(ahem, hit the button by mistake!)
Originally Posted by Martin Reed
....probably be supportive of such an initiative. Maybe run the idea past Garry Hulme at Kentmere as well? Possibly also the people at Foma, as they're now becoming centre arena.
How about getting someone from Fuji, too? I can help doing that if we need a Japanese guy from that company in Japan, but Fuji promoting here or any other place in the global market may have someone else in that position who sits in anther branch of their offices...
Originally Posted by Martin Reed
By the way, thank you for replying to my earlier post of the "please-explain-this-to-me-like-I'm-a-5-year-old" question. Now I seem to know the situation a bit better. But I'm assuming I represent the mass who have no clue whatsoever, so I feel someone has to play that role on the discussion forum like this one.
Maybe we need a good article or something on this topic posted somewhere very visible. We know we don't want to create more fear about this because some people get turned off easily when they see and hear something very negative, but still, we need the truths out, so we can get more ideas from others to take some actions. And I agree with you that this has be more cooperated with and elaborated by the people from the manufacturers, etc if they are serious about what they are selling.
Dr. Souichi Kubo was head of one of the photographic departments at Chiba. His wife (The former Miss Arai) is still teaching there, but he retired the last I had heard. This information dates from May 2006. I had a long conversation with visiting educators from Chiba at the ICIS meeting in Rochester.
Originally Posted by firecracker
I have met him and many of his students here in the US when he was assigned here for 1 year by the Japanese government. His base of operations was in Rochester as he studied US education in photographic science.
The problem about dissemination is manyfold here.
1. Some companies don't want anyone to know the state of their equipment.
2. The formulas may be antiquated and may embarass the holders.
3. The formulas may be worth a lot of money if sold.
4. The company, if defunct, may want to restart someday.
All of these and the extremes in confidentiality of the processes involved will prevent anyone from really publishing until things are closed down once and for all, and by then it will be that catch 22, where there are no engineers to get things up and running again. AAMOF, most companies only have technicians left, not engineers. This may be what is hampering the efforts of M&P in rescuing Azo paper from the dustbin of history.
I have been able to analyze your book from an engineering aspect. I mean no disrespect when I call the formulation part to be done from a technicians standpoint, which if done by rote will produce the intended result. I can read, understand and meaningfully alter the formulas to work far far better though.
This will be the problem in the future unless information gets out there.
Going on with that, color would be another step beyond into the unknown which I have not even addressed. I had to start at EK with basics, by handcoating, sensitizing, addendizing and testing a complete film and paper. I had to do this in B&W and color. And, my results were ''graded" by my supervisors.
I then had to do it on a coating machine.
It was like learning to fly. I've been at the controls of a military jet. I've handled cargo planes, but I'm not a pilot. This is the same with a technician and an engineer that goes across the topic of photo science and engineering.
I did pretty good taking pictures in the back seat of a jet, upside down, but I could kill someone (me) at the controls. Well, reading your excellent book, I can make results like you do, but putting engineering into it, I can exceed those results.
BTW, I wish it were back in print. I recommend it to all of my workshop students and carry my dogeared, bookmarked copy with me to class every day.
Come on people, What is the point in a thread like this, 13 pages and every constructive idea someone has blown out of the water as un do able. Some here have a vast amount of knowlage in these things and boy do they enjoy impressing the rest of us with it, mainly in the negative vein.
Last time I stuck my head out of the darkroom the sky was not falling down and chicken likin was not hot foot on her way to tell the king.
THERE ARE STILL A NUMBER OF COMPANIES MAKEING FILM AND PAPER AND DOING WELL DOING IT. While the demand is there they will continue to do so, when their poorly maintained machines clap out those who have better quality machines will get a larger share of the market.
Simon Galley says film will not die, I belive him, if we continue to buy it.
I can get any amount of this film is dead bull shit in any high street store, why am I login in to an anolouge photography site to read it??? Seems to me that some of you have already given up and all you want to do is sit around here impressing each other with how you know it will not work and bitching woe is me.
There are some 18000 APUG members, is that all the anolouge photographers there are? I dont for one moment think so. So where are the rest? Getting on with it and not sitting around here indulging in pointless navel gazeing.
Can you not see you are doing a better job of promoteing digi than the digi people are with this clap trap, APUG is an "informed forum" SHAME ON YOU!!!
This is no way to promote interest in anolouge photography.
I can cope with this no longer, I am returning to the darkroom for red light theropy.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Thanks for an interesting post regarding your attitude.
I am doing something about the future of film and paper, as well as trying to elicit responses from others and there have been some excellent suggestions. Sorry you didn't read this thread that way.
I'm also sorry you found no way to contribute anything positive. No, I take that back. You did. You have suggested to us that a lot of people feel the way you do. Only history will judge whether you are right or not. Maybe others would care to comment as well.
PE, Refer you to my previous post page 10.
I do what I can to stimulate interest and demand for traditional materials from main stream suppliers which is where most of us get them. While they are still tradeing I will be buying from them.
That you make and coat your own emulsions is laudable but as you are at pains to point out it cannot be done for 35mm so is useless to the magority of those we are trying to tempt down the traditional route.
Your contacts at Eastman Kodak may well make you privy to information us mere mortals are not, however given that you are retired from their employ I sugest that companies like Ilford, Fotospeed, Kentmere and many others will still be producing traditional materials long after both you and I are long dead. It will be those we have encoraged down the traditional route who will continue the art, if there is enough of them there will be main stream companies supplying their needs. If not it will be their problem, I will of done what I could when I could.
Several things here.
Your post on page 10 said nothing new that I have not posted or that others have not posted. Most notable is the fear of chemicals in society today.
I have no contacts at EK. I worked there and retired. I do live in Rochester and I read the paper. See my post on that today in another thread.
Regarding production, I hope you are right. But then IDK how long either of us will live. Again, see that other thread.
Last but not least, it appears that you did not keep your word. You didn't go back to the darkroom for therapy. (just kidding you a bit)
Must be worth exploring - let's see what Ilford's response is initially. Photo Engineer puts the territory in perspective by illustrating that it is not a level playing field among the remaining manufacturers - the point about obsolete equipment is certainly borne out by the last statement from Forte - they were obviously hanging on by a thread towards the end.
Originally Posted by firecracker
Although bringing down these (necessary) secrecy divides between the manufacturers is hardly an option, I'm going to carry on promoting an open forum between them and those APUG members that feel concerned for the well-being of emulsion photography (which surely should be all members?).
As a photographic dealer I supply chemicals for alternative processes to the UK market, and there are many people exploring the possibilities of alternative processes - from our sales of silver nitrate, ammonium ferric citrate and potassium ferricyanide certainly circa 1000 per annum in the UK. At the same time, over about 10 years I know of only 3 people we have dealt with who have actually produced their own emulsions - 2 of them were students, whom we supported by providing darkroom facilities, and one is an artist with scientific training combining emulsion images with other media.
So there is obviously an enormous gulf of knowlege in the essence of what comprises emulsion photography. Rather than talking about setting up alternative manufacturing, the first move has got to be improving the dialogue between factory and end-user. The manufacturers know what they're talking about, but the market doesn't! And for starters, let's take Simon Galley up on his offer of the Ilford (Harman) factory tour.
PE, thanks again for the positive comments re. the 'Silver Gelatin' book, it will be out again, but I will certainly call on you to overhaul the recipes.
I was certain of the same until D-40 came out
Originally Posted by copake_ham