Re: Kodak and No. 2 Pencils

[P3D Dr. George A. Themelis <DrT-3d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

John Ohrt writes:

>I wish Kodak, Ilford, AGFA, and some others the best of luck.  I can get
>enough data from them to leave me confused for the rest of my life.
>    
>If you want to foster price cutting at the expense of customer support
>and the range of products available, IMO, that is short sighted.

The other side of the coin is that, to a large extend, commercial film
is a commodity, just like the No. 2 pencils that we use to fill out 
forms.  The majority of consumers do not care much about the technical 
data and, frankly, do not care if they use Fuji or Kodak since they 
cannot see much difference in their drug store processed prints.  

Professional photographers do not read spec sheets (past speed rating)
but rather rely more on their own experience using these films or in 
reviews published by their peers who also report on their experiences.  

Photography is not an exact science and these specs don't mean much
to most people who use common consumer films. The vast majority of 
film users will not pick Kodak, Ilford or Agfa over Fuji because 
they got enough data over the web to leave them confused for the
rest of their lives... but will pick one over the other based on
rational considerations like price and availability, and also 
irrational considerations like sense of trust, effect of
advertisement, etc...  Many Americans will aways use Kodak
because this is the "right thing to do" (support a US company).

-- George Themelis


------------------------------