Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,497   Posts: 1,543,067   Online: 892
      
Page 36 of 69 FirstFirst ... 263031323334353637383940414246 ... LastLast
Results 351 to 360 of 690
  1. #351

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Slovenia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    745
    Images
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Kershaw View Post
    I thought the Rollei IR films are Agfa product?

    Tom
    They are.

  2. #352

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    2,797
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    The impossible example is a bad one.

    The reason that the company couldn't immediately make a really good polaroid film was because the old chemists were brought in to work on the new films however they were not allowed to use the same processes as they use with Polaroid because of licensing and patents... If they were allowed to use the same exact process as Polaroid, they would have the same exact stuff Polaroid film today, it's the patents that are owned by someone else that they can't easily procure, it's not financially feasible to buy them, thats preventing them from having the older Polaroid films in stock

    Thought I agree the machines kodak use probably have as much to do with quality as the chemistry behind the emulsions.

    Then again ilford can easily coat the Rollie IR films... So...
    Sorry that reads like a Holywood SiFi script, it is total denial of the problem.

    The manufacturing is as much the process workers as the chemists. Kodak could not make plusx at Harrow UK with the patents and Rochester staff to hand they would need several attempts, all the old hands from 2005 have long gone.

    It would be easy for Ilford to rebadge SFX...

    How many times did your team need a second take?

    Ask the sites pet technical expert...

  3. #353

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Mission Viejo, California
    Shooter
    127 Format
    Posts
    1,462
    Laws should be changed to declare a patent abandoned once the owner is no longer using it.

    One has to wonder who, if anyone at all, owns the Polaroid patents.

    The other side of patent protection is one has to defend the patent. So if Impossible were to use Polaroid's patents, whoever holds the rights would have to be willing and financially able to pursue infringement in the courts.

    And, there's always the chance the courts would side with Impossible.

    But still there needs to be an abandonment clause.
    - Bill Lynch

  4. #354
    AgX
    AgX is offline

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,591
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    The impossible example is a bad one.

    The reason that the company couldn't immediately make a really good polaroid film was because the old chemists were brought in to work on the new films however they were not allowed to use the same processes as they use with Polaroid because of licensing and patents... If they were allowed to use the same exact process as Polaroid, they would have the same exact stuff Polaroid film today, it's the patents that are owned by someone else that they can't easily procure, it's not financially feasible to buy them, thats preventing them from having the older Polaroid films in stock

    Thought I agree the machines kodak use probably have as much to do with quality as the chemistry behind the emulsions.

    Then again ilford can easily coat the Rollie IR films... So...

    You are wrong.

    The problem with a proceeding of manufacture of Polaroid instant materials after the closure of Polaroid as manufacturer was as well

    -) the desinterest of the respective persons

    -) the physical non-existance of the original elements



    The initiative and knowledge to do so then came from outside Polaroid.
    No, not Florian Kaps.

  5. #355

    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Maastricht
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    440
    Images
    5
    Polaroid stopped making chemicals in 2005. The factories that produced them have long since been demolished. Some key chemicals are illegal today and Impossible is not allowed to use them. Even with the patens and recipies they have to start from scratch because every component reacts differently to another. Change one of them and you have to start all over testing and making it right. If you have to change half a dozen......also the negative materials were made by Polaroid and in the beginning by Kodak. The stuff is not being made anymore so a new vendor and therefor new negative materials were needed. That has also a different reaction to the chemicals etc....do you get the picture? It is not as easy to get the right recipy it is a lot more than that. And that is why it is so amazing on how fast Impossible has been able to create a decent colour film. Polaroid took about 20 years or so to get decent color in their pictures.

    Anyways when Ferania starts producing I will start buying.
    Reality is whatever stays when you stop believing in it.
    allthingsanalogue.weebly.com
    darkroomninja.blogspot.com

  6. #356
    Hatchetman's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Chicago, IL
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    612
    Images
    7
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter de Groot View Post
    And that is why it is so amazing on how fast Impossible has been able to create a decent colour film. Polaroid took about 20 years or so to get decent color in their pictures.
    .
    Which is why I generally ignore all the Doomers.

  7. #357

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    2,797
    Quote Originally Posted by Peter de Groot View Post
    Polaroid stopped making chemicals in 2005. The factories that produced them have long since been demolished. Some key chemicals are illegal today and Impossible is not allowed to use them. Even with the patens and recipies they have to start from scratch because every component reacts differently to another. Change one of them and you have to start all over testing and making it right. If you have to change half a dozen......also the negative materials were made by Polaroid and in the beginning by Kodak. The stuff is not being made anymore so a new vendor and therefor new negative materials were needed. That has also a different reaction to the chemicals etc....do you get the picture? It is not as easy to get the right recipy it is a lot more than that. And that is why it is so amazing on how fast Impossible has been able to create a decent colour film. Polaroid took about 20 years or so to get decent color in their pictures.

    Anyways when Ferania starts producing I will start buying.
    The 7 Polariod patents that Kodak were stopped for in 86 were still valid in 86 but will have expired long ago, some of the other patents had expired by 86. But that won't have helped Impossible one bit.

    Polariods film in early 70s was pretty good Impossibles first offering was unusable by comparison. Id not say their current film is as good as Polariods early colour film.

    Impossibles development budget probably much smaller than Polariods and thus it is impressive that they have been able to bootstrap to today's film.

    But it is not APUG people who are buying the bulk of the film or the 2nd hand cameras?

    I don't see Ferrania having any more sales than Kodak or Fuji today. The market for E6 is vanishing. Maybe that will be enough for them for a while.

    I don't think Ilford would make a tripack XP2+ ie a colour C41 film because as mini labs dissappear C41 will lose volume because of lack of convenience. My local mini lab closed last month that (loss of convenience) will stop me using XP2+ - HP5+ instead.

  8. #358
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,312
    Images
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by Tom Kershaw View Post
    I thought the Rollei IR films are Agfa product?

    Tom
    Well I saw a post here recently that said that this person knew that ilford was actually doing the IR stuff in 120 rolls at least... And if you look at the backing paper of PanF+ and compare it to RollieIR400 it's the EXACT same paper.
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  9. #359

    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    UK
    Shooter
    35mm RF
    Posts
    2,797
    Cosina made a lotta SLRs for other companies...

    But are Agfa coating any film today?

    My last batch of APX100 did not say 'made in Ge'... previous batch did say 'made in Ge'...

  10. #360
    Dr Croubie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    rAdelaide
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,264
    Images
    2
    Quote Originally Posted by wblynch View Post
    Laws should be changed to declare a patent abandoned once the owner is no longer using it.

    One has to wonder who, if anyone at all, owns the Polaroid patents.

    The other side of patent protection is one has to defend the patent. So if Impossible were to use Polaroid's patents, whoever holds the rights would have to be willing and financially able to pursue infringement in the courts.

    And, there's always the chance the courts would side with Impossible.

    But still there needs to be an abandonment clause.
    I thought there was? ie, that's why Rodinal is now called Rodinal in the States again? (or is that because it's a "trademark" not "patent" thing)
    An awful lot of electrons were terribly inconvenienced in the making of this post.



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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