Apple also makes it work because they have engaged with the consumer, high consumer satisfaction too, a nameless, faceless Chinese company is going to have a high barrier to entry, unlike say Ilford who has a face (ohhh Simon)....
Originally Posted by zsas
I was agreeing with you.
Anyway, Foxconn makes other companies consumer goods (Apple, Samsung, Sony, etc...). They are not a "face" per se....
You dont go to the store and buy a "Foxconn phone" or tablet, or TV....see what I mean?
Ilford is a face, who also manufacture, same with Kodak (but hardly have a "face" in the film game anymore)....
Last edited by zsas; 07-24-2012 at 05:10 PM. Click to view previous post history.
Reason: tons o typo's
Ilford's workers aren't jumping from factory windows, either. Ilford is the future.
Originally Posted by zsas
Ha! I just saw your little rewrite of history, Mr MaineCooncat, presumably a conoisseur of kitties the
size of Pleistocene ground sloth species. Shipping laundry to China would be a bit annoyingly slow even in this day and age. Laundry sometimes came into SF and back via barges from the goldfields.
But mostly, Chinese labor entered the Mother Lode and higher Sierra for a variety of reasons, including livestock. Two weeks ago I was photographing some of their lovely old stone fences and
stock enclosures up there. And all through the area the the "tree of heaven" which they brought over from China have spread like weeds, though I think they are beautiful. The Chinese were all over
the high passes tending sheep, even in areas now considered remote to even seasoned backpackers,
and well before John Muir described such places. One pass was considered so miserable that to this
day it carries a Chinese expletive name so foul it is impossible to translate.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
These keep sprouting along a fence by my chile garden. They're almost impossible to kill and when the leaves are torn they stink. The stench of Ailanthus in the air was the signature odor of my childhood summers in Illinois.
Originally Posted by DREW WILEY
I must learn of this word.
One pass was considered so miserable that to this day it carries a Chinese expletive name so foul it is impossible to translate.
I photograph things to see what things look like photographed.
- Garry Winogrand
I don't believe China's going to "save" film, but I think not for a lot of the reasons people think.
I've been living in Beijing for two years now and keeping up shooting film even in the capitol is a hit and miss affair. C41 & E6 processing service is commonly available via sendout at Kodak Express outlets which are everywhere, and there are some pro labs as well that offer traditional B&W. The Wukesong Camera Market will sell you some version of anything related to photography you can imagine from digital P&S's to field cameras to studio lighting to traditional darkroom gear. The film selection isn't as broad as what you get stateside, but they stock C41, E6 and B&W in rolls and sheets. Kodak, Fuji, Ilford and Lucky were all represented. Some segment of the population is clearly still shooting film.
That said though, film is vanishingly rare in standard retail channels. The Kodak Express outlet near my school had a few rolls that I suspect had been in the display case a very long time. I have never seen a single roll or disposable camera in say, grocery stores.
The sense I get about film in Beijing is that it's the purview of a limited number of pros and well-to-do hobbyists, some casual older hold-outs who haven't taken to digital and possibly a segment of the working class for whom even a cheap digital camera is expensive. So, my impression is that film manufacturing carries on in China not because the population has special interest in it, but rather because it still fulfills a niche that digital isn't yet able to realistically fill. It's not a place that's ripe for a second analog coming.
People continue to miss the point I am trying to make about China saving film. I am NOT, repeat NOT talking about Chinese domestic film consumption. I am talking about China's ability to manufacture things at a very low cost. The problem with film right now is that Kodak and Fuji cannot produce film with any appreciable amount of profits. Sure Kodak claims to make money from film now but it is a pitiful amount compared to the profits that Kodak's owners demand. So there is no future for film with Kodak. Someone has to be able to make film more cheaply. Clearly that can happen in China if someone decides to do so. They wont have the massive overhead that Kodak has from their glory days and can make film in far smaller amounts FOR EXPORT to the west.
Film still has a user base correct? That base needs to be able to buy film at a cost that isnt too high, in order to allow that base to grow. Kodak isnt going to get you there. Is Fujifilm? Ilford is a big player and is doing everything pretty much right. But what about color film? Could Ilford start up color film production? If not, someone could do it in China, far far cheaper than Kodak, Ilford, and Fujifilm.
I think that I answered that in my post. QC in the "Kodak" plant in China was not up to Kodak standards AFAIK.