Corporations and Big Boobs – A commentary.

[dr5chrome]

as was stated below, simply buy 1/2" 1hr photo tape and tape 2 ends of 120s together [cut the tape to med.format width ahead of time]. line the rolls up on a straight-edge in the dark and tape both sides. as long as you tape straight, the spliced rolls should go on the 220 reel. best that you use HEWES reels for this. I have done this and it works well.

this still doesn't solve TXP.

dw

Suzanne,

It's not as big a deal on simple portrait sessions. However, this weekend I'll be in Arkansas doing an all-day shoot for an ad campaign. I typically go through at least 12 - 15 rolls of 220, which I can develop three at a time. Can you imagine how much more painful it's going to be to develop 24 - 30 rolls? And how much more expensive?

Ugh. It makes my head hurt.

- CJ

[white.elephant]

For my purposes this weekend, I've decided to go 35mm. It's the best compromise, although I HATE that I have to compromise on the way I want to work.

- CJ

What film are you going to use?

[Cheryl Jacobs]

What film are you going to use?

For this weekend, I've decided to resort to 35mm and Tri-X 400. It will be sufficient for this project. After that, I don't know. I'll figure something out. I absolutely hate Tmax with a passion, so it won't be that. I am not terribly fond of Tri-X 400, but it may be the lesser evil. I do plan to do more tests with HP5; it's never been my favorite, but maybe I can find a way to like it more. The biggest pain factor is that whatever I go to will have to be 120. I resent that.

I just can't believe that there is no other 220 B&W option. Unbelievable.

[dr5chrome]

That's the typical situation when someone doesn't know what s/he's talking about. Otherwise, one hopes that the chatter might cease. Amazing how many people seem to think it's an easy matter to downsize a multibillion-dollar global company."let's punish Kodak for not offering the products we like by boycotting Kodak's products"; or whining about a company's lack of "commitment", as that fuzzy term means anything in the real world apart from their offering products they can sell at a profit, to the benefit of their shareholders. If you want to feel "special", buy a dog.
--internet whining, petitions---is just wasted effort.

hmmmm...

I find this argument/post very flawed, especially in a forum such as this. Is it not what many do here? [forgive me for the ones that don’t vent].

This would be the 1st time I have voiced such an opinion and I feel I have the right to do so.. For the record, While I am no huge conglomerate, I have made many sacrifices to stay in business, including drastic downsizing and relocation. I keep it going because I think dr5 [& film processing] is important to photography. We make enough to pay the bills. This is the reality of photography today. Ask Sean if he makes a boat load of money keeping APUG going.

I never said 'lets punish Kodak and not use them'. I said they were not being smart by eliminating a staple film and the reasons from a lab perspective as to why TXP was not selling. STILL, @ 5% of their total films sales TXP sales is nothing to shake a stick at!

There is a question here of 'profit' and 'losing money'. Is Kodak 'losing money' on TXP? I doubt it. Is Kodak committed to photography or the dollar?

I would argue with anyone that I had the right to make this original post. Not because I hate KODAK. I need KODAK. I need ILFORD. I need EFKE & ROLLEI/MACO. I would hope that these companies need dr5. .. as I believe dr5 processes most of these companies B&W films better than any other development. Believe this or not, some do, and all it does is sell more film!

The dr5 website advertises ALL the B&W films, FREE. We promote ALL the films use. The only company we have EVER gotten 'thanks' from is ROLLEI/MACO for promoting their films. Never once have we gotten thanks from Kodak or Ilford for promoting their films or producing the exceptional image quality dr5 produces.

So for once, do I have the right to vent what we feel is a very foolish move by Kodak? ...yes

dr5

[apconan]

why are you advertising your own service
why are you complaining about not receiving thanks from kodak? you speak like you deserve thanks. you don't, they didn't ask you to 'promote their films'

and you obviously don't know anything about business if you are comparing your own downsizing to that of a corporation. any ant can lift something several times it's weight and carry it long distances. a human can't. the same can be said for a corporation. because of it's size, it is relatively less flexible than a small business

[brian d]

they didn't ask you to 'promote their films'

Maybe they should have...

[Cheryl Jacobs]

why are you advertising your own service
why are you complaining about not receiving thanks from kodak? you speak like you deserve thanks. you don't, they didn't ask you to 'promote their films'

and you obviously don't know anything about business if you are comparing your own downsizing to that of a corporation. any ant can lift something several times it's weight and carry it long distances. a human can't. the same can be said for a corporation. because of it's size, it is relatively less flexible than a small business

With all (or any) due respect, I fail to see what your issue is with David. He has a legitimate point and is in a somewhat unique and qualified position to comment on Kodak's activities. It directly affects his business, as it does mine. I do not see that you are contributing anything valuable to the conversation.

If you have nothing of any more substance to add, perhaps it's time to leave this thread alone.

Thanks in advance.

- CJ

[mikebarger]

Cheryl

I don't know...

First, I don't have a dog in this fight...never ever used TXP...only use 220 color for family snaps.

I went back and looked at your posts and see a small business person concerned about the impact this decision is having on your business. Honest concern as to how it is going to affect your livelihood. I don't see any claims about you being the best at your profession.

I can also see David is concerned and upset about the decision, the impact on his livelihood, but I also see the plugging of a business mixed in the post.

I don't give a hoot if it's there or not (heck I don't even know what a DR5 is), but looks to me like there is a commercial there.

With no disrespect.

Mike

[Cheryl Jacobs]

Mike Mike,

David is also a small business who is affected by this. And any small business owner will tell you that it is a grave mistake, particularly in this economy, to not mention your business at every opportunity. It's marketing 101.

Regardless of whether or not anyone feels there's a "commercial" in there, he still has a legitimate point from a rather unique perspective.

And I am the best at what I do. Ha. (Just kidding.)

[2F/2F]

In light of the recent announcement that Kodak was giving the AX to TXP roll film, I just could no longer keep my mouth shut.

TXP is one of the best B&W films on the market. I don't think that there is much of an argument to this fact in this arena. This has to be the stupidest move I have ever seen a company make! To Delete the best product out of their line is truly short sided & dim-witted.

Surly These grown men and women know how to do their jobs. In this circumstance, this is not just a numbers game. Today there are allot less knowledgeable people about film because of the digital market, let alone the many who simply don't know that there are 2 TriX films. As a lab I cant tell you how many times I have to explain this fact.
The facts are that Kodak themselves caused the failure and low sales of TXP by not effectively marketing the 2 separate films.

It is my opinion that Kodak should do a better job in marketing TXP before even considering eliminating this staple film, but given a choice between 'TX' & 'TXP', Kodak should pick the better of these 2 films and make TXP the "TriX" film across the board.

I think it is time for Kodak to sell their film division as ILFORD did. We will be less likely to see Corporation-boobs discontinue anymore films. There is no reason Kodak can not make limited runs of this emulsion instead of totally wiping off the map.

dr5

Ditto. By now, we should know to expect the bi-annual moron reports...but this one really threw me. TXP was definitely their most special film, IMO, with TX right behind.

How is it that sheet sales of the emulsion are stable, but not medium format? If anything, I have always had a hard time finding TX in 120, not TXP. The only walk-in store in which I have ever seen TX in 120 is Freestyle. Everywhere else, when you say "120 Tri-X", it is assumed you mean TXP, and the TX is not even stocked.