Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,205   Posts: 1,531,750   Online: 899
      
Page 5 of 22 FirstFirst 123456789101115 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 213
  1. #41
    donkee's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Mid Michigan USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    147
    Quote Originally Posted by RattyMouse View Post
    Jeez.....so much hate towards Kodak. Sorry I posted that link guys. I won't do so again.
    For me it isn't hate. They just don't offer anything I want anymore so there is nothing for me to buy.

    Fuji and Ilford have what I want. Looks like Agfa transparency film is going to be an option for me too.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------
    SRT-102 | XD-5 | XD-11 | XE-7 | Hi-Matic 9 | Hi-Matic 11 | Sears 35RF | Minolta 5D | Sony A300 | Mamiya C220 | Bronica SQ-a | Yashica YK | Minolta Maxxum 7000 | Pentax K1000 | Speed Graphic 23


    http://blisslars.tumblr.com/

  2. #42
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,213
    Images
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by Michael R 1974 View Post
    Stone, I hope the "real hipsters" you know were of age in the 1950s. If not, there is little distinction to be made between contemporary "real" and "fake" hipsters. They are all fake. It's just another retro fad, whether you shoot lomo or iPhone.
    Haha those evolved into hippy's who evolved into corporate moguls lol!

    But truly I know what you mean, it's a new generation of NYC hipsters, I think they are similar enough though.
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  3. #43

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    2,562
    You don't have to be any kind of hipster to appreciate Lomos and I-phones. You just have to enjoy skeet shooting. It's always nice to have
    something different to toss into the air beside thousands of computer discs.

  4. #44

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    The highest state
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,886
    Quote Originally Posted by donkee View Post
    Fuji and Ilford have what I want. Looks like Agfa transparency film is going to be an option for me too.
    Great, then talk *positively* about those products, moving film use into a positive light, not a negative one. Kodak is not bringing back E6, Plus-X or Techpan, period. So why keep asking for it, that sounds negative. I have been trying for *years* to tell people how bad this looks but you just don't get it!

    For example, about three months ago while out shooting with my Blads, I ran into a couple of photo-keen 20-somethings who were really intrigued by my cameras. We got to talking about a lot of things, including Kodak films. At the end of it all I recommended this site as a resource. About a week ago I ran into one of them in town. We got to talking about film, Kodak again and this guy mentioned that while he found a lot of good resources in terms of developing, printing, etc on this site, he was somewhat put off by people always talking about what they don't have and not being positive about what we do have.

    We all need film to stay in a positive light, this constant asking for what we don't have and never will again is a sickness and it is a sad one at that...you are totally missing the point if you continue to do this folks, really.....so stop it for once!

  5. #45
    Ken Nadvornick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Monroe, WA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,165
    Images
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by PKM-25 View Post
    We all need film to stay in a positive light, this constant asking for what we don't have and never will again is a sickness and it is a sad one at that...you are totally missing the point if you continue to do this folks, really.....so stop it for once!
    An alternate interpretation is that it's just the market making it's wishes known. In a pre-Internet era companies used to spend fairly large sums of money to hire and fund market research efforts to figure out what their customers—and potential customers—wanted. Now that information can be had directly by simply reading online, where the whole damn world is more than happy to tell you what it wants. For free. Until your eyes bleed.

    The APUG membership is not a statistical outlier to be ignored simply because it's not saying what you want to hear. Rather it's a repository of 66,474 once or greater enrollees who felt strongly enough about the product category of photographic film to sign up as members. And the product preferences expressed here by them are genuine. People aren't gratuitously lying about the products they want to buy and use, if those products were made available. Why on earth would they do that?

    It's not a sickness. It's the market at work.

    My humble advice would be that one ignores the expressions of this cost-free market research at one's own risk.

    Ken
    "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

  6. #46

    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    San Diego, CA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,242
    Images
    21
    Quote Originally Posted by Ken Nadvornick View Post
    An alternate interpretation is that it's just the market making it's wishes known.
    That's if you believe that what people say on the internet reflects how they will actually behave (and if you believe that the things said by the relatively few active posters are a good model of the views of the lurking majority). Personally, I betcha it doesn't.

    I'm pretty sure there's recent research showing that inet discourse skews negative compared to "real-world" offline behavior. Trying to market products in such a way as to keep people from complaining online is a fool's errand; you could bring a film to market that had an RMS granularity of 0.00000000003204, a dynamic range of 68 stops, loaded itself in your camera and could be developed in full daylight while the snipped leader polished your shoes for you, and people would still find something to complain about.

    -NT
    Nathan Tenny
    San Diego, CA, USA

    The lady of the house has to be a pretty swell sort of person to put up with the annoyance of a photographer.
    -The Little Technical Library, _Developing, Printing, And Enlarging_

  7. #47

    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    The highest state
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,886
    Quote Originally Posted by Ken Nadvornick View Post
    It's not a sickness. It's the market at work.
    Yes, it is a sickness and no, it is not a market that works, because this is a re-emerging market with low demand, still declining in some areas such as color. So it is a niche and within this niche people have been told time and time again by the likes of Simon Galley, Colleen Krenzer, Eric from Freestyle and Henry P from B&H that there is NOT sufficient demand for the products that have been discontinued, *Full Stop!!*

    So when ever you fill the wunder-kind internet with wanting what will NEVER come back, it is not positive for film, not positive for the films that are left, not positive for Kodak, Ilford, Fuji, etc and I gave a perfect example above in how this is DAMAGING the movement of film as a niche. That 20-something that I inspired to shoot film chose not to join this site based on this old washed up guard attitude, I can't blame him.

    If we as film users fail to inspire others to use what we DO have left, we risk losing that too, I'm sorry but as a professional who wants to continue to depend on film, this annoys me to no end Ken.

  8. #48
    Ken Nadvornick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Monroe, WA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,165
    Images
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by ntenny View Post
    That's if you believe that what people say on the internet reflects how they will actually behave (and if you believe that the things said by the relatively few active posters are a good model of the views of the lurking majority). Personally, I betcha it doesn't.
    Perhaps...

    But then again, the people who do market research already know that. And how to correct for it. That's their job. And that job was no different in decades past when they had to decipher how many of those customers who made their product wishes known down at the bottom of all of those mail-in warranty registration cards were also serious about what they wrote. Nothing new here.

    More information, whether it be raw or corrected, is always better than less information. Especially when it's essentially free for the taking.

    Ken
    "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

  9. #49
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    7,213
    Images
    225
    Quote Originally Posted by PKM-25 View Post
    Yes, it is a sickness and no, it is not a market that works, because this is a re-emerging market with low demand, still declining in some areas such as color. So it is a niche and within this niche people have been told time and time again by the likes of Simon Galley, Colleen Krenzer, Eric from Freestyle and Henry P from B&H that there is NOT sufficient demand for the products that have been discontinued, *Full Stop!!*

    So when ever you fill the wunder-kind internet with wanting what will NEVER come back, it is not positive for film, not positive for the films that are left, not positive for Kodak, Ilford, Fuji, etc and I gave a perfect example above in how this is DAMAGING the movement of film as a niche. That 20-something that I inspired to shoot film chose not to join this site based on this old washed up guard attitude, I can't blame him.

    If we as film users fail to inspire others to use what we DO have left, we risk losing that too, I'm sorry but as a professional who wants to continue to depend on film, this annoys me to no end Ken.
    One thing I did because of all this talk about old film, is spent a bunch of money trying out the old stuff, compared to new, and besides Panatolmic-X and Verichrome Pan, neither of which will come back.

    Besides wasting a bunch it money on eBay, ya know what it did? It got me to NOT buy currently available film from the supplier that would help keep film alive.

    Dan is right, all this lamenting is bad for business all around. Appreciate, but don't complain.
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  10. #50

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Penfield, NY
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    998
    Quote Originally Posted by Ken Nadvornick View Post
    The APUG membership is not a statistical outlier to be ignored simply because it's not saying what you want to hear. Rather it's a repository of 66,474 once or greater enrollees who felt strongly enough about the product category of photographic film to sign up as members.
    I wonder how many of the 66,474 user names actually even check-in at least once a month. It seems to me, that only about 100 people actually participate on a several times a week basis.

    Anybody have the figures and care to share the numbers?



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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