Very interesting article on the digital transition...

[Evin Grant]

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/essays/rise-fall.shtml

 

[Shawn Nelson]

Wow, great article! Thanks for posting the link Evin

 

[Gianny Trutmann]

Thanks really good

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

I'm confused by this article.

"They didn't fail because they didn't recognize the coming threat of digital."
"They failed because they didn't recognize the coming threat of digital would happen so fast."

How are those two statements different? Everyone recognized that *eventually* film would be replaced. Even now everyone recognizes that eventually digital will be able to completely and perfectly emulate film and surpass it. Seems like a bit of a strawman argument against hasselblad that he valiantly defeats.

I also fail to see how killing your only digital R&D project isn't a demonstration of not recognizing the coming digital wave.

It is true though that good companies in the technology industry have to be impecable in their timing. Apple has had two huge hits on their hands thanks to timing the sweet spots for Mobile Broadband and cheap micro hard disks. There were hard disk MP3 players and there were Smartphones before apple's offerings. They just managed to get their release to coincide with both hitting a cost/benefit point.

 

[David Rasberry]

He mentioned the impact of change of ownership on the process too. I think this is underrated. How many well managed successful cash rich companies have been weakened to the point of failure by leveraged buyouts where the new management makes off with the cash? Companies like Hasselblad have had their R&D and new product funds gutted to support excessive executive salaries and short term profit payouts to investors while devaluing the brand.

 

[Emanuel A.]

I'm confused by this article.

"They didn't fail because they didn't recognize the coming threat of digital."
"They failed because they didn't recognize the coming threat of digital would happen so fast."

How are those two statements different?

It is a good skill of copywriting. Besides, it is good writing technique of dialogues in any screenplay or script.

The 180º change from the initial negative premise does launch the declarative sentence reverted, reforcing the lemma apparently tied for the negative where the main contention is hidden (working as legit co-premise).

The trick is to re-think it as an argument map. The key is « (would) happen so fast » -- that's the message the communicator (as sender) tries to get it on the other side also (especially) in order not to pass up (working as undeniable truth). Sort of logical fallacy (under syllogism aka categorical syllogism) 'cause the ultimate outcome is not a negative conclusion. Quite the opposite with a double force. Kinda tricky.

 

[Wesley Scoggins]

"They didn't fail because they didn't recognize the coming threat of digital."
"They failed because they didn't recognize the coming threat of digital would happen so fast."

It's not that they didn't think Digital had a future and was eventually going to replace film.

They just didn't expect it to happen in less than a decade.

It's like, if we knew an Asteroid was going to hit us in 40 years, but... Whoops, freak accident, why we weren't watching another asteroid hit it, and now it's going to hit us in 10 years.

It's not that we don't think it's going to happen, it's just going to happen way sooner than we think and take us by surprise.

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

Seems like his 100s of hours of research discovered what he is saying wasn't the cause actually was the cause. The people at the top thought they would be fine and could simply switch if the time ever came.

If you think it's coming 10 years or 100 years into the future is sort of beside the point the conclusion that they had no plan to deal with a competing product is the reason they got swamped.

It was a classic case of poor management. "We've been successful for 100 years, vis a vis we'll be successful for another 100." They ignored the threat and it steamrolled them.

Also I think the Kodak commentary while interesting wasn't really relevant to Hasselbad. Kodak is a vertically integrated company. That is a market that is going to get significantly reduced. But a camera company isn't really the same thing. Canon's business didn't really change. Their cameras look pretty much the same. Their lenses are pretty much the same. Their point and shoots look pretty much the same. They need more electrical engineers and programers now but their business doesn't really compare to Kodak or Fuji and the comparison seemed pretty strained.

Here is my interpretation.

Nikon and Canon had low-end cameras. Therefore they could cut their teeth on the low-end and commodity cameras first. The point and shoot digitals. They were able to ease themselves into it.

At the high end the medium format cameras are all about quality. For RED the REDOne was really a test platform. The hardware is all programmable so that they can learn as they go. It was a learning experience. It's a necessary step. You can't get everything perfect right out the gate without some lumps on the head. If their management was so arrogant as to think that they would ever be able to simply step in at the last second offer a competing product without an active R&D program of somekind they were sure to run the company into the ground. Whether they were oblivious to the emminent take over of digital or simply oblivious to digital in general is pretty much beside the point. They were oblivious.

 

[Luis de la Cerda]

I think the issue is timing. It's not that they didn't have a plan, but the plan failed in it's execution...

At which point do you shut down the older technology operations?

At which point do the new technologies become profitable enough for the company to be able to survive on them alone?

How do you handle the expenses of the layoffs?

How much can you invest in advertising your new products?

How do you compete with newcomers into the field that have a manufacturing base tailored specifically for the new technologies if you have to invest from zero?

It's like having an airline and finding out air travel is going to become extinct, and trying to turn the business around by becoming a potato chip company. It might be possible, but tricky.

I think the article is very interesting. Being too big when sudden change happens can be the key to your own undoing. Same thing happened to the dinosaurs.

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

What they should have done was spun off a sub-company to produce commodity cameras. Used those to get their foot in the door. Protect the haselbad name from contamination and begun developing a smaller operation which hopefulliy would be self sufficient while working on cutting edge R&D.

Perfect analagous situation: Touchscreen PCs.

They aren't really too practical in most situations. But microsoft needs experience developing them. So they release the Microsoft Surface. It's a division which hopefully will operate in the black. It gives their engineers (and Apple's engineers since Apple tends to 'field test' their products via other companies) the opportunity to figure out just what works and doesn't through wide user testing. When you're in bold new territory it's always a good idea to send out a scouting party. If they're a self sufficient scouting party you can accomplish a lot more without the high costs of outfitting and support.

 

[Danish P.V.]

What they should have done was spun off a sub-company to produce commodity cameras. Used those to get their foot in the door. Protect the haselbad name from contamination and begun developing a smaller operation which hopefulliy would be self sufficient while working on cutting edge R&D.

Carl Zeiss as well as Leica builds lenses for cheap cellphone or home video cameras as well as highend photography and/or cinema lenses. I don`t think that consumer cameras would harm the high-end arm of the company. And the thought of a Hasselblad pocket camera makes my mouth water

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

And personally I would argue that Zeiss lenses as a result is now a pretty meaningless name.

They practically make Ikea wine glasses now.

I don't think however that offering a lower quality digital camera though would have hurt the brand. After all you would recognize that there were tradeoffs of convenience and workflow in exchange for quality at the time. But *if* they were concerned about that they could have isolated themselves by using a subsidiary.

There is definitely a strong argument to be made that a company's product can be purchased based on name alone. Until the last round of Onkyo Receivers which buzz when plugged into an HDMI port I would have said I would buy any Onkyo product without reading reviews. Now they've lost that for lots of people who now actually read reviews and do comparison shopping without simply trusting that they can depend on name alone to receive a high quality product.

 

[I Bloom]

It's interesting, because I think we may be watching Panavision and Arri doing the same thing as Hasselblad. No doubt they make great cameras, just not enough transistors in them.

IBloom

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

How much will panavision really be affected? I always picture Panavision as light, lenses and grip. They have a horse in the race but it still seems like more of an experiment and one-off sort of thing in collaboration with Sony. I'm sure they would be just as happy to rent an Epic-X as a Genesis.

 

[I Bloom]

Panavision lenses work on Panavision mounts.

IBloom

 

[Gavin Greenwalt]

I'm inclined to believe it's as easy to panavise an epic as it is a 235.

New cameras are constantly coming to market. Film or digital seems sort of beside the point for their business model. If anything an epic system needs more monitoring and more accessories to rent.

 

[Hans von Sonntag]

It's interesting, because I think we may be watching Panavision and Arri doing the same thing as Hasselblad. No doubt they make great cameras, just not enough transistors in them.

IBloom

A recent interview with Arri's CEO Franz Kraus shows that they are very well aware of what's going on.

They simply have a different strategy. They don't believe in pixel counting but quality, simplicity and reliability. They have a very strong user base. Arri users mainly work in TV-Drama, TVCs and feature sector. A realm where quality and reliability are key. The D21 is a heavy mother but qualitywise a bechmark. Their annouced 2K camera will be released at end of the year. Franz Kraus says the camera's sensor will have filmlike DR, 2K resolution and ergonomics Arris is famous for plus an optical VF. The 2K camera will be positioned in the S16mm realm. This means it's going to be 40K.

I'm sure that rental house will embrace this camera.

For many private owners it's going to be too expensive - here Scarlet will have a huge market.

I'm sure that many on these boards will lough at 2K resolution but effectively only a very, very few ever finished their projects at 4K. 1080p / 2K is the golden standard for the next decade. So we will compare 2K Arri footage with 2K Red footage.

The good thing: Red will get some headwind - good for the EpicX developement which is an unbelievable offering for RedOne owners.

Hans

 

[I Bloom]

A recent interview with Arri's CEO Franz Kraus shows that they are very well aware of what's going on.

They simply have a different strategy. They don't believe in pixel counting but quality, simplicity and reliability. They have a very strong user base. Arri users mainly work in TV-Drama, TVCs and feature sector. A realm where quality and reliability are key. The D21 is a heavy mother but qualitywise a bechmark. Their annouced 2K camera will be released at end of the year. Franz Kraus says the camera's sensor will have filmlike DR, 2K resolution and ergonomics Arris is famous for plus an optical VF. The 2K camera will be positioned in the S16mm realm. This means it's going to be 40K.

I'm sure that rental house will embrace this camera.

For many private owners it's going to be too expensive - here Scarlet will have a huge market.

I'm sure that many on these boards will lough at 2K resolution but effectively only a very, very few ever finished their projects at 4K. 1080p / 2K is the golden standard for the next decade. So we will compare 2K Arri footage with 2K Red footage.

The good thing: Red will get some headwind - good for the EpicX developement which is an unbelievable offering for RedOne owners.

Hans

Higher DR is definitely extremely important, and if their new camera feels anything like the 416 on your shoulder well....

Do you have a link to this interview?

IBloom

 

[Hans von Sonntag]

Higher DR is definitely extremely important, and if their new camera feels anything like the 416 on your shoulder well....

Do you have a link to this interview?

IBloom

I would love to share. I cannot because it's published in the Film&TV Kameramann, a monthly magazine here in Germany. Whenever it will be publishedin the web I let you know. Sorry Ian,

Hans

 

[M Most]

How much will panavision really be affected? I always picture Panavision as light, lenses and grip. They have a horse in the race but it still seems like more of an experiment and one-off sort of thing in collaboration with Sony. I'm sure they would be just as happy to rent an Epic-X as a Genesis.

That "experiment" and "one off sort of thing" is currently the single most popular electronic camera for high end television drama work, the first choice of many productions and something that Panavision can't build enough of to satisfy the coming season's demand.

Not everything has to be mass market to be successful.