Scott 3 months ago

    I'm 64 yrs old. I have an iPhone XR. It's with me all the time. It takes great pictures. I also have a digital (Fuji) camera. It too takes great pictures. I also have a Canon AE-1 that I purchased in 1982. It currently has a roll of Kodak TMax B&W film in it. It also takes great pictures. Kodak has made some bad choices, they have also made some brilliant choices. I think they are looking at this like the music industry looks at vinyl records. Wait long enough and maybe the market will come back (slightly) their way. Hey Kodak... don't wait too long.

  • Ruchin Singh
    Ruchin Singh 3 months ago

    Yeah I get the picture. Like CC said innovator's dilemma.

  • Der unbekannte Nette
    Der unbekannte Nette 3 months ago

    Please do NOKIA!!!!!

  • Becc da hecc
    Becc da hecc 3 months ago

    My mom used to work at Kodak-

  • Devestation And Reform
    Devestation And Reform 3 months ago

    As a person who shoots on film, I hope they can make it. They still have my favorite film stocks and seem to be investing in the film commmunity.

  • Thomas Charnota
    Thomas Charnota 3 months ago

    I think the video is pretty fair looking at Kodak. But I think what Kodak failed to do is see “what else” can be done connected to digital photography. A place online to store photos for a small fee? Branch that concept into online storage and web services? Interestingly they understood the hardware that they saw as commodity but failed to see new business ideas that could have expanded revenue and other business avenues for them. They’re a little better about that today in the commercial space. Understanding how cryptocurrency can be connected to DRM and building technology that can generate revenue from that connection. Great ideas.

  • AmbiencePT
    AmbiencePT 3 months ago

    I use my Smartphone for snaps and apps. When it comes to artistic projects I only use Kodak films.
    There is still a market for film, they will never be a giant again, but they can provide films for a new generation of artists and photographers.

  • snowboarder 2020
    snowboarder 2020 3 months ago

    can you do one on polaroid?

  • Pink Back Program Pink Back Program Vote

    Think in the end album would have helped

  • Samuel Osuji
    Samuel Osuji 3 months ago

    Really awful of Kodak

  • josephskiles
    josephskiles 3 months ago

    Damn now I have that earworm of a song stuck in my head

  • Paul Hughes
    Paul Hughes 3 months ago

    worked for them for 25 years should have seen it coming you did not mention Instant photography and Polaroid taking them to court they would have lost a lot of money and the copyrights

  • Josh Martimez
    Josh Martimez 3 months ago

    My first camera was a digital Kodak Camera gifted to me in 2007. Great video.

  • AMA RMDtv
    AMA RMDtv 4 months ago

    I HAVE SPENT HOURS LOOKING FOR SOMETHINGS NEW INTEREST ABOUT KODAK , BUT NOTHINGS! R.I.P KODAK . YOU WILL BE ALWAYS REMEMBERED

  • Shellie Carlson
    Shellie Carlson 4 months ago

    Both of my fav point and shoots are Kodak. I buy their film. It's short sided that they did full court press the digital age. Hope they keep making film because it's great film. Very sad.

  • Jann Adriel Cervo
    Jann Adriel Cervo 4 months ago

    I'm crying. I hope Kodak recovered from their bankruptcy. Though their new line of digital cameras is not that great, but still I miss the days when they are the biggest in the industry and the best. I have to say though if ever they developed the digital camera back then, it is a huge possibility that phones will have cameras earlier instead of the early 21st century, and although if ever they managed their company in the right direction then our current smartphones camera manufacturer would be Kodak. Since what I see in Sony that they are the one who manufactures smartphone cameras. I sometimes imagine, that could be Kodak if they were just quick to decide in their bureaucratic business.

  • personator907
    personator907 4 months ago

    I got a Kodak 10MP digital camera for my birthday in 2008 and it was good. It held up quality wise for a number of years and I used it until smartphone cameras caught up.

  • racewiththefalcons1
    racewiththefalcons1 4 months ago

    Kodak should put everything they have into film photography, even though it sounds like a backwards move. The rise of digital photography has made far more people interested in photography than arguably ever before, and a portion of those people who are serious enough about photography could be interested in learning to shoot on film. It won't be a game-changer, but it could end up being the last resource for film shooters.

  • Caroline Loewer
    Caroline Loewer 4 months ago

    Poloroids are making a comeback

  • Bill Holland
    Bill Holland 4 months ago

    The nail in the coffin was the switch to digital projection in theaters. So much cheaper and easier to ship a disc drive to a theater than to ship reels of film. The major studios insisted that theaters switch to digital projectors and stopped shipping film. Kodak’s film production went from 15 billion feet of film one year to less than a billion feet of film the next year, after most theaters had switched.

  • Diogo Cruz
    Diogo Cruz 4 months ago

    Did you sub to pewdiepie yet ?

  • Washington Pendleton
    Washington Pendleton 4 months ago

    What a real woman knows tutwiler twos.levert lewis three.

  • Salim Güzeyer
    Salim Güzeyer 4 months ago

    Kodak 🖐⚘

  • Vincent Revote
    Vincent Revote 4 months ago

    Kodak did not just ride the digital wave. And you cannot blame them. They were very very high profit margins with film sales. And to adapt going digital means altogether adopting a different business model, a very huge undertaking with very huge upstart costs. They could have bought Instagram LOL.

  • Hannah Czynszak
    Hannah Czynszak 4 months ago

    weird thing i have found Kodak branded glasses and vision lenses. so there trying

  • Doby Pilgrim
    Doby Pilgrim 4 months ago

    Nope. What killed Kodak is phones with built in cameras.

  • ImpetuouslyInsane
    ImpetuouslyInsane 4 months ago

    Another thing that most likely killed Kodak - the cell phone and smartphone. It was said from what I quickly looked up, Nokia had the best selling cell phone with a camera in around 05-06. Might be worth looking into for your follow-up

  • Flowerpot Records2
    Flowerpot Records2 4 months ago

    Shooting on movie film is actually kinda fun and interesting but it's very expensive and a lot of work

  • joseph milone
    joseph milone 4 months ago

    i remember in the 70's kodak had these kiosk type booths where you can drop off your film in a kodak envelope and pick up the prints in like a week or something

  • Endrank luvs da 4 loko
    Endrank luvs da 4 loko 4 months ago

    In the early 90's, I loved those "disposable" cameras made my Kodak that came with 27 or so pic that you'd take then drop off at Walgreens/CVS to get developed in an hour. It was always fun to see how the pics would turn out that you took, especially if it was some party where the camera was passed around. It seemed more genuine than digital pictures cause you couldn't look at it immediately then just take another if you didn't like the way the first one looked. What you got was what you got. It was like buying baseball cards. A lot weren't all that great so the good ones really stood out.

  • WildCard Iowa
    WildCard Iowa 4 months ago

    I grew up in the 70s, Kodak was a staple of everyday life.

  • Kenya White
    Kenya White 4 months ago

    I love this channel. These videos are all so interesting...

  • L K
    L K 4 months ago

    Now everyone's gonna comment about their childhood memory of Kotak moments. Fuck off.

  • sornord
    sornord 4 months ago

    I read years ago "Kodak" came from a vocalization of the sound made by the shutters of their original cameras.

  • Carlos Johnson
    Carlos Johnson 4 months ago

    It's Time for a kodak moments.

  • Jeffrey Leary
    Jeffrey Leary 4 months ago

    Bought my first camera in 1977. A little 110, I've loved it for years, I still have it. Have not used it in years. Know were I can film for it?

    • bad dog
      bad dog Month ago

      Any GOD camera store should have it, or be able to get it for you.

  • Michael Rabi
    Michael Rabi 4 months ago

    I processed film in high school

  • IRUNNNEWY0RK
    IRUNNNEWY0RK 4 months ago

    Kodak declined the city of Rochester died !

  • matthew s
    matthew s 4 months ago

    NOT ---- 1800's
    Founded September 4, 1888; 130 years ago en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kodak

  • rofyle
    rofyle 4 months ago

    I work for a company that briefly supplied Kodak with its consumer printers. You're right about Kodak not focusing enough on digital cameras. They spent a vast amount of their resources on printers. The company I work for supplies a lot of different companies with printers, and for a brief period of about 12 months Kodak was easily our biggest customer. They thought people were going to start printing family photos. It never occurred to them that people were storing their digital images on disk and in the cloud.
    I will say one thing though, Kodak did have the best printer image I have ever seen. Hands down, no bullshitting, you could photocopy a dollar bill with their machines.

  • Song
    Song 4 months ago

    in 2005 i bought my first digital camera (Canon SD500) for my photography class. At that time i already know Kodak sucks already.

  • Frank Lamagna
    Frank Lamagna 4 months ago

    Even Ansel Adams foresaw digital photography before he passed away.

  • Angel Gaeta
    Angel Gaeta 4 months ago

    I thought they went extinct because of the invention of mobile phones 😅

  • jon
    jon 4 months ago

    ITS OFFICAL im addicted to company man videos. cannot stop learning! thank you.

  • Mike H.
    Mike H. 4 months ago

    Yet if they re-release Kodachrome and offer the development it would probably do pretty well. I would buy a cheap 35mm on eBay to give it a try. Just a 1 off limited release of the film or something. Charge a decent price + RUclip marketing = gold.