Kodak is gone from the Imagination Pavilion.

[pilferk]

Clearly, you lack the appreciation of fine cinema.

"Waterworld" could be in Future World... while "Ishtar" could be World Showcase, as the desert reclaims the nations.

And you have to pass through "Battlefield: Earth" to cross between them.

I think naming those 3 movies in the same post might have broken one of the 7 seals of the apocalypse. See what you've started, now?

 

[BayouMickey]

I think naming those 3 movies in the same post might have broken one of the 7 seals of the apocalypse. See what you've started, now?

.... And hail, brimstone, mickey bars and dolewhips fell from the sky..
..And the seas turned to Beverly

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Maybe I missed something someplace but I've never read anything about a negative impact on the construction of EPCOT by Kodak. Could you please provide some insight into this.

Disney's association with Kodak denied the construction of a "Mt. Fuji" matterhorn type ride due to kodak's objection...Fujifilm

This has been documented in may of the books, articles written on imagineering and construction at WDW...and unlike jim hill...when senior WDI personnel comment on things such as this...i'm compelled to think they are not exaggerating...

that's all...but the failure to incorporate the attractions into the world showcase pavilions - first as a budget and construction timeline sacrifice....then as management's turmoil and a lack of committment to "re-invent" the park when the eisner borg..i mean..."team" took over - represents Disney choosing the wrong fork in the road.
in my opinion at least

 

[DCTooTall]

One thing I remember about most of the Futureworld pavilions as a kid and teen in the 80's and 90's, They did actually educate. For the most part, it seemed like make of the pavilions did educate about the past, before bringing you into the present/future...usually in the post-show.

Seas: Then: Intro from the Que to the seacabs had displays, films, and information about the forming of the seas and man's attempts to explore and learn about them. Then you got to the aquarium and the exhibits (which I'll conceed haven't changed dramatically post-nemo)
Now: Intro is basically a long line with beach to the pier theming, before you get to the exhibits in the back. There really isn't even any reason to "ride the ride" since you can just sneak into the exhibits from the gift shop. (Nice little trivia bit.... you can still see the old Sea Base Alpha themeing on the outside of the omnimover tunnel thru the aquarium. It's easy to spot from the rotunda.)


Land: Then: The Land Boat ride took you thru the history of farming before taking you to the greenhouse where you were introduced to the future of farming in hydroponics / etc. the show helped teach kids about how to eat properly. Now: admit I haven't ridden the land boat ride, but my understanding is it's pretty much the same. the show about proper eating is gone, replaced by a ride that while cool, doesn't really teach much.


JII: Then: Gather, store, recombine. The Ride, in fun way, helped to show how anything was possible with your imagination. Imageworks was a fun playground with many ways to play and even use your imagination. Now: Don't get me started on the ride, and the downstairs Imageworks doesn't really seem to have much of anything to play with.

UOE: Then: History of petroleum's creation.... From the dinosaurs to their extinction and transformation into oil... as well as the processes of oil exploration and drilling. Now: honestly... Haven't ridden it to see how Ellen changed things.

WoL: Then: Ride where you got to go inside the human body and see white blood cells at work as well as many other parts of the body. Show where you see how different parts of the body react to situations you are put into. Overall education about your health and biology. Now: Glorified Banquet hall.

Horizons: Then: Cool look into a possible future as mankind expands into areas currently unhabitable. A nice way that combined many of the themes and ideas from elsewhere in Futureworld. Now: A "history of EPCOT" pin.

M:S : Then: Didn't exist. Now: an interesting simulator involving a mission to mars. Post show possibility to show history of space exploration, or pretty much anything educational, is non existant and instead just a long boring hallway.

WoM: Then: Ride took you thru the history of transportation and into a post-show area where you could see many concept vehicles, ideas for future transportation, alongside current showroom vehicles. Now: Another "History of EPCOT" pin

TT: Then: didn't exist. Now: queue has some vehicle test displays. ride is a vehicle proving ground. post show doesn't have much which looks forward to the future.


Not sure where the future, or education, really is in Futureworld anymore.

 

[Figment632]

DCTooTall that was a great post and yes EC used to Educate as well as entertain it was a first an was unique. Now it is becoming just another theme park.

 

[floridianer]

DCTooTall that was a great post and yes EC used to Educate as well as entertain it was a first an was unique. Now it is becoming just another theme park.

c´mon
They are still showing "the circle of live!!"

 

[Figment632]

c´mon
They are still showing "the circle of live!!"

And your point is what?

 

[floridianer]

That there is still a little bit of education...

But this was way more in the 80s and 90s, I agree

 

[Figment632]

That there is still a little bit of education...

But this was way more in the 80s and 90s, I agree

Well The Land is the pavilion I would say fine and is the only EPCOT CEnter pavilion left. That said COL could use an update.

 

[floridianer]

Well The Land is the pavilion I would say fine and is the only EPCOT CEnter pavilion left. That said COL could use an update.

Agreed,

I think that UoE is educational too but it is way too long and could have an update too!!

 

[Figment632]

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.

 

[floridianer]

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??

 

[Figment632]

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.

 

[CandyMandy]

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!

 

[pilferk]

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.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

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%

 

[CandyMandy]

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.

 

[pilferk]

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....

 

[doconeill]

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?

 

[pilferk]

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.