Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,531   Posts: 1,572,548   Online: 1149
      
Page 14 of 32 FirstFirst ... 489101112131415161718192024 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 312
  1. #131
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,702
    Stone, she was addressing a rumor on this thread claiming Kodak had stopped making film, and would use out the last master rolls over the next several years. That's a pretty damn serious rumor to just ignore. She was within her rights to address that, even on a thread from Ilford. She posted to clarify, not to push Kodak. It was entirely appropriate.
    On threads about Kodak, Simon has commented when appropriate, and as a member, he certainly has the right to join the discussion anyway.


    As for the recent announcement, I don't know how you missed this:

    www.apug.org/forums/forum390/118015-news-today-kodak.html

    Just because you didn't see it doesn't mean it didn't happen.
    Last edited by lxdude; 05-05-2013 at 02:45 AM. Click to view previous post history.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  2. #132

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Mission Viejo, California
    Shooter
    127 Format
    Posts
    1,487
    Can we please keep this thread for the ILFORD ULF film program? I don't think it's fair to keep talking about Kodak in an ILFORD thread.
    - Bill Lynch

  3. #133

    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Passaic, NJ
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    27
    Quote Originally Posted by anikin View Post
    WAAAAIT!!!!! Simon, the 122 format is 3 and 1/4 for IMAGE size. The film itself is 3.715" or about 94mm.
    The SPOOL is 3.715" wide. I'd guess the film itself would have to be a tiny bit narrower than that so it doesn't jam between the flanges.

    I just measured some actual 122 film stock, and it came out as 3.614", more or less. I don't know whether this is factory VP122 or some of that 105mm Ortho Copy microfiche that I cut down myself; the edge markings only say "KODAK SAFETY FILM" with no frame numbers. 3-5/8 is exactly 3.625", so this would be pretty close.

    edit to add: when you say you're making 122 film, I don't suppose you're going to be selling it with backing paper and/or spools?

    Come to think of it, there'd likely be a great market for just the backing paper. Heck I'd even buy a wide roll of plain backing paper myself and slit it down as I need it; spools I can make myself if I have to. Any possibility of making the backing paper available for sale?

  4. #134
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,760
    Images
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by wblynch View Post
    Can we please keep this thread for the ILFORD ULF film program? I don't think it's fair to keep talking about Kodak in an ILFORD thread.
    ^^^^^ thats what I'm trying to say ^^^^

  5. #135

    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Capital of Oregon Territory
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    783
    Quote Originally Posted by Shalom View Post
    The SPOOL is 3.715" wide. I'd guess the film itself would have to be a tiny bit narrower than that so it doesn't jam between the flanges.

    I just measured some actual 122 film stock, and it came out as 3.614", more or less. I don't know whether this is factory VP122 or some of that 105mm Ortho Copy microfiche that I cut down myself; the edge markings only say "KODAK SAFETY FILM" with no frame numbers. 3-5/8 is exactly 3.625", so this would be pretty close.
    Thank you Shalom for the correction. I wrote the message before I processed my first roll of 122, so I had nothing to measure against, only online references. I now have processed a roll of verichrome pan and I agree, my film measures 3-5/8 inch wide as well. Which makes sense since 3.715 would be a rather weird number

    Simon, my offer is still open. I can express mail a piece of the film and a spool, if needed, to you so you can match it when cutting HP5+.

    Eugene.

    Eugene.

  6. #136

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    211
    Quote Originally Posted by Simon R Galley View Post
    Well you are lucky as we will be making 122 FORMAT roll film available in slittings ( in HP5+ only )
    on a purely technical point we make 122 FORMAT as being 3 and 1/4 wide 82.55mm. :
    Thank you!!!!!! This is fantastic!!

    My other camera is a Pentax

  7. #137

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,905
    Dear All,

    I think I may have got the jump on you lot for once.....We will actually be making Roll film Wrapper ( 120 backing paper ) available in 100' lengths in in the ULF run.

    Simon. ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited.

  8. #138

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,905
    Re 122 Film

    The issue we have is that is removed from the ISO standards.

    Do not worry, we will find out the correct size by the time we cut it !.

    Simon. ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

  9. #139
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,760
    Images
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by Simon R Galley View Post
    Re 122 Film

    The issue we have is that is removed from the ISO standards.

    Do not worry, we will find out the correct size by the time we cut it !.

    Simon. ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :
    Hey Simon, this is great! I know this run is much greater than in the last with so many specialized sizes, so thank you!

    That said, if you see a pattern where some film doesn't sell (can't see how but just as an example) would you consider making some kind of company statement about every... 3-5 years having a more extensive run? So even if it won't work out that there's enough to do it every year, that as a company you will commit to continued runs SI ce you're the only provider? Even if it's only every few years?

    Just wondering if that can be done (with an actual published predicted list of special runs).

    Thanks. Hope that was clear.



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

  10. #140

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Cheshire UK
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,905
    Dear Stone,

    The reason why we do the ULF run once per annum is to minimise costs and especially waste and by doing that we can cover the additional costs and justify offering this as a service, it is very, very expensive to make in such small numbers and 'manually' integrate this into the production systems and schedules. It is why I have to have the senior managements approval every year to run the ULF programme. BUT it is a also very important that we do it because this area of the market, the people especially, are very dedicated and produce some of the most special and important images in silver based photography, and it follows they are therefore customers with a specific need that needs to be addressed... so I cannot ever envisage HARMAN technology not doing it.

    The list this year will be the biggest ever, I cannot think it could possibly expand very much further or that we could ever agree to do even more specialist items even once every two or three years.

    I hope that answers your question.

    Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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