Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,587   Posts: 1,545,842   Online: 1147
      
Page 9 of 31 FirstFirst ... 345678910111213141519 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 90 of 309
  1. #81

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Earth
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,560
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    Well, Alan has it right. Ray, I doubt if you have had the production experience to judge this well. Sorry.

    And now the air and words are dirty!

    PE
    That was an uncalled for low blow...
    I said I did not dissagree with what Alan said.
    So, What is your point?

    What was it that prompted you to judge my comments
    by your assesment of my production experience
    rather than the content of what I said?

    Before you pick on the background of the little guy,
    go back and review the mistakes in you glossry!

    (Give me a holler if you need a hint)
    -----------------------------------------------

    Clean Air Clean Words to follow...
    Be free of all deception, Be safe from bodily harm
    Love without exception, Be a saint in any form
    (Patti Smith)

  2. #82
    Sirius Glass's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    13,128
    Ray, your comment that is was the same to make one sheet of paper as make a roll was so absurd that it more than proved your lack of understanding production.
    Warning!! Handling a Hasselblad can be harmful to your financial well being!

    Nothing beats a great piece of glass!

    I leave the digital work for the urologists and proctologists.

  3. #83

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Earth
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,560
    How so?

    My

    the fact that KODAK is so huge is in large part a decesion...
    made out greed, not necessity.

    For example, paper can be made by the sheet as well as by the mile.


    simply meant that Kodak did not have to get so big,
    and that being big did not mean they had to stay big.

    Being big was their CHOICE
    Last edited by Ray Rogers; 02-05-2011 at 05:18 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  4. #84
    M.A.Longmore's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    New York
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,850
    Images
    15
    .
    What would happen if Kodak actually advertised Film, and other analog photographic products ?

    Remember; Like they did in The Good Olde Days ...

    Would That Help ?

    __________________________________________________ ________________________________________________


    Sanjay Sen - APUG Subscriber
    Sanjay Sen, 36, a champion of human and animal rights, died June 3 in a motorcycle accident in Wayne, New Jersey.

    July 23 1975 - June 3 2012

    __________________________________________________ __________________________________________

  5. #85

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    965
    Images
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by Ray Rogers View Post
    How so?

    My

    the fact that KODAK is so huge is in large part a decesion...
    made out greed, not necessity.

    For example, paper can be made by the sheet as well as by the mile.


    simply meant that Kodak did not have to get so big.
    No, I suppose they didn't "have" to get so big; they were unfortunately saddled at one time with products that people actually wanted to buy. They could have decided, to restrain themselves. They could have said, Gee, you know, in the future, we won't be able to sell as much film and paper as we do today, so we'd better not build that new coating machine. We'll just tell people to buy Fuji instead.

  6. #86
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,037
    Images
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by Ray Rogers View Post
    That was an uncalled for low blow...
    I said I did not dissagree with what Alan said.
    So, What is your point?

    What was it that prompted you to judge my comments
    by your assesment of my production experience
    rather than the content of what I said?

    Before you pick on the background of the little guy,
    go back and review the mistakes in you glossry!

    (Give me a holler if you need a hint)
    -----------------------------------------------

    Clean Air Clean Words to follow...
    Ray, as Sirius said above, your post quoted there was what made it rather obvious that you didn't have any experience in manufacturing processes and the costs involved at various scales.

    BTW, whatever did you mean by "the mistakes in you glossry"?

    PE

  7. #87

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Earth
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,560
    Quote Originally Posted by Moopheus View Post
    No, I suppose they didn't "have" to get so big; they were unfortunately saddled at one time with products that people actually wanted to buy. They could have decided, to restrain themselves. They could have said, Gee, you know, in the future, we won't be able to sell as much film and paper as we do today, so we'd better not build that new coating machine. We'll just tell people to buy Fuji instead.


    You make it sound like Kodak were the Beatles!

  8. #88
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,037
    Images
    65
    Rudeofus;

    No, the chemical companies that make kits are NOT equipped to coat film or paper. There is absolutely no crossover in either production facilities or coating.

    PE

  9. #89
    lns
    lns is offline

    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    435
    Quote Originally Posted by Ray Rogers View Post
    How so?

    My

    the fact that KODAK is so huge is in large part a decesion...
    made out greed, not necessity.

    For example, paper can be made by the sheet as well as by the mile.


    simply meant that Kodak did not have to get so big,
    and that being big did not mean they had to stay big.

    Very true, and I understood your point at the time. Fear not: probably a lot of other people did too.

    I think you're right. But to me, that's water under the bridge. When Kodak expanded, the future looked bright and expansion seemed a good economic choice. It is fair to say that a lot of businesses have been blindsided by change.

    When it became clear that film was starting a major decline in sales, Ilford chose to restructure, get smaller and concentrate on black and white film. While Kodak chose to use the cash from film operations to try to turn into a digital company. Ilford's parent has a division that sells printer paper, by way, so it isn't film only either. Again, water under the bridge. Both were legitimate strategies. I prefer one but understand the other.

    I still maintain that there's too much panic in threads like this. We'll go crazy if we post about every negative prediction from every obscure stock tout or committed digital evangelist or negative nellie. I've been reading about the imminent death of film for five years now, and it's still here. I don't know about anybody else, but I bought some film from Kodak and Ilford this week, not to stick in a freezer, but to use. I'm shooting some of the new Portra 400 this weekend, and I can't wait to see the results.

    -Laura

  10. #90
    IloveTLRs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Switzerland
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,000
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by brucemuir View Post
    I will truly be bummed when TriX is gone
    I will promptly slit my wrists
    Those who know, shoot film



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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