One thing we can all agree on - this is one of the worst of Stone's terrible ideas.
i don't know ...
the lowest common denominator works in the tv and film and radio / commercial entertainment industry.
if they just reduce everything down to crappy film maybe it will work in the film photography industry
crappy digital cameras sell like hotcakes, no ?
luckily none of us have any bearing on what the big wigs in england and rochester do, or even think about.
i thought the letter writing campaign was entertaining at least.
very different than the attitude of the good folks at ilford who actually
participate here and regard our feedback as something useful and helpful ( if not entertaining as well )
Last edited by jnanian; 04-13-2014 at 09:43 PM. Click to view previous post history.
I think you're off by a mile, Stone. Color film is being eaten alive by digital. Why focus on color film? The only survivor of all films is going to be black & white.
Personally I enjoy shooting one single emulsion a lot, but there are plenty of people out there who can't wait to try out all of the available films, just so they can get the 'look' of a particular emulsion... If you limit yourself to one b&w emulsion, you are going to kill a very large following of the other films.
I don't see you logic at all. Fuji will not sell off their technology, and Ferrania will not have the money to buy it anyway. Smaller players like ADOX will survive. Ilford will be fine because they are flexible.
In my letter to the president I told Kodak Alaris to closely take a look at companies like ADOX and Ilford, who not only participate actively among photographers, actual end users, but they have also intelligently sized their equipment to meet the demands of a shrinking market. I'm sure Ferrania has done the same math. Large scale film production is a thing of the past. Flexibility is the only way to go. Once the movie industry demand disappears to less volume than Kodak can manufacture without film getting old between coatings will be the pain threshold. Then it'll be free fall for color film on large scale.
Originally Posted by StoneNYC
"Often moments come looking for us". - Robert Frank
"Make good art!" - Neil Gaiman
"...the heart and mind are the true lens of the camera". - Yousuf Karsh
Originally Posted by Thomas Bertilsson
I agree with you about the fact that scaling down is the best option, but that's why I was saying about cutting back on film lines because Kodak CANNOT scale down, the machine is too massive that they currently have and the cost of producing a new machine is just too high, so Kodak has to take a different approach than the other companies in order to stay in the game.
I'm watching Fujifilm. They are at the last one standing with regards to having a decent product line by breadth. As a 120 shooter, they have these films for me.
B & W
This would be relatively ideal if they had a 400 speed Neopan still around.
Thankfully, Ilford is here and can and has taken up that slack for my shooting needs.
Reala 100 would make that list perfect (as well as dropping Provia for Astia), but I guess we could survive on this.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I almost agree with you, (but the 400H has a weird cast I don't really like, then again, it's CN and I don't like any CN lol.
Originally Posted by RattyMouse
And again agree on the Neopan400.
My only issue with Fuji is the price if the Acros100 in sheet film, if they could get it down to ilford prices (and cut it in 8x10 again) I might even give up ilford D100 for all Acros...
They could theoretically rent time on a different coating machine. According to PE it would be far from trivial to move production without changing the product, but if the choice is either shutting down the Kodak brand or making the film on Harman's or Agfa's coating facility...
Originally Posted by StoneNYC
Except kodak would have to give away all of their secrets to another company, it's not like Harmon would let all the kodak people run their previous machine, they would coat FOR kodak, but then it wouldn't really be Kodak's emulsions etc. Part of the quality of the kodak film is their specialized machine they designed to be almost completely without emulsion flaws...
Originally Posted by Arctic amateur
while your ideas are as good as anyone else's ideas ...
i find it strange that in the twilight of color film
anyone would spend millions ( or billions ? ) of dollars
buying out another company's film lines.
while it is sad that color may be the first thing to do
sometimes one just has to "let go"
its like when kodachrome went and people hoarded the film
then the machine was mothballed and now they are stuck
with a garage of film ... we live in another time
where color image making will probably either be done as it was in 1900
using alternative process techniques with paints, dyes, and the human touch like gum over or bromoil &c
or through digital means ( or both ). buying out fuji would only be resources wasted
on a media that will be gone soon, when they could use those resources to figure out how to
shorten a run, or modify a machine to work differently &c.
i don't have a crystal ball by anymeans but it is kind of obvious when there are only 1000 labs remaining
when a year ago maybe there were 2000 and 5years before that 10,000
im not really sure what the point is in re-invigorating a medium which is nearly obsolete because 10000 people
( amateurs/professional amateurs ) or whoever uses it ... they certainly won't buy enough to make the multi million dollar
purchase of another company viable, and if they do, there are fewer and fewer labs to process the film.
then again, if they DO reinvigorate the whole color film thing, they better have a way to partner with or create
a lab to process the film seeing kodak was the largest supplier of color films and the largest photofinisher in the world.
when ilford / harman technology created a lab where people could send their film and have it printed, that was a stroke of genius
because millions of people shoot film and don't process it themselves, and there are very few labs that process b/w commercially.
from what ron mowrey says / suggests there isn't a machine that coats emulsion nearly completely with out a flaw.
Originally Posted by StoneNYC
there are flaws, lots of them ... and they map them and know where NOT TO CUT
so those flaws don't end up in a box, the same way adox/efke, foma and ilford do.
it is easy to imagine a machine that creates without flaw because their product is a good one.
Right so Kodak's machine has a way of identifying where the bad spots are, something that they couldn't do necessarily on other machines so my point is still valid.