Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,896   Posts: 1,520,987   Online: 895
      
Page 23 of 26 FirstFirst ... 1317181920212223242526 LastLast
Results 221 to 230 of 252
  1. #221
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,009
    Images
    222
    Quote Originally Posted by wblynch View Post
    Even Better! That means two new black and white films for us !!
    Or two competing films at the same ASA with not enough customers willing to move from Delta100, Tmax100, FP4+(125 close enough), FOMA100, Acros100, etc etc... however with the idea that the new ADOX stuff will come in all sorts of formats... if it comes in 4x5, 70mm, 120 and 127 formats... that would be a huge draw, if it came in 220 I might switch from ilford and fuji for the 100 range... but that's just me... (except night exposures... unless this film can match Acros100 on that... ). Especially if it's all reasonably and competitively priced.
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  2. #222
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    It doesn't have to be one or the other. Integrate the different mediums into the collection. For some it may also be a switch back to what they might have predominantly used before.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  3. #223

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    496
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    Or two competing films at the same ASA with not enough customers willing to move from Delta100, Tmax100, FP4+(125 close enough), FOMA100, Acros100, etc etc... however with the idea that the new ADOX stuff will come in all sorts of formats... if it comes in 4x5, 70mm, 120 and 127 formats... that would be a huge draw, if it came in 220 I might switch from ilford and fuji for the 100 range... but that's just me... (except night exposures... unless this film can match Acros100 on that... ). Especially if it's all reasonably and competitively priced.
    As long as you're going as far as 70mm, 127 and 220 then why not shoot the moon and make millions of us older camera folks happy and run 620 too. There are tons of 630 cameras out there and I, for one, would buy 620. I've got some honey cameras in 620 that are fantastic. My Kodak Medalist will match any 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 camera made today. The Kodak Monitor 620, Kodak Reflex I & II, Kodak Duo, and the Chevron are just a few Kodak's. Plus, there are thousands of other 620 cameras out there. It cost no more to make 620 film than it does to make 120 and it always pissed me off that since Kodak created the "bastard" size they didn't keep a small stock available. Maybe that's the kind of thinking that got kodak into trouble in the first place? When Kodak stopped the 616/116/620 production I boycotted them and never bought a roll of B&W Kodak film for many years. Of course I must confess that I still continued to use Vericolor 160 for weddings. So I guess that makes me a hypocrite! JohnW

  4. #224
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,578
    It's all about whether they can sell enough to make it worth doing. I was buying 116, 616, 620 and 828 long after all cameras that took those sizes were out of production. But I only used the cameras occasionally, and that's the issue. So I could understand it when they went- I was glad they were around as long as they were. Lots of companies (especially these days) do not support old products even if they could do it without losing money. They don't want to bother with it.
    There are numerous threads here on APUG about respooling 120 onto 620 cores, easily found through using the search box. Some people have even modified 620 cameras to take 120 film, which would probably vary a lot in difficulty depending on the camera model.
    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.

  5. #225
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,009
    Images
    222
    Quote Originally Posted by John Wiegerink View Post
    As long as you're going as far as 70mm, 127 and 220 then why not shoot the moon and make millions of us older camera folks happy and run 620 too. There are tons of 630 cameras out there and I, for one, would buy 620. I've got some honey cameras in 620 that are fantastic. My Kodak Medalist will match any 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 camera made today. The Kodak Monitor 620, Kodak Reflex I & II, Kodak Duo, and the Chevron are just a few Kodak's. Plus, there are thousands of other 620 cameras out there. It cost no more to make 620 film than it does to make 120 and it always pissed me off that since Kodak created the "bastard" size they didn't keep a small stock available. Maybe that's the kind of thinking that got kodak into trouble in the first place? When Kodak stopped the 616/116/620 production I boycotted them and never bought a roll of B&W Kodak film for many years. Of course I must confess that I still continued to use Vericolor 160 for weddings. So I guess that makes me a hypocrite! JohnW
    620 can easily be respooled from 120, not as much need for that, in fact, I had a bunch of 620 that I took off and put on 120 spools because I don't own any 620 cameras HAHA, sorry if that's a dig in that we could have traded, but it really is easy to re-spool the 620 stuff, as long as you have one 620 spool you're good.
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  6. #226
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,009
    Images
    222
    Quote Originally Posted by lxdude View Post
    It's all about whether they can sell enough to make it worth doing. I was buying 116, 616, 620 and 828 long after all cameras that took those sizes were out of production. But I only used the cameras occasionally, and that's the issue. So I could understand it when they went- I was glad they were around as long as they were. Lots of companies (especially these days) do not support old products even if they could do it without losing money. They don't want to bother with it.
    There are numerous threads here on APUG about respooling 120 onto 620 cores, easily found through using the search box. Some people have even modified 620 cameras to take 120 film, which would probably vary a lot in difficulty depending on the camera model.
    yea, the 70mm is good for 116/616 as well, and 828 can just be respooled from 35mm and same with 620 as you said respooled from fresh 120. 127 on the other hand... I love my Yashika44, really want it to last a while, I did buy into the Ilford ULF run so I'll have 22 rolls of 127 to shoot this year all fresh HP5+ but it would be nice not to have to roll it myself, or at least have fresh backing paper, right now I'm working off 4 rolls of fresh backing paper, and 6 rolls of really brittle scraped up backing paper, and I don't do well with cutting my own backing paper, so that's out...

    Anyway, just a dream

    PS I have one roll of 828... I think it's Kodachrome II ... lol
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  7. #227

    Join Date
    May 2009
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    496
    Well guys, 620 is my main beef. Oh it would be nice to haul out my beautiful Kodak 3A and shoot those huge negatives again (many folks here don't even know what I'm talking about). Just like having a roll film 4x5. Or the 616/116 , but I realize there is a film size slitting problem there. Not with 620! Same film width, paper backing etc. Only the spool is different and I'm sure some cheap Chinese plastic plant could poop those out for almost nothing. What I'm saying is is if you want to sell more film in a dwindling market then sell more damn film. I believe a roll of 620 film still constitutes a roll of film. It's not like the other sizes where the slitter has to be setup and paper has to be specially made. Like StoneNYC says all you have to do is re-pool! So, 620 is already made, but just on the wrong spool. I'm sorry, if I were in the film business and that businesses well being was depended on the volume of film it sold, I would be looking for every way I could do just that. Of course you don't want to create a new high-cost overhead by retooling, but with 620 you don't have to.
    BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY BEING MADE! You would not want to make 3 million rolls, but make some just to get the feel of the market. Then you could gauge your production to that. If it doesn't sell then stop spooling 620 altogether. You are nothing out since all the film and backing paper was 120 anyway. Oh, if you have some left over 620 spools just dump them on eBay 'cause they are going for as mush as a roll of film anyway.
    As for me? I re-spool 620 all the time and it's no problem, but it sure would be easier just to place my order with B&H, Adorama or Freestyle. Do I think it will happen? Heck no! Why? Because these companies nowadays do not think out of the box. Then they act puzzled when things keep going downhill. Or worse yet they don't act like they care at all about the company and ride it down the hill while they milk their fat paychecks. Happens all the time and I have more than a few friends who have paid the price for that. Just my stupid opinion I guess, but I'm sticking to it! JohnW
    Last edited by John Wiegerink; 07-27-2013 at 06:52 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  8. #228
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,009
    Images
    222
    Quote Originally Posted by John Wiegerink View Post
    Well guys, 620 is my main beef. Oh it would be nice to haul out my beautiful Kodak 3A and shoot those huge negatives again (many folks here don't even know what I'm talking about). Just like having a roll film 4x5. Or the 616/116 , but I realize there is a film size slitting problem there. Not with 620! Same film width, paper backing etc. Only the spool is different and I'm sure some cheap Chinese plastic plant could poop those out for almost nothing. What I'm saying is is if you want to sell more film in a dwindling market then sell more damn film and I believe a roll of 629 film still constitutes a roll of film. It's not like the other sizes where the slitter has to be setup and paper has to be specially made. Like StoneNYC says all you have to do is repool! So, 620 is already made, but just on the wrong spool. I'm sorry, if I were in the film business and that businesses well being was depended on the volume of film it sold, I would be looking for every way I could do just that. Of course you don't want to create a new high-cost overhead by retooling, but with 620 you don't have to.
    BECAUSE IT'S ALREADY BEING MADE! You would not want to make 3 million rolls, but make some just to get the feel of the market. Then you could gauge your production to that. If it doesn't sell then stop spooling 620 altogether. You are noting out since all the film and backing paper was 120 anyway. Oh, if you have some left over 620 spools just dump them on eBay 'cause they are going for as mush as a roll of film anyway.
    As for me? I re=spool 620 all the time and it's no problem, but it sure would be easier just to place my order with B&H, Adorama or Freestyle. Do I think it will happen? Heck no! Why, because these companies nowadays do not think out of the box. Then they act puzzled when things keep going downhill. Or worse yet they don't act like they care at all about the company and ride it down the hill while they milk their fat paychecks. Happens all the time and I have more than a few friends who have paid the price for that. Just my stupid opinion I guess, but I'm sticking to it! JohnW
    Ilford just had 122 as an option in their ULF run this year, not enough people ordered it so it was the only one that didn't get ordered... I think the minimum for that was 10 rolls and only 4-6 got ordered in total, they were of course about $220-$260 per 50 foot roll, but still, if you want it bad enough, buy 10 to guarantee the order...

    Also, you can buy 620 spools fresh in ... Provia 100f, Velvia 100f, E100G, Portra160, Tmax100, Tri-X Pan, and Tmax400 ... so stop your complaining... the work is already done for you.... sheesh! go buy some spools...

    http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/search...op+Nav-Search=
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  9. #229
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    John, just buy some spools man. The problem is easily solvable with 5 minutes in eBay.
    Stop worrying about grain, resolution, sharpness, and everything else that doesn't have a damn thing to do with substance.

    http://www.flickr.com/kediwah

  10. #230
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,578
    John, I don't want to sound unsympathetic. But as a transparency film shooter, I've seen at least 8 different color slide films completely discontinued in the last 4 years, and I face the very real possibility of every single one being gone long before I'm done with photography. If that happens, I will adjust, and hope I have color negative film for a while longer.
    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.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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