Pretty sure the pun wasn't intended. Most people have either no idea or only the very vaguest notion that silver is in traditional film, and zero concept of it being integral to the image. Plus it's a common saying. But it's a nice unintended reference anyway.
Originally Posted by Ken Nadvornick
If film were not somehow profitable, then Fuji would be running a loss, Ilford would be running a loss and several companies in Europe with plans to expand their film and paper coating facilities would be in trouble. As this is NOT the case, we can safely assume there is some degree of profit to be made.
Yes, Kodak has to do better! Yes, profit margins are thin. But, even if Motion Picture collapses there is still a market. Kodak has the most modern and best facility for this purpose in the world and a huge body of trained people to call on here! So, it can be done. But to have someone say that they will fail or that there is no profit is premature.
I think that the other companies I mentioned would dispute that foregone conclusion of failure on Kodak's part.
I'm glad someone could decipher what "fir a kibg tune" was supposed to mean. I'm guessing "for a long time?" I noticed my iPhone often wants to write "fir" when I meant to type "for" and doesn't recognize it as a typo since it's a real word. "kib" are each one letter removed from "lon" and "tune" would be an autocorrect for a mistyped "time." Hum, guess I did decipher it.
Originally Posted by Photo Engineer
A shame there likely won't be more Ektalure, but that was gone before other paper and maybe the inability to use cadmium now limited it anyway. Elite was nice but we have plenty of excellent graded papers, and even more excellent VC papers. About the only Kodak B&W paper I personally miss and don't have a substitute for is Panalure (the last version, which was actually quite good) and that's because I shoot a fair amount of color negatives, often find ones I'd like to print in black and white, and no one else makes a panchromatic paper for doing so.
Simon, are you listening? Any chance Ilford could make a panchromatic B&W paper for that? Foma folks??
Maybe, if they want to keep making money on traditional materials, it might not be too much to hope for RA4 paper cut into sheets? Surely they still have, or could get or lease, cutting and packing equipment, and they do still make the paper.
Good grief man, give it a rest. I'm sorry your mother didn't give you any toys to play with but that's no reason to keep telling everyone else that all their toys are being taken away.
Originally Posted by CGW
I hear and recognize the logic in much of what you are saying but the combination of the excess mood of gloom in which it's delivered and the repetitive drum beat just turn it into a tired wail that starts to read like Charlie Brown's teacher sounds - here come CGW and Aristophanes again to try to rain on the parade, "wahwahwah, wahwahwah, wahwahwahwaaaa.."
That is what happens when you touch type and your fingers go astray!
Sorry. I'll be sorry for a kibg tune.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Sorry the news isn't cheerful but changing the parade route and burying your head in the sand aren't exactly solutions. But if you're OK with "truthiness," then it's "problem solved."
Originally Posted by Roger Cole
I definitely agree that Kodak could manufacture film for a profit for a kibg tune. They'd have to figure out how to shed their various other liabilities though. That's what chapter 11 is for.
Interestingly, I received an email from Freestyle yesterday that discussed film and included:
Kodak's sales in their film division increased 20% last year, and this division continues to be a profitable segment. They have billions of dollars in assets. Citicorp Group just gave them $950 million to help fund their restructuring efforts which will continue for 18 months.
Sounds like Kodak will be around for a while longer and that Citicorp is pretty sure they are going to get their money back with interest. The film division seems to be doing quite well and may even prosper under new management as a separate entity. Regardless of what happens, Freestyle is prepared to make a sizable investment in product to keep important products available for years to come.
I'm already unhappy about Plus-X fading, but maybe Tri-X will keep on keepin' on!
Sizable buy for years to come? Freestyle for the win - I liked supporting them already in spite of spendy shipping costs from the west coast and paper prices higher than NY (but with different selection and the only source for Adox paper.) But this is a good sign from them.
Originally Posted by DWThomas
I like and miss Plus-X but like FP4+ just fine. I picked up some Arista "Premium" rebranded 35mm Plus-X. They still have it, albeit in 24 exposure loads only (which I often prefer anyway) for $1.89. Wish I could get some in 120 without spending crazy eBay prices, but FP4+ does nicely for me.
Tri-X is a different matter and I'd miss it greatly. HP5+ is a fine but very different film. I'd miss Tri-X a lot.
You can make a profit on any product as long as your expenses are lower than your revenues. Elementary, right?
For film to survive, all of the excess expenses have to be removed from the equation. Paying people who no longer work for Kodak isn't going to be possible if Kodak film is to survive. The pension is a thing of the past, unless, of course, you work for the government.