Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,994   Posts: 1,524,269   Online: 998
      
Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 80
  1. #41
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,939
    Images
    65
    Well, it was Kodak's first digital camera and since it was invented there it was the first. And since I worked for EK it was pretty hard to "wash my hands" because at that time it looked like EK was going to do something with it!

    PE

  2. #42
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,046
    Images
    223

    Is APS totally dead?

    More info...

    http://www.kenrockwell.com/tech/aps.htm


    ~Stone

    The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  3. #43
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,939
    Images
    65
    Congratulations Stone. Do you believe everything you read on the internet?

    Well, there are so many theories on the internet about so many things. Can you believe this site?

    I was in the Air Force in intelligence and also at EK. I see so many untruths about both!

    Best wishes.

    PE

  4. #44
    Diapositivo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,844
    Although Ken Rockwell has a certain way to put things that somehow make him sound less serious, the same concepts he expresses about APS could be very easily defended with a carefully worded scientific document.

    Japanese makers like Canon and others had already pretty brilliantly solved the problem of "intimidating" 135 film loading and unloading. My Canonet and my Yashica T3 brilliantly load their 135 roll in a very fool-proof way and could be loaded with one's eyes closed.

    I understand the need for a 126 ("Instamatic") format at the time. Easy loading. Probably the square format was thought not to oblige people to choose between portrait and landscape orientation (that require thinking, and we know how "thinking" doesn't sell well) but, all in all, it made a sense.

    The 110 ("Pocket Instamatic") format had the purpose of having a camera enter inside any woman bag without hassle. The idea was brilliant. Woman always (used to) have their bag with them. If we can place a camera in it, we'll sell a lot more film, prints etc. People will have the camera in their bag as a "habit" and many more pictures of family gathering, friends at the put etc. will be taken. Problem was 110 was a bit too scarce in image quality. That lesson should have been learned.

    By the time Kodak launched their "disc" format there must have been clouds of grass smoke going around Kodak air conditioning system. The disk format was NOT compact at all, its quality was dismal, laboratories would have had to make an investment, it just could not work.
    I remember the Italian magazine Fotografare burying the system with their first review as something like a bad-temper joke.

    I certainly don't agree with the "conspiracy" idea that Kodak actually wanted to force laboratories to upgrade. But certainly Kodak managed to behave, with Disc, as if they were the only film and camera producer in the world and anybody was forced to follow them.

    APS certainly was flawed IMO by its small format. Whatever the industrial considerations (the foreseen advent of digital lines of cameras and the attempt to produce one line of lenses in the long run) the small format was a huge mistake as it couldn't have involved serious amateurs and detracted them from 135. That is something that anybody should have foreseen at the time and probably they foresaw it very well. So APS ultimately was condemned to be a pocket-camera format only. And that, in turn, would probably deter most laboratories from investing new money at it.

    As PE says - an elephant is a mouse designed by a committee - if you want your new format to be too many things for too many needs than it will solve none of them.

    Ken Rockwell is right in scoffing at the APS format as a substitute of 135. APS was some kind of a new 126 but without the "need" anymore, he's right IMO.
    The concept could have been interesting but the quality target was entirely wrong.

    Scanning and slide projection could have been made by APS scanners (they do exists, my Nikon 5000 has an adapter for APS) and APS slide projectors (with HUGE benefits) but that doesn't match with the P&S market segment where APS was confined by its small size.
    Fabrizio Ruggeri fine art photography site: http://fabrizio-ruggeri.artistwebsites.com
    Stock images at Imagebroker: http://www.imagebroker.com/#/search/ib_fbr

  5. #45
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,939
    Images
    65
    All systems (126, 110, Disc and APS) required a substantial change for photofinishers in terms of processing and printing equipment. So, APS does not stand alone in that. What it stands alone in is the fact that the entire industry cooperated in its creation. All of the camera and film companies came out with this format at almost the same time, as they had foreknowledge. In the case of 110, 126 and Disc, they were closely guarded EK secrets.

    At the time that APS was introduced, the models at EK predicted that digital would not become a viable amateur product for still photography until about 2020. IDK what the other companies thought, but the result indicates that they had somewhat similar thoughts as EK. In any event, that forecast gave the APS film format about 25 years of life! As it turns out these predictions were wrong.

    I have said elsewhere that the forecast for film and paper in 2005 was that sales would decline by 30% in a year. In that year, in the first quarter the decline was 35%! This catastrophic decline affected Kodak, Ilford and Agfa in the public news. IDK about Fuji. That was the year that Agfa and Ilford had severe financial problems. I know that these problems were caused by a variety of factors, but the fact is that the overall market slumped catastrophically. My point being that all companies suffered from bad models and did so from as early as 1990. APS was caught in this hoorah.

    PE

  6. #46
    DWThomas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    SE Pennsylvania
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,207
    Images
    63
    As I understand it (and I still own an Elph Jr which was/is a great super compact P&S camera) there was a plan to make all sorts of film available, B&W, C41 and transparency, spread out among the film makers. That part never really happened; in the peak of APS there was only one slide film and IIRC, no B&W. Cameras targeted at "serious" photographers would be handicapped with such a limited choice of film. I vaguely recall the processing for APS transparency film required sending it to Europe which is a slow starter for the potentially sizable US market too.

    But hey, I also seem to recall Polaroid came out with instant movie film about the time consumer video cameras appeared! Ya takes yer chances.


    (Back after four days without power.)

  7. #47
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,046
    Images
    223

    Is APS totally dead?

    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    Congratulations Stone. Do you believe everything you read on the internet?

    Well, there are so many theories on the internet about so many things. Can you believe this site?

    I was in the Air Force in intelligence and also at EK. I see so many untruths about both!

    Best wishes.

    PE
    No but I believe my eyes, and my eyes tell me the format is only good in 4x6 prints, Maybe 5x7.. Even the panorama images were lower quality and a bit blurry, it's like saying 35mm is as good as 8x10 sheet film, the more surface area, the more detail. I also had many of those thoughts before reading the article.

    There's one thing even you can't deny, Kodak's history of sales techniques is undeniable, create a new format film and a lime of cameras exclusive to that format, then stop supporting it and creat another format.... 616,116,122,121,220,620,35(original),102,103,104,1 27,110,126, etc,etc..... Instead of standardizing, they simply make more money on a new system than on one that other film companies already produce, if they have a new system, others have to do R&D to produce competing films, which means Kodak is always ahead of the game.

    If they had been smart and made the advantix system backward compatible (meaning shape the canister like 135) with added contact points on the base or top and magnetize the perf area, they could have had canisters that fit in 35mm cameras that already existed but you could have those pano options as well etc in the new cameras. Meaning people could still use advantix film in normal cameras so the market of people purchasing the film would be larger, and then from then on creat the 35advantix camera line and stick to it, other manufacturers could follow suit since they also would want the extra advantages of the advantix system but wouldn't have to change all the machinery for a new size of film, lens lineup etc. pros would like the shoot info / date cataloging etc. and it wouldn't exclude those who didn't have the money for a new camera YET, or didn't want to buy two kinds of film bedside they had their favorite camera they didn't want to give up, but wanted the new stuff too.

    Just saying they could have done better.


    ~Stone

    The Important Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  8. #48
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,046
    Images
    223

    Is APS totally dead?

    I just wish they would (or someone would) produce small batches of expired for,ate in interesting film options, like Lomo but with real intent to produce good images, like if ilford created small runs of advantix, disk, 127,126,110 in B&W and sold them to urban outfitters or something. There's fun in finding a cheap camera at a tag sale that no one has anymore and shooting on film that's almost unknown. It makes photography fun again. And something to do in between serious shoots.

    Also, know if they make an advantix insert for the epson v750?


    ~Stone

    The Important Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  9. #49
    Diapositivo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,844
    Even better, I would like someone produces some bulk "slitter-loader", maybe an artisanal one.
    The idea being, a 126 cartridge could be made in iron or plastic and reused forever.
    One would put the bulk film in the bulk slitter-loader, and the apparatus does the slitting and loading work in a "transparent" way.
    One could buy slitter-loader and reusable cartridges for 126 and not rely on special production bulks.

    A different slitter-loader could be devised for APS, 110 etc.
    Fabrizio Ruggeri fine art photography site: http://fabrizio-ruggeri.artistwebsites.com
    Stock images at Imagebroker: http://www.imagebroker.com/#/search/ib_fbr

  10. #50
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,046
    Images
    223

    Is APS totally dead?

    Eh, sounds like too much work, I hate bulk loading... The only bulk loader I want is a 70mm one... So hard to find and especially cheaply


    ~Stone

    The Important Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin