Disney Information Station Logo

Go Back   The DIS Discussion Forums - DISboards.com > Disney Trip Planning Forums > Disney Rumors and News
Find Hotel Specials & DIScounts
 
facebooktwitterpinterestgoogle plusyoutubeDIS UpdatesDIS email updates
Register Chat FAQ Tickers Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read





Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Old 08-30-2010, 09:13 AM   #91
Figment632
DIS Veteran
 
Figment632's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Mesa Verde
Posts: 2,136

Quote:
Originally Posted by floridianer View Post
Agreed,

I think that UoE is educational too but it is way too long and could have an update too!!
I don't mind the lenght I just think its content is very dated.
__________________
Follow me on Twitter @Figment632
Figment632 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2010, 09:17 AM   #92
floridianer
Mouseketeer
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Essen, Germany
Posts: 219

Quote:
Originally Posted by Figment632 View Post
I don't mind the lenght I just think its content is very dated.
But the dinos are cooool!!
And the final words are great...

What is the one and only source that NEVER runs out??
floridianer is offline   Reply With Quote
|
The DIS
Register to remove

Join Date: 1997
Location: Orlando, FL
Posts: 1,000,000
Old 08-30-2010, 09:24 AM   #93
Figment632
DIS Veteran
 
Figment632's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Mesa Verde
Posts: 2,136

Quote:
Originally Posted by floridianer View Post
But the dinos are cooool!!
And the final words are great...

What is the one and only source that NEVER runs out??
The dino section is fine, what is dated is the solar and nuclear energy plants. IMO FW should be about the future so UOE should energy we a striving for.

EX: Cars and homes powered by fuel cells.
__________________
Follow me on Twitter @Figment632
Figment632 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2010, 01:17 PM   #94
CandyMandy
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Charlotte
Posts: 1,343

Quote:
Originally Posted by pilferk View Post
When you build your company around film and processing...and then see that those two products are going to be obsolete...perhaps it's best not to prolong the inevitable (Advantix!)
Re: Advantix - to be fair to Kodak, they weren't the sole film company behind the introduction and promotion of the APS (Advanced Photo System) film format and in what may come as surprise to many isn't extinct.

Fuji, Agfa and Konica were into APS big time and all of the major camera manunfacturers (including Nikon, Minolta and Canon) were on that bandwagon, some even producing APS SLRs (example below).

And to this date APS film is still being produced and sold by Kodak and Fuji, since an installed base of active users remains. Which probably explains why my local CVS still has on site equipment to develop APS film and will do that in one hour!


Last edited by CandyMandy; 08-30-2010 at 09:05 PM.
CandyMandy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2010, 02:03 PM   #95
pilferk
Jambo Wildbunch Gang
I feel like Rita Rodney Dangerfield...
 
pilferk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 6,556

Quote:
Originally Posted by CandyMandy View Post
Re: Advantix - to be fair to Kodak, they weren't the sole film company behind the introduction and promotion of the APS (Advanced Photo System) film format and in what may come as surprise to many it isn't extinct.

Fuji, Agfa and Konica were into APS big time and all of the major camera manunfacturers (including Nikon, Minolta and Canon) were on that bandwagon, some even producing APS SLRs (example below).

And to this date APS film is still being produced and sold by Kodak and Fuji, since an installed base of active users remains. Which probably explains why my local CVS still has on site equipment to develop APS film and will do that in one hour!

They weren't the only company to get on board.

They were the only company staking their future on the investment in the tech, though. It was a foolish gambit...not just in hindsight, but when they launched.

All the other companies pretty much took advantix/aps as what it was: A stopgap til the digital revolution took over the mass market. And it did that pretty well...offered some of the benefits of digital, while still using film at a time when digital storage media was still pricey. I remember buying a 1GB IBM smartdrive for close to 200 bucks for my Canon Pro-90 IS....so I could take more than 30 pictures to a card at max resolution.

Not Kodak, though. They continued to invest significant R&D money into the tech, and pretty much buried their head in the sand when it came to digital tech and printing. They pushed their Advantix line of cameras, while they were selling (but not marketing very well) some VERY good (the DC260 for example) point and shoot digital cameras. It made no sense, and they're paying for it now, big time. It was a blunder at least as bad as "New Coke" and, it looks like, harder to recover from. I would not be surprised to see Kodak fold, which will be incredibly sad. And if they don't...I just can't see them ever reclaiming the market they had, once. Things have gotten better over the last 5-ish years, but they're trying to play catch up in both market share and market recognition. That's a big, uphill battle.

You're lucky, on the local CVS front. Most of the "labs" (and they aren't really that, anymore...they're printing stations) have converted over to digital, and all film processing gets done via outlab. I know CVS and Walgreens both have said they're going to sunset inlab film processing, and they don't replace "old" or broken machines anymore. They just bring in a new printer. It's cheaper. Walmart has, as far as I know, almost completely converted out of processing. Ditto on Target.

And even considering all that, both Fuji and Kodak's outlab volume continues to decrease. You'd think, since so many of the local places that used to process film have shut that piece of the operation down...they'd at least see some uptick in volume. Not so. There are just fewer and fewer people using film out there, now..unless it's something really specialized like medium format for portraits or old 120 film used for "artistic" purposes in a Brownie.
__________________
Disney dreamin'...Somewhere!
11 9 7 (...our little Disney Souvenir)

Last edited by pilferk; 08-30-2010 at 02:15 PM.
pilferk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2010, 02:25 PM   #96
lockedoutlogic
DIS Veteran
 
lockedoutlogic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Joisey
Posts: 3,936

advantix reminds me of all the stupid things i got ripped off on in college....

mostly i blame yuengling...but fast times and fast women also share some of the blame....i have 1%
__________________
Went there.....
Worked there....(Resort Operations)
Wed there....(EPCOT 2004)
Bought there....(SSR 2006)

Last Trip: Too Long Ago
Next Trip: Can i borrow some money to go?
Gift Shop Quality: When did we get to WalMart?
Food Quality: Only the finest free range roast chicken breast and loch dart salmon in the Kingdom


"May the Space Being bless the Free Market"
lockedoutlogic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-2010, 04:16 PM   #97
CandyMandy
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Charlotte
Posts: 1,343

Quote:
Originally Posted by pilferk View Post
There are just fewer and fewer people using film out there, now..unless it's something really specialized like medium format for portraits or old 120 film used for "artistic" purposes in a Brownie.
Actually, the "sleeper" element that is keeping the film business alive and well is the "disposable/one-time-use" (or to be more fashionable, now "recyclable") camera market.



Anyone reading this knows that despite the profusion of portable digitial imaging devices (read: just about every handheld out there now) you still find those ubiquitous Fuji Quicksnaps and Kodak Funsavers in the checkout line racks at just about any major retailer.

Why?

The desire in the mass market for a simple, turnkey way to get a physical print.

And in that mass market every other method of getting a print is still a #(&@!* hassle. Home printing is not the panacea promised (the cost adds up and the printers never work flawlesly) and not everyone enjoys the tedium of uploading stuff for printing to Walgreens or sitting at a kiosk there trying to get their SD card to be read properly. The disposable is often cheaper and always simpler, which is why -- despite its serious technical limitations --it shows no signs of disappearing.
CandyMandy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2010, 08:40 AM   #98
pilferk
Jambo Wildbunch Gang
I feel like Rita Rodney Dangerfield...
 
pilferk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 6,556

Quote:
Originally Posted by CandyMandy View Post
Actually, the "sleeper" element that is keeping the film business alive and well is the "disposable/one-time-use" (or to be more fashionable, now "recyclable") camera market.



Anyone reading this knows that despite the profusion of portable digitial imaging devices (read: just about every handheld out there now) you still find those ubiquitous Fuji Quicksnaps and Kodak Funsavers in the checkout line racks at just about any major retailer.

Why?

The desire in the mass market for a simple, turnkey way to get a physical print.

And in that mass market every other method of getting a print is still a #(&@!* hassle. Home printing is not the panacea promised (the cost adds up and the printers never work flawlesly) and not everyone enjoys the tedium of uploading stuff for printing to Walgreens or sitting at a kiosk there trying to get their SD card to be read properly. The disposable is often cheaper and always simpler, which is why -- despite its serious technical limitations --it shows no signs of disappearing.
Sales (at least reported sales) of the FILM disposables (there's some digital options out there, now, too) declines about 25% - 30% year over year and has since about 2004 (coincidentally, right around the time Kodak announced they were not longer going to produce film cameras..other than the disposables..any more). At least according to Kodak and Fuji's own numbers.

It might be keeping film afloat, but even that's sinking fast.

They're convenient and they're also set up as impulse buys....two big advantages, especially for younger kids and tweens. They're also GREAT for events where you want to give your guests the ability to take pictures (outings, parties, weddings). They also require no large investment of funds, up front (though, you can get a decent digital camera for not much more). And they do the job, even if they do it in a more expensive manner. It's never cheaper per print..because you're paying a premium for the camera ($12 to $20, depending on where you're buying it), you're paying for processing ($6 - $10) AND you're paying for printing of EVERYTHING you snap (you lose the ability to edit and delete as you can with digital) ($4 - $6 on a roll of 36 exposures)....for a low end total of around $22 for those 36 pictures. With digital, all you're paying for is the print, the camera, and the storage medium (which is actually cheaper, at this point, than film)...with the camera and the storage medium being reuseable. Even considering the convenience factor, the disposable film camera is a dying breed. There's just too many better options out there (digital cameras, camera phones, and coming digital disposables).

FYI: We've walked into Walmarts, Walgreens, CVS', and Targets, handed them our SD card and asked them for prints in an hour. Usually, we get our prints, and our card, returned to us. Sometimes they take the card, upload for us, and hand it back to us. Isn't that what they're SUPPOSED to do? Granted, that's not going to work if your preferred camera is your phone. In that case..I guess we would copy them to a flash drive or CD and do the same thing.

If your local photo stop isn't doing that....ask them why. Ours do. Maybe it's just because we're from a relatively "small town" area....
__________________
Disney dreamin'...Somewhere!
11 9 7 (...our little Disney Souvenir)
pilferk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2010, 06:45 PM   #99
doconeill


Fastpass Jedi Master
 
doconeill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Massachusetts
Posts: 16,866

Even the disposable market has been turning to cheap flash cameras, although they are still trying to find a market - why get a digital camera, even a disposable, if you're just going to get film prints? (Yes, you can get photo CDs too...)

Back to the subject - anyone been by recently to see if they've actually removed the signs yet?
__________________
Doc - WDW Untangled - New: Fastpass+ - Rider Switch - MagicBands - ADR Calculator - WDW MYW Ticket Price Calculator
"WDW is the reason more of us should have paid more attention in Math class." - Me
Commissioner, Official DIS Unplugged Fantasy Football League - MK Conf - EC Conf - HS Conf -2013 Champion oc_tony!
4th Annual New England DISMeet for GiveKidsTheWorld - Oct 3-5, 2014 - Plymouth, MA

doconeill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2010, 11:08 AM   #100
pilferk
Jambo Wildbunch Gang
I feel like Rita Rodney Dangerfield...
 
pilferk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 6,556

Quote:
Originally Posted by doconeill View Post
Even the disposable market has been turning to cheap flash cameras, although they are still trying to find a market - why get a digital camera, even a disposable, if you're just going to get film prints? (Yes, you can get photo CDs too...)
The disposable digitals currently in development are actually becoming cheaper for companies to manufacture and can hold more pictures than the film equivalent.

They can then sell the camera for less than the film equivalent, to the consumer.

In addition, the consumer doesn't have to pay for film processing (which they DO have to pay for with a disposable film camera). You only have to pay for prints. And many of the disposables being proposed (and a couple that have already been brought to market) include the option to delete unwanted pictures. Which means you don't pay for anything you don't want. The net is the consumer pays considerably less money for those prints (in total cost), and gets more "good pictures" in the end, to boot.

And, as far as the consumer is concerned, they function no different than a film disposable. Drop the camera off to the photo lab. You get your prints and a photoCD (included..no extra cost) of your pictures returned to you. The only difference is: Your bill is less the film processing fee and you don't get NEGATIVES back.

You don't see many disposable digitals on the market, yet, because the one hold up is the LCD preview screen (quality vs effective/cheap production), but that's quickly becoming less of an issue. There have been a few (some as cheap as $10) over the years, with decent quality pictures..but they had grainy LCD screens (both Ritz/Wolfe and CVS offered them, not long ago).

The film disposables have a market, for now...and they do have some nice convenience advantages in certain situations. But that market is shrinking. And there's a good chance that market will pretty much disappear within the next 3 - 5 years as other, more cost effective and feature rich, options come to mass market.
__________________
Disney dreamin'...Somewhere!
11 9 7 (...our little Disney Souvenir)

Last edited by pilferk; 09-01-2010 at 11:20 AM.
pilferk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2010, 09:31 PM   #101
homercrispy
Earning My Ears
 
homercrispy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 72

kodak

I for one will not miss the kodak pre-show.
homercrispy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2010, 09:36 PM   #102
nytimez
Nihilist
 
nytimez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Lacus Somniorum
Posts: 6,070

Quote:
Originally Posted by pilferk View Post
The disposable digitals currently in development are actually becoming cheaper for companies to manufacture and can hold more pictures than the film equivalent.

They can then sell the camera for less than the film equivalent, to the consumer.

In addition, the consumer doesn't have to pay for film processing (which they DO have to pay for with a disposable film camera). You only have to pay for prints. And many of the disposables being proposed (and a couple that have already been brought to market) include the option to delete unwanted pictures. Which means you don't pay for anything you don't want. The net is the consumer pays considerably less money for those prints (in total cost), and gets more "good pictures" in the end, to boot.

And, as far as the consumer is concerned, they function no different than a film disposable. Drop the camera off to the photo lab. You get your prints and a photoCD (included..no extra cost) of your pictures returned to you. The only difference is: Your bill is less the film processing fee and you don't get NEGATIVES back.

You don't see many disposable digitals on the market, yet, because the one hold up is the LCD preview screen (quality vs effective/cheap production), but that's quickly becoming less of an issue. There have been a few (some as cheap as $10) over the years, with decent quality pictures..but they had grainy LCD screens (both Ritz/Wolfe and CVS offered them, not long ago).

The film disposables have a market, for now...and they do have some nice convenience advantages in certain situations. But that market is shrinking. And there's a good chance that market will pretty much disappear within the next 3 - 5 years as other, more cost effective and feature rich, options come to mass market.
If you're returning the disposable digital for "processing" anyway, why can't they reuse the screens? And why do you need that extra step -- why can't you just plug it into your own computer and skip the "processing" step completely? And once you do that, when does it cease to become "disposable?"
__________________
nytimez is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2010, 10:46 PM   #103
ChrisFL
Disney/Universal Fan and MALE
 
ChrisFL's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Tampa, FL, US
Posts: 7,611

__________________



Disney Parks Visited: MK - EPCOT - DHS - DAK - DL - DCA - HKDL - TDL - TDS
ChrisFL is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-03-2010, 02:22 AM   #104
mousermerf
DIS Veteran
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,636

Is this really still being debated?

Eastman Kodak's sponsorship of the Imagination pavilion ended at the end of June. For questions or concerns, please contact David Lanzillo of the Eastman Kodak Company david.lanzillo@kodak.com
mousermerf is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply



Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

facebooktwitterpinterestgoogle plusyoutubeDIS Updates
GET OUR DIS UPDATES DELIVERED BY EMAIL



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:09 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

Copyright © 1997-2014, Werner Technologies, LLC. All Rights Reserved.

You Rated this Thread: