Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,948   Posts: 1,557,868   Online: 837
      
Page 18 of 26 FirstFirst ... 812131415161718192021222324 ... LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 252
  1. #171
    zsas's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    1,962
    Images
    74
    Good points Ken! Though we can't forget that some folks are new to film, students, etc.; and that give-and-take-symbiotic-system can't exist (yet) because price is so much more important (vital)....

    I wonder what the mix is of folks who'd rather get a bunch'a $2'ish rolls of low cost b/w film vs the $5+ roll-a-film-folks.....hummmm I smell a poll

    For the record, I pay a lot more for APX100 here in the states because I love it! I am worried that any change to the emulsion will affect my art goals....so for me, I am like you describe the symbiotic buyer
    Andy

  2. #172
    zsas's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    1,962
    Images
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by NB23 View Post
    But I agree, this rebranding business has to be kept secret as much as possible in order to prevent hurting the company.
    What's funny to me is that in the US there is only one manufacturer of film. So if the box says made in the US, it's Kodak by default.

    Now the whole EU thing allows these sellers like Lupus to say "...ohh it's made in the EU..." and walk away.

    From a consumer perspective, like Ken describes, the symbiotic relationship can't be upheld when some of the varriables of the symbiotic relationship have been removed. For eg, if X factory in the EU, was known for producing film with pinholes, defects and whatnot, and the consumer can't be sure that the film isnt coated at X factory cus the obfuscation of who made it exists due to an "EU" stamp on the box.....well....the risk is there that your gonna get what your gonna get.....and thus the cost better be low...

    I think in the US our import laws require the country of manufacture to be on the box....

    When the APX400 hits the US shores I will buy some and see if we can put this shell game to a rest re the new APX400...
    Andy

  3. #173
    zsas's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    1,962
    Images
    74
    One more food for thought. I sit here typing on my Foxconn phone....I mean iPhone.

    I believe 99% of the parts are Chineese made and the phone was assembled in China at a company called Foxconn, who Apple, an American company, contracts with to manufacture the phone.

    What if, Apple has the same components, that I belive are 99% Chineese, sent to the US and the phone is assembled in the US. The country of manufacture is therefore the US

    Anyway....I think this might happen in film. It could be coated at say Foma and cut/boxed (aka confectioned) in Germany. Same thing...

    Now the difference is that when you buy OEM parts of a iPhone, lets say you break the glass and you want to swap it out (as I've done too many times to count).....the OEM part will say made in China.

    That transparency doesn't exist with film...

    Is this odd to some?

    I once saw a documentary that said a major % of a Leica M7 is pre-assembled in Pourtugal and then assembled in Solms Germany. So can you get OEM parts of a M7 and find out that this was the case?

    Is this a German-thing? Or a EU thing? I don't understand all this obfuscation...

    Look, anyone who knows me knows I love ADOX and their films/chems and service - I am a diehard Adonal user!
    Andy

  4. #174
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,471
    Images
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by zsas View Post
    One more food for thought. I sit here typing on my Foxconn phone....I mean iPhone.

    I believe 99% of the parts are Chineese made and the phone was assembled in China at a company called Foxconn, who Apple, an American company, contracts with to manufacture the phone.

    What if, Apple has the same components, that I belive are 99% Chineese, sent to the US and the phone is assembled in the US. The country of manufacture is therefore the US

    Anyway....I think this might happen in film. It could be coated at say Foma and cut/boxed (aka confectioned) in Germany. Same thing...

    Now the difference is that when you buy OEM parts of a iPhone, lets say you break the glass and you want to swap it out (as I've done too many times to count).....the OEM part will say made in China.

    That transparency doesn't exist with film...

    Is this odd to some?

    I once saw a documentary that said a major % of a Leica M7 is pre-assembled in Pourtugal and then assembled in Solms Germany. So can you get OEM parts of a M7 and find out that this was the case?

    Is this a German-thing? Or a EU thing? I don't understand all this obfuscation...

    Look, anyone who knows me knows I love ADOX and their films/chems and service - I am a diehard Adonal user!
    Love Adox Adonal I would be curious about their APX400, I have one roll left from highshool of the original stuff.

    So I can compare

    Usually it says made in china, ASSEMBLED in the USA...

    And you can tell by the edge marking "font" where film comes from... They never change that just what's written, so that's easy to tell.


    ~Stone | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  5. #175
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,471
    Images
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by clayne View Post
    Pretty sure you're going to have to prove 320TXP is more fine grained than 400TX in 120 format, sir. :-)

    Either way, who cares. Both great films. Both PRO (whatever the hell that even means).


    Both are great films...

    And I'm reminded of the comment yesterday about it must just be the marketing department calling it "pro" haha whatever that means


    ~Stone | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  6. #176
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,678
    Quote Originally Posted by clayne View Post
    C'mon... Tri-X is absolutely a pro film. Do you know how many great images have been made on this film, by professionals and the like? Absolutely stellar film and it's deserving of it's reputation.
    I guess it's because of when I grew up, but if someone says "pro film", Tri-X is the one I think of. To U.S. magazine and newspaper photographers of the past five decades, the standard B&W film was Tri-X.
    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.

  7. #177
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,471
    Images
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by lxdude View Post
    I guess it's because of when I grew up, but if someone says "pro film", Tri-X is the one I think of. To U.S. magazine and newspaper photographers of the past five decades, the standard B&W film was Tri-X.
    Regular Tri-X or Tri-X Pan Profesisonal? There's a difference...


    ~Stone | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  8. #178
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,601
    Images
    60
    Stone:

    Tri-X 400 (as it has evolved over the years) has had more shots taken on it by professional photographers for professional uses than any other film you could possibly buy new today.

    It may not be the most popular film now for professional use (although I wouldn't be surprised if its numbers are still very high) but it is certainly of professional calibre, marketed to professionals and used by professionals.

    And with respect to the rest of this thread, and the discussions about price, everyone here seems to be ignoring one important fact.

    There is no longer anything resembling a rational distribution system for Kodak materials and, to a great extent, it is the distribution system that determines the price that consumers pay.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  9. #179
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,471
    Images
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    Stone:

    Tri-X 400 (as it has evolved over the years) has had more shots taken on it by professional photographers for professional uses than any other film you could possibly buy new today.

    It may not be the most popular film now for professional use (although I wouldn't be surprised if its numbers are still very high) but it is certainly of professional calibre, marketed to professionals and used by professionals.

    And with respect to the rest of this thread, and the discussions about price, everyone here seems to be ignoring one important fact.

    There is no longer anything resembling a rational distribution system for Kodak materials and, to a great extent, it is the distribution system that determines the price that consumers pay.
    Ok I give up on the Tri-X ok haha.

    But I wasn't complaining about their B&W film, only color. Though both Fuji and Kodak's B&W sheet film is double everyone else's B&W film and I don't know how that equates to distribution since the B&W in 120 or 35mm is distributed by the same trucks or whatever, how can Ilford, Foma, and the rest sell sheet film at a lower cost that's more equal to 120 but Kodak and Fuji have to double or triple theirs?

    Anyway, I bet that this new APX in sheet film will be a reasonable price and I'll use it


    Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  10. #180

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Shanghai, China
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,080
    Images
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by Ken Nadvornick View Post

    I wish more film buyers would realize this and be more willing to spend realistic money for their film. Film photography should be important enough for photographers to give up something else in their lives in order to be able to pay fairly for the film, paper and chemistry they want. In doing so they would also help assure the future availability of these products.



    Ken

    I totally agree with Ken's statement above. Pay for the damn film and keep profit in the business!

    But in an off topic rant here, why do people here continually use the word chemistry in place of the word chemicals?? This annoys me to no end! (I know, 1st world problem!)

    I have been a professional chemist for 20 years and NOT ONCE during that time, nor at any time during my 4 years of undergraduate to get my Chem degree nor at all during my graduate education have I ever heard the word chemistry used as it is in the photography world (in place of the word chemical or chemicals).

    I can only speculate that this is a corruption by non chemists. Or perhaps the word chemical is scary to the non chemist? Implying something more dangerous?



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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