Kodak Gallery sold to Shutterfly

[paul_de_ley]

<p>Last December I had just started using Kodak Gallery to get some calendars and enlargements printed online. This morning I received the following message via my KG account:</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Dear valued Kodak Gallery member: <br /> <br /> I have some very important news regarding your Kodak Gallery account and images. You may have heard that we recently entered into a process to sell Kodak Gallery as part of Kodak’s broader restructuring efforts. I am writing today to let you know that we have closed on a buyer: a public company called Shutterfly. <br /> <br /> Although I am sad to announce that our Kodak-branded service will be closing on July 2 as a result of this sale, I am very pleased to announce that we have found a strong partner in Shutterfly. They offer a market leading user experience that mirrors ours in many ways, and many of the services and products that you enjoy today on Kodak Gallery can also be found at Shutterfly.com. Their services include free, unlimited storage and 100 percent customer satisfaction guarantee. Working together, we will securely transfer your account photos to them free of charge. We are absolutely committed to making this transition as smooth and easy as possible. <br /> </p>

</blockquote>

<p>Not sure what this means in the bigger picture of Kodak's downsizing and restructuring. Although I'm very much an absolute beginner when it comes to printing digital photos (both on- or offline), I was pretty pleased with the quality of the results and the online tools at KG and had assumed that this part of Kodak's business might have been more likely than some of their other divisions to benefit from the transition to all things digital & internet.</p>

<p>As far as customer base goes I may have been symptomatic of their troubled business models and pricing tactics though, since I ordered only during pre-holiday countdowns when KG offered 30-40% off plus free shipping, such as the last weeks before xmas and mother's day.</p>

[randrew1]

<p>The idea of a central repository where digital image files would be stored to allow for multiple access by consumers was floated at Kodak in the early 80's. The .com boom of 1999 and 2000 brought several online photo-sharing sites into existence. Snapfish offered a "free" service where they would process your film, scan your negs, post the scanned images, and send you a set of 4x6 prints. The user paid a $2 shipping and handling fee and was required to answer 3 consumer survey questions for each roll of film. Within a year, the surveys were gone and there was a total charge of $5. Kodak bought a 20% stake in Snapfish in 2000. In about 2003, Kodak sold their equity in Snapfish and bought Ofoto.com, a similar site. They renamed it Kodakgallery.com, but ofoto.com will still get you to the home page. There was an impressive series of TV ads in 2005 where (among other things) they promised to keep your pictures forever.</p>

<p><a href="

<p>Kodak never quite learned how to stay ahead of the curve with online photo sites. Picassa and Flickr have maintained mostly public photosharing sites. Shutterfly and Snapfish have maintained sites where most pictures are kept in private galleries. Smugmug.com seems to have done well with a fee-for-service model. Kodak tried to be all things to all people and never satisfied any major contingent.</p>

<p>As for the switch to Shutterfly, on the plus side, Shutterfly offers free unlimited storage. On the minus side, there are no free downloads of full resolution images. Unstated at this time: What happens to your images if your account becomes dormant. Kodak originally promised: "Send us your pictures and we will keep them forever." Then they started requiring a purchase at least once per year. Then they started requiring larger fees for larger amounts of storage. <br /><br />For those of us who live in Rochester and maybe know some employees who still work at Kodak, it was a bit disheartening to see that Shutterfly uses Fuji paper. I prefer the color reproduction of Kodak paper, but Crystal Archive dyes do last a bit longer than Kodak's and I expect Fuji to continue manufacturing a few years longer than Kodak. </p>

[David_Cavan]

<p>All of which goes to show that online storage is not yet future-proof, if it ever will be. The thought of forgetting to make a payment because of illness or some other issue and having your image library wiped out is not attractive.</p>

<p>I've used Shutterfly for several book projects and been quite pleased with the results so from that perspective I think they are adequate. </p>

[walter_strong5]

<p>The process of picking apart the carcass is in full swing.</p>