I don't think it's about shutting up for that reason, I think it's more about the fact that we as photographers may complain and bitch about things, but we also understand the dynamics of it, but when we speak about those things around nine photo folk, that may purchase onesies-twosies but actually be fairly useful in the purchasing market they may stop purchasing because of our complaints thinking that Kodak is no longer any good, and it's that trickle-down effect that I think that Dan is speaking about, one pro photographer talks badly about Kodak, and then that person tells a couple friends "oh my photographer friend said blah blah blah about Kodak" and eventually everybody thinks that Kodak stopped making film, which is the case because of the whole Kodachrome issue, have to people I talk to think that all film has been discontinued because they saw on the news that Kodachrome was being discontinued as a film. So I think Dan is just saying we need to be careful about how we speak about film, and especially to those who aren't in the know, so we don't end up shooting ourselves in the foot in the long run.
Originally Posted by Ken Nadvornick
PM reply sent, so as not to further upset people...
Originally Posted by StoneNYC
"They are the proof that something was there and no longer is. Like a stain. And the stillness of them is boggling. You can turn away but when you come back they’ll still be there looking at you."
— Diane Arbus, March 15, 1971, in response to a request for a brief statement about photographs
[ Insert meaningless camera listing here ]
The problem is that at least at the moment all those small enterprises are dependant directly or even indirectly on the big companies.
Originally Posted by Ken Nadvornick
There is a somewhat sinister momentum that has been taking place in regards to the public's awareness on film ever since all the news about the demise of Kodachrome that Stone is talking about. He is right in that far too many people think Kodachrome being gone means film is gone. This is a problem for us film users and the film makers but it is a "Golden" opportunity for some other folks, Nikon, Canon, Apple, etc.
I have it on good authority that the only reason Nikon stopped taking film based entries in their long standing photo contest was purely marketing, to convince people that film really does not exist at all as far as they are concerned. They are not the only ones, there are literally hundreds of web personas that work very hard to keep people chasing the digital rainbow and do everything they can to say no, you can not buy film, you can not get it developed, you now have to use digital, you don't have a choice.
This is sinister momentum folks, these people do not want potential buyers of a brand new $2,700 retro Nikon Df to think that they can just buy a second hand FM2 or F3 and still enjoy film, they are also in a perilous market and desperate shareholder situation and *every* single time someone on a site like this one complains about what films they no longer have so why bother using Kodak, Fuji, etc.....it greases the rails for that sinister momentum and makes the jobs of the digital marketing force that much easier.
This is NO JOKE dammit, so THINK about this next time you ask for Pan-F in 4x5 or the return of Kodak E6. The best thing you can do as a film user to help market digital is keep asking for films that have been discontinued. Because you are making a potential film user feel like they are late to the party and all the good stuff is gone, so why bother.
It's completely baffling to me how some can not see this...
Last edited by PKM-25; 11-11-2013 at 04:48 AM. Click to view previous post history.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Keep in mind that Kodachrome only had that iconic value in parts of the world and and thus its demise is only relevant to that fraction of the public.
Originally Posted by PKM-25
I agree with everything except the PanF+ in 4x5 part. Not only because that would be friggin awesome! But specifically because I don't think it's dangerous to encourage the current companies to developing new films, or to expand their lines, if they are capable and the market will support it. If they were able to produce PanF+ on a thicker base, make it properly and make it without re-doing the entire thing, they would, many people ask for it.
Originally Posted by PKM-25
Adox is making new films, Ferrania is too, so I think it's natural for companies like ilford and kodak to at least look into new products even if it's only to a small degree.
Anyway I think as long as it's not LAMENTING and just "oh this film is so great, I hope someday they make it in X size" I think that's fine.
Also saying "man! Neopan400 was such a great film! But when it stopped being made I started using Kodak Double-X and that's GREAT!"
But saying "man film sucks now ever since Kodakchrome died" well that's a fools errand....
I completely disagree, because people aren't that where a film in general, if you don't know that much about film, and you hear "no more Kodak Kodachrome" on the news, in any sense of it, most people immediately assume that all film is gone, since they don't see it anymore, it's not sold very often, there's no advertisements for it, and people don't generally see it being used. But yet the news reports about Kodachrome were all over the world, and many people from many countries that aren't in the no believe now that film is gone. In fact tonight I met a girl who looked at me and said "that's a film camera? I thought you couldn't even get film anymore, I saw on the news like a couple of years ago" to which I replied to film is still alive and well they're still making it that he's making you found, and you can mostly get it on the Internet, to which she replied "yea but where do you get it developed, I didn't don't see any labs anymore" to which I replied that you can go to CVS or Walgreens or Rite Aid etc., and she said "really??! Are you sure? I haven't seen any "labs"" ... I asked her if she had seen the photo centers, she answered yes, and I said well that's the lab, they just don't call it a lab anymore and often they mail it out to another location to all have the same processing done in one place to save money. She said "oh" and that was it.
Originally Posted by AgX
I have this kind of conversation very very often....
Kodachrome is not that an icon in parts of the world as it is in the USA.
That a news agency reports about Kodachrome being cancelled does not necessarily mean that many people in that country can begin something with that name. I'm sure asking people here on the street would show that the majority does not know Kodachrome.
Last edited by AgX; 11-11-2013 at 05:44 AM. Click to view previous post history.
Its not an issue but just on a few points : KENTMERE Photographic did not go 'belly up' KENTMERE Photographic was a profitable company when HARMAN technology Limited bought it and it remains so to this day although now absorbed into HARMAN, KENTMERE Photographic also had a wide range of wide format inkjet products as well that HARMAN technology continue to coat.
The KENTMERE range of products including mono RC paper, inkjet and film form an important part of our portfolio now and going forward.
Finally, HARMAN technology Limited is based in Mobberley, CHESHIRE ( not Macclesfield although it is quite near ) this was the former ILFORD Imaging factory built in 1984 on the site of the RAJAR photo works that have been at Mobberley since 1903.
The 6 Original Board Directors of HARMAN technology were all Senior Managers at ILFORD Imaging Limited and had ( and have ) in excess of 140 years service to ILFORD / HARMAN.
Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited