Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 74,456   Posts: 1,643,760   Online: 733
      
Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 80
  1. #41
    CGW
    CGW is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,797
    Nothing to cheer about but no reason for panic either.

    Kodak's reps aren't offering much comfort when they gush about sales figures but not volume. Volume matters and that's the worry.

  2. #42

    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Sydney
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,392
    Images
    84
    Quote Originally Posted by tomalophicon View Post
    Are they the same thing?
    Yeah, Scotch film was a 3M brand although I did hear it may have been made by Ferrania. Still have some in the freezer.

  3. #43
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,856
    American Scotch film from Italy. A little roll of identity crisis inside every box.
    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.

  4. #44
    kb3lms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Reading, PA USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    786
    Images
    5
    IMHO, Kodak has a track record of pulling out of markets just before they do well, or do well again. 8mm video is an excellent example. Kodak got in early, didn't see film-like profits and then bailed out. About a year later every video camera maker was selling 8mm video like hotcakes. Verbatim and Sterling Drug would be further examples. There are many more, I am sure.

    When people (as in general public) find out five or 10 years from now that they don't have any real pictures on paper and the baby pictures are long gone because of a corrupted memory card, fouled hard drive or the latest incarnation of Windows BS and Facebook has finally gone into the dark corners of the Wayback Machine where it truly belongs, things in the market may very well change. Most people's PCs don't work and they couldn't print a picture if they could actually figure out how to do it - and most can't. A generation of our history is disappearing into the bit-bucket. Kodak ought to market that.

    We need an Open Source Color Film project and APUG is just the place for it.

  5. #45

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    OH
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,787
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by canuhead View Post
    I'll be using Kodak's b/w products (and Acros tbh) until the day they kill them all in a scorched earth move and only then will I turn to other products. I don't choose film based on a company's shortsightedness or worry about 'learning' a new film. I never really thought going from Brand X to Brand Y was all that difficult in the grand scheme of things.
    Exactly. I love what TMY-2 and TMZ can do, so why would I stop using them while they are still available?

    Then again, I started shooting film about 5-6 years ago, with the thinking that I was going to shoot it and enjoy it while it was still here to be enjoyed. And as long as I can continue to do that, it's great. I'll figure out the transition to Ilford, or in a worse case scenario, back to digital for everything, when the time comes.

  6. #46

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    San Clemente, California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,243
    Quote Originally Posted by Rudeofus View Post
    ...A bunch of 8x10 film is special order only from now on. Remember Ilford's once a year "we cut to your size" offer and I can already see what will happen with Kodak's large format offers, as long as either Kodak or some savvy business person starts collecting many small orders and combines them into a special order volume (plus a profit)...So...will end up only as inconvenience...
    Your conclusion about Kodak 8x10 320TXP simply being less convenient to obtain is incorrect.

    Ilford, in its annual special sizes program, will supply any listed item regardless of how few boxes are ordered. Kodak, selling through retailers, will only cut and package non-stock sizes if a minimum quantity is ordered. Using TMAX 400 as an example, Canham has managed to complete only one 8x10 special order nearly 11 months ago, with a second attempt falling short in October

    http://www.canhamcameras.com/kodakfilmstatus.html.

    This despite his minimum number of boxes being 218, fewer than the B&H minimum of 245 boxes

    http://www.canhamcameras.com/kodakfilm.html

    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/produc...MY_8_x_10.html.

    Although B&H asks "only" $73.50 per box, compared to Canham's $77.00, it has not to my knowledge sold anyone the minimum quantity since 8x10 TMAX 400 became a special order item. Note that these are 10-sheet boxes.

    Regardless of film size, Kodak requires an approximately $18,000 purchase for special orders. Ilford will deliver a single unique-size box of film even if it sells for $50 and only one is ordered. The likelihood of anyone being able to put together an 8x10 320TXP group order in the future is slight. I think this community will need to rely on Ilford for first-tier-quality 8x10 black and white film going forward. FP4 Plus is a fine film and performs similarly to 320TXP in many ways.

  7. #47
    Ken Nadvornick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Monroe, WA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,116
    Images
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by kb3lms View Post
    A generation of our history is disappearing into the bit-bucket. Kodak ought to market that.
    They can't. Kodak also disappeared into the bit-bucket...



    Ken
    "When making a portrait, my approach is quite the same as when I am portraying a rock. I do not wish to impose my personality upon the sitter, but, keeping myself open to receive reactions from his own special ego, record this with nothing added: except of course when I am working professionally, when money enters in,—then for a price, I become a liar..."

    — Edward Weston, Daybooks, Vol. II, February 2, 1932

  8. #48
    michaelbsc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    South Carolina
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,106
    Images
    5
    Quote Originally Posted by Ken Nadvornick View Post
    They can't. Kodak also disappeared into the bit-bucket...



    Ken
    Yeah, but the ink will be cheap.
    Michael Batchelor
    Industrial Informatics, Inc.
    www.industrialinformatics.com

    The camera catches light. The photographer catches life.

  9. #49

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Alberta, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    186
    Quote Originally Posted by kb3lms View Post
    IMHO, Kodak has a track record of pulling out of markets just before they do well, or do well again. 8mm video is an excellent example. Kodak got in early, didn't see film-like profits and then bailed out. About a year later every video camera maker was selling 8mm video like hotcakes. Verbatim and Sterling Drug would be further examples. There are many more, I am sure.

    When people (as in general public) find out five or 10 years from now that they don't have any real pictures on paper and the baby pictures are long gone because of a corrupted memory card, fouled hard drive or the latest incarnation of Windows BS and Facebook has finally gone into the dark corners of the Wayback Machine where it truly belongs, things in the market may very well change. Most people's PCs don't work and they couldn't print a picture if they could actually figure out how to do it - and most can't. A generation of our history is disappearing into the bit-bucket. Kodak ought to market that.

    We need an Open Source Color Film project and APUG is just the place for it.
    This isn't 1999. The world is now in a different place. I think most people realize they are no longer getting prints done, and they're doing it by their own choice. Aside from the scrapbooking niche, most people aren't putting together physical photo albums anymore. If people do get prints, it's usually just a few things so that they can have it in a frame and on display. But now with digital picture frames, I predict that will become less popular as well. Most people are perfectly fine sharing photos over Facebook or Flickr photo albums. Besides, archiving your photos on a website, in my opinion, is a safer bet than keeping it on your personal hard drive. I've never heard of someone loosing their Facebook pictures because one of Facebook's drives died. Now with cloud computing, it seems even less likely.

    So with that, I wouldn't count on a resurgence in film because people realize they don't have prints. You can always make prints from digital and most film nowadays isn't even printed, it's scanned. Digital archiving is only going to get safer and more secure in the future.

  10. #50

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Enroute
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,004
    Film: Just use it, make photographs with it and try to show people good work, get the word out that it still rocks, can be souped in your kitchen sink. Word of mouth and stellar visual examples of why people should use film are what is going to keep it around, not a big marketing campaign from Kodak or Ilford.

    When I was a kid, it was the photographs I saw being made on film that made me want to use it, not an ad from the company that made it....
    "I'm the freak that shoots film. God bless the freaks!" ~ Mainecoonmaniac ~

Page 5 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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