Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,276   Posts: 1,534,733   Online: 883
      
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 30
  1. #11
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    22,972
    Images
    65
    Even back when I started at EK, it was perceived by the general public as the big bad giant. Yes, in the 60s and 70s and even later, Kodak was a big corporation and we were asked to tread very gently with other companies and to be extremely ethical dealing with people to help mute this perception.

    PE

  2. #12
    mrred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    660
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by RattyMouse View Post
    The most recent essay by Thom Hogan covers Kodak and the future of film. Worth a read if you have not seen it.

    www.bythom.com
    This ranks right up there with "I didn't know you could get film for that" ignorance. Sure the big picture changed with the movie industry, but it is not going to change much of my ability to purchase film. Kodak was never the only fish in the sea.

    I've actually tried their inkjet paper, although a little thin, makes a nice gloss.

  3. #13
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    From his own site:

    "One thing the digital revolution did is give us back our darkrooms (Photoshop, et.al.). It also let us (kind of) design our own film. A US$999 DSLR coupled with some good software and a monitor calibrator and a US$500 printer gives you full control over everything from capture to final 13x19" print. FULL control. As in "if it ain't right in the print you did something wrong." As some of you may surmise, I'm a closet control freak. Give me the power to do my own thing and I do. So I jumped on digital as far back as the early 1990's, starting with scanners and printers, but eventually opting to go 100% digital. I've put my time into the wet darkroom of the film days. I've processed just about everything except Kodachrome, and printed everything. Let me tell you, digital is ultimately not only easier, but gives you a finer degree of repeatable control."

    So why would I listen to this guy?
    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

  4. #14
    CGW
    CGW is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,798
    Quote Originally Posted by clayne View Post
    From his own site:

    "One thing the digital revolution did is give us back our darkrooms (Photoshop, et.al.). It also let us (kind of) design our own film. A US$999 DSLR coupled with some good software and a monitor calibrator and a US$500 printer gives you full control over everything from capture to final 13x19" print. FULL control. As in "if it ain't right in the print you did something wrong." As some of you may surmise, I'm a closet control freak. Give me the power to do my own thing and I do. So I jumped on digital as far back as the early 1990's, starting with scanners and printers, but eventually opting to go 100% digital. I've put my time into the wet darkroom of the film days. I've processed just about everything except Kodachrome, and printed everything. Let me tell you, digital is ultimately not only easier, but gives you a finer degree of repeatable control."

    So why would I listen to this guy?
    It's a matter of choice. I'm guessing the probable narrowing of choice and a sense of powerlessness are what have been stressing us all out in these threads recently. Tell me I'm wrong?

  5. #15
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by CGW View Post
    It's a matter of choice. I'm guessing the probable narrowing of choice and a sense of powerlessness are what have been stressing us all out in these threads recently. Tell me I'm wrong?
    You're not wrong - and I believe it's one of the reasons a lot of analog people actively detest newer digital technology. Their choice is being taken away and being placed into the hands of the manufacturers, their sensor designs, etc. Sure, Kodak, Ilford, Fuji, Agfa, etc. films have a certain look for each one, but the user of them still had inherent flexibility in each both on the exposure and development side. Analog people, typically being DIY in nature, love this! I love it! I'd hate for the organic nature of these materials to be reduced down to an inflexible formula.

    That's the issue. The inherent "life" within analog materials and how we work with them.
    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

  6. #16
    Aristophanes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    505
    Images
    15
    Quote Originally Posted by clayne View Post
    You're not wrong - and I believe it's one of the reasons a lot of analog people actively detest newer digital technology. Their choice is being taken away and being placed into the hands of the manufacturers, their sensor designs, etc. Sure, Kodak, Ilford, Fuji, Agfa, etc. films have a certain look for each one, but the user of them still had inherent flexibility in each both on the exposure and development side. Analog people, typically being DIY in nature, love this! I love it! I'd hate for the organic nature of these materials to be reduced down to an inflexible formula.

    That's the issue. The inherent "life" within analog materials and how we work with them.
    Hold on.

    "You press the button, we do the rest", Kodak circa. the dawn of consumer photography.

    ...and your quote of "...choice is being taken away and being placed into the hands of the manufacturers",

    ...are contradictory to the entire business history of film photography. You have always entrusted your ability to capture and display images in the hands of commercial interests.

    Nothing has changed. Nor the personal attachment to cultural processes, which Kodak and all the others build into their economic profiles of the market.

    The only ones to blame are your fellow photographers who have gone digital for reasons mostly of cost, but also of convenience. There are, quite frankly, not "a lot of analog people" left. For a decade people, pros and vernacular, had film and digital side-by-side on the shelves and the choice was made in a long, drawn out market play.

    That's the issue.

    Whether or not you make it an emotional issue is your personal choice. But one cannot blame the film industry entirely for the failure to maintain analog market share and the corresponding decline of choice, even f the last choice is digital These. companies poured billions of $'s of capital into film photography and in the case of Kodak, Agfa, and others, their shareholders were wiped out by disruptive technology.

    You are generalizing about the DIY perspective as that has always only ever applied to a very small fraction of the overall film market. Unless you make your own emulsions, you have always been playing in someone else's commercially kept walled garden. Photography is more like this almost any other industry, even autos. Photoshop is DIY for many people in exactly the same way a home darkroom is, and the whole DIY experience for either film or digital is based on industrial machines or their software equivalent churned out by large corporate entities. They make, you buy. If not enough of you buy product x, it's over.

  7. #17
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,838
    Images
    57
    Bullshit, the manufacturers of modern digital cameras are well in on and okay with all of this. They absolutely love this arrangement of continual release/obsolete/buy-again.

    So yes, I can blame my "fellow" photographers (they're not really my fellows), for enabling that bad cycle to continue, and I can also blame the consumers of photography who don't give a damn one way or another (but who will invariably notice something missing given enough time).

    I'm talking, right now, analog right now, with experienced printers and lab people - NOT generic consumers. Dude this is APUG, not johnny-consumer-find-me-a-lab-for-my-kodak-gold.com. The entire site is dedicated to the process, materials, and DIY attitude. Get that through your head. You're preaching to the absolutely wrong audience.
    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

  8. #18
    eddie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Northern Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,414
    Images
    207
    For the vast majority of people, photography isn't that important beyond documenting their lives. I know many who (when film was the only option) had a P and S 35mm. Often, it would take a year to complete a roll of film. A few shots at a June graduation... a few of their summer vacation... a few of Grandma at Christmas... For them digital makes sense.
    For a few, though, photography is an art form... a means of expression... For those in this category, film/darkroom is a tactile event, and the process matters. Their commitment to create a silver gelatin print/alternative print/projection transparency has more to do with the hand-crafted nature of the finished product than anything they can do on a computer. Ease is not part of the equation.
    I'd like to think APUG consists of the latter.

  9. #19
    CGW
    CGW is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    2,798
    Quote Originally Posted by clayne View Post
    Bullshit, the manufacturers of modern digital cameras are well in on and okay with all of this. They absolutely love this arrangement of continual release/obsolete/buy-again.

    So yes, I can blame my "fellow" photographers (they're not really my fellows), for enabling that bad cycle to continue, and I can also blame the consumers of photography who don't give a damn one way or another (but who will invariably notice something missing given enough time).

    I'm talking, right now, analog right now, with experienced printers and lab people - NOT generic consumers. Dude this is APUG, not johnny-consumer-find-me-a-lab-for-my-kodak-gold.com. The entire site is dedicated to the process, materials, and DIY attitude. Get that through your head. You're preaching to the absolutely wrong audience.
    APUG.ORG is an international community of like minded individuals devoted to traditional (non-digital) photographic processes. We are an active photographic community; our forums contain a highly detailed archive of traditional and historic photographic processes. We'd like to thank all of the photographers out there who have given us the encouragement to see this concept through.

    Enough of the splenetic rant. Don't see much reference here to the survivalist bona fides you seem to think are necessary for participation. Lots of different ways to "do" analog outside of DIY. Been doing this just long enough to recall there being no shortage of aspirational "upgrade-itis" pitched at film shooters frightened about dying in their sleep not owning the latest from Nikon or Canon.

  10. #20

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    The highest state
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,912
    Quote Originally Posted by CGW View Post
    It's a matter of choice. I'm guessing the probable narrowing of choice and a sense of powerlessness are what have been stressing us all out in these threads recently. Tell me I'm wrong?
    I'm not stressed, I read these threads not so much for information as much as watch-this-train-wreck entertainment.

    The better, less obscure products are often the most used therefore purchased. So to avoid stress, one only needs to prepare for what the worst case scenario could be in regards to product longevity...per product. Most of the more talented shooters of analog product I know keep it simple, they don't dabble in everything then piss and moan when one out of over 100 films gets nixed. Instead, they invest a few grand into product and supporting product and move onto to more important things like shooting, printing, marketing, networking.

    Changes in the larger scheme of analog products have set a lot of us into motion in terms of making decisions as to what the most important products are for our needs. If one of these products is prone to be on the chopping block, we simply either replace it with another product or stock up, no big deal and certainly no stress....

    So you can either keep typing the keyboard in a manner that would make a jazz organist gasp or get on with using the products we have and make some fine images happen.

    I've made my choice, obviously you have too...

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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