Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 76,256   Posts: 1,680,507   Online: 846
      
Page 19 of 31 FirstFirst ... 91314151617181920212223242529 ... LastLast
Results 181 to 190 of 308
  1. #181

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,819
    Quote Originally Posted by Hatchetman View Post
    I would like Ilford to market some color films, not necessarily make them. Seems like they are the only company that has their act together with regard to a long-term plan, marketing, and customer service.
    An excellent suggestion....maybe Simon could comment? I would not have thought that this would take a large capital outlay, and, given that UK Poundland can sell Kodak and Agfa 35mm color neg at £1 per roll (= $1.50 ) presumably at a worthwhile profit, it would seem there would be a reasonable return.

  2. #182
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    24,655
    Images
    65
    Kodak and Fuji can sell film at a low price because their manufacturing process is so fast and efficient.

    But, I spent nearly 60 years learning and using photography. Analog photography! I know most all details of its manufacturing and processing. I don't want to be an activist at my age, but I will not see the skills that I learned die.

    PE
    Last edited by Photo Engineer; 07-25-2013 at 06:19 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: Well, I typed in 70 instead of 60 years. Sorry.

  3. #183

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    8,093
    Images
    228
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    Stone, if digital is better than E6, then why do you use E6 instead of digital?

    But, OTOH, as you and Ken point out, there is a market for Lobo and TIP products. This is one that went by under my radar and I am sorry. Yes, it may be a viable source of customers, but these customers will tend to be less critical that most of us wrt color, grain and sharpness. So yes, I do agree with you on those points.

    PE
    Ok I'll clarify...

    There are probably some films that are finer grained technically than the pixel count on a sensor, and if you are a perfect printer and own an enlarger that can print 20x30 prints and own trays that can process them and a full darkroom to do the work, and the chemistry and source the paper for such a job etc. then a 35mm image on film can print as detailed as a digital camera can or better if sticking to a full traditional process. Or possibly if you can afford a drum scan you potentially could get as sharp an image with a scan then printed chemically with the hybrid projector thing however that works. But for all realistic purposes for the normal photographer, you can't really make bigger than maybe an 8x10 print or 11x14 for some advanced non-pro's (or even some pro's). So for most realistic purposes digital can more easily and reasonably printed on a finer scale than film of a comparable size... now if you go to 120 film or Large Format, obviously there's not competition in the difficulty to get the finest grain, but again the whole process of printing optically is very costly if you don't have the setup and materials and have to start from scratch.

    And if you're nobody like me, it doesn't matter how good your prints are, no one will pay the high price for a print that was done optically if you're a nobody.

    I shoot film because for one I like the LOOK better, I care about the grain to a point so I shoot medium format mostly and now some LF now that I have my first 4x5, and since I hybrid process by scanning first, I can send the scanned image to the lab, and they print it chemically somehow, which costs a bit more than the places that print them with ink, but not so much more that I"m shocked by the price, so it's worth it to get a real chemical print and it doesn't cost me an entire darkroom setup to do it...

    Anyway, I think I've lost my point... or forgotten what the heck I was even responding to, so I'll shut up now. But I shoot film because I like the look, and the process better, that doesn't mean I don't recognize that my digital camera doesn't produce more detailed images, just that detail isn't everything and the artistic vision I create with film satisfies me more. So better is all perspective.

  4. #184

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    8,093
    Images
    228
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    Kodak and Fuji can sell film at a low price because their manufacturing process is so fast and efficient.

    But, I spent nearly 70 years learning and using photography. Analog photography! I know most all details of its manufacturing and processing. I don't want to be an activist at my age, but I will not see the skills that I learned die.

    PE
    In what universe, where, are those two selling color film at a low price....

  5. #185
    clayne's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    San Francisco, CA | Kuching, MY | Jakarta, ID
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,837
    Images
    57
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    In what universe, where, are those two selling color film at a low price....
    Go back to Ken's post. It's not as cheap as it was - but it isn't exactly fine dining prices. Still affordable - but not if you want to shoot 20 rolls of crap.
    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. #186
    Ken Nadvornick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Monroe, WA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,347
    Images
    50
    N.B. I think 'clayne' may be referring to this post I made in reply to a 'Mirko' post yesterday in another thread...

    Ken
    "When making a portrait, my approach is quite the same as when I am portraying a rock. I do not wish to impose my personality upon the sitter, but, keeping myself open to receive reactions from his own special ego, record this with nothing added: except of course when I am working professionally, when money enters in,—then for a price, I become a liar..."

    — Edward Weston, Daybooks, Vol. II, February 2, 1932

  7. #187
    Truzi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,456
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    Well, I have lead you into a trap.
    Umm... is your darkroom made of gingerbread?

    Ignore me, I've been home sick all week and am just having one of those smart-ass moments.
    Truzi

  8. #188

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    8,093
    Images
    228
    Quote Originally Posted by clayne View Post
    Go back to Ken's post. It's not as cheap as it was - but it isn't exactly fine dining prices. Still affordable - but not if you want to shoot 20 rolls of crap.
    That post was about B&W and also about re-branded "cheaper" film like Arista, totally different than portra or ektar or Velvia or Provia which are 2-3 times as much as their B&W counterparts... And the chemistry is who can even count how much more if you compare say Rodinal to a Fuji E-6 kit.

    Color film is certainly fine dining prices...

    Anyway as I said that was sort of a different topic and my question was addressed to PE


    ~Stone | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk

  9. #189
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    24,655
    Images
    65
    No, my DR is not made of gingerbread. I chose poor wording on that. Sorry.

    And, someone here yesterday talked of Kodak or Fuji film going for 1 pound per roll which they said was about $1.50. I should have incorporated that quote and now I have lost it.

    I too have had a summer bug for a while but I keep typing.

    PE

  10. #190
    Ken Nadvornick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Monroe, WA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,347
    Images
    50
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    Color film is certainly fine dining prices...
    Actually, that post was intended by me to be a bigger-picture post that encompassed all types of film, and the constant clamor for ever-cheaper prices no matter what the eventual cost or outcome.

    While I am sensitive to the relative nature of terms such as "cheap" and "expensive" as applied to each individual photographer's financial situation, I also realize that those terms, and their ripple effects, apply to the manufacturing side of the transaction as well.

    What we may complain about as being too expensive, to the manufacturing side may be as rock-bottom cheap as they can go. Any cheaper, and they suffer a real risk of crashing and burning. And then we end up with no film at all.

    Regardless of whether one liked their film products or not, Mirko's point was: Think Efke...

    Ken
    "When making a portrait, my approach is quite the same as when I am portraying a rock. I do not wish to impose my personality upon the sitter, but, keeping myself open to receive reactions from his own special ego, record this with nothing added: except of course when I am working professionally, when money enters in,—then for a price, I become a liar..."

    — Edward Weston, Daybooks, Vol. II, February 2, 1932



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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