Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 73,051   Posts: 1,611,048   Online: 1225
      
Page 21 of 31 FirstFirst ... 1115161718192021222324252627 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 210 of 308
  1. #201
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,937
    Images
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    Right that only proves my point, if they can afford to sell it to someone else at a price where the rebrander of film can still make a profit on a $1 film, then Kodak and Fuji are certainly price gouging the market...


    ~Stone | Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
    Stone, I posted something like this earlier today:

    Kodak and Fuji can sell film at a low price and with a profit due to the efficiency and speed of their manufacturing process.

    Neither company is price gouging.

    PE

  2. #202
    Truzi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Ohio, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,374
    Stone, keep in mind that the price you pay at a brick & mortar or online store for the Kodak or Fuji brand includes overhead for the retailer, plus they need a little profit. Typically retailers like this operate at a higher expense than the dollar stores.

    Also, when film is "rebranded" for a "dollar" or "pound" store, Kodak or Fuji make less per unit than if they sold to Freestyle or B&H. However, they get a contract for a very large volume, which helps make up for the loss.
    Truzi

  3. #203

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    8,093
    Images
    228
    Quote Originally Posted by RattyMouse View Post
    Kodak Gold and Fuji Superia are $2 a pop. How cheap do you want it?
    Well first I don't really shoot C-41, I shoot E-6 almost exclusively (and now some ECN-2 because I was given 200 feet for free), and if I'm spending money on film, I wouldn't buy either of those as I've had nothing but bad images from them, too grainy and mucky. So I don't consider those even worthy of buying for $2.... if they were 25 cents I still probably wouldn't shoot them.

  4. #204

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Mission Viejo, California
    Shooter
    127 Format
    Posts
    1,494
    Without the $2 film you would not even have the $8 film.
    - Bill Lynch

  5. #205

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    US
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    2,060
    I'd say Kodak film was generally higher priced than any of the others for the most part. But you've got to ask yourself a question. Have you ever heard of ANYTHING defective from them? In 50 years, I haven't. You're bound to think it had to happen somewhere sometime, but I've never heard of it. They print this disclaimer I practically know by heart after all these years: "This product will be replaced in manufacturing, labeling, or packaging..." I always rolled my eyes at it. Seemed almost absurd to even have to print that, because it doesn't happen. Not that I've ever heard of. So, it's higher. When the stakes are high, you can count on it. Can't coun't on a lot of other things, but THAT you can. Plus the fact that the state of New York is also undoubtedly run by tax-addicts.

  6. #206

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    8,093
    Images
    228
    Quote Originally Posted by Truzi View Post
    Stone, keep in mind that the price you pay at a brick & mortar or online store for the Kodak or Fuji brand includes overhead for the retailer, plus they need a little profit. Typically retailers like this operate at a higher expense than the dollar stores.

    Also, when film is "rebranded" for a "dollar" or "pound" store, Kodak or Fuji make less per unit than if they sold to Freestyle or B&H. However, they get a contract for a very large volume, which helps make up for the loss.
    I understand how that works in general, the concept. But that's a HUGE profit difference not a small one. Also like ilford says they pulled out of that because we all know what it really is, so it does take away from the big boys. I'm not talking about films like "shaws brand" which surely is crappy fuji superia or gold or something, I'm talking about Portra400 and Ektar100 type films, (or in the easy case of Arista, Tri-X) Anyway we're WAY off topic here so lets get back on track with color film discussion from ilford, which IMO I think for now they should stay out of it completely, there's still too much competition. I really do wish they would consider buying the fuji machines and patents for Velvia50/100 and Provia100f and Astia when Fuji finally shuts down its E-6 line, then they would own the market on E-6 and could produce papers again and have no competition at all. If they do any color at all, I really think that should be it, there was a time it didn't work because C-41 took over and RA4 papers were cheaper to make etc, but I think by the time Fuji shuts it down, the market will be good for a comeback of chemically produced high quality images that are sustainable for lifetimes...

  7. #207

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    US
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    2,060
    I take that back. About 40 years ago I bought a booklet called "Applied Infrared Photography". Didn't turn out to be as interesting as I thought because I had no use for taking aerial shots of jungles to discern guerrillas, but that's beside the point. I remember it had a few duplicate pages. Now I know that the books were likely gathered and stitched on a Macybinder, which can occasionally pick up doubles. But Koday probably didn't print it right there on the premises. Probably was farmed out. If that's the worst of my complaints with Kodak, then I'm doing pretty good.

  8. #208
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,937
    Images
    65
    Tom;

    At that time, Kodak did indeed print their own booklets (for the most part), in their own printing department.

    PE

  9. #209

    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    US
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    2,060
    Well then I want my money back on my booklet.

  10. #210

    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    University of Arkansas, Fayetteville
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    607
    Again, Ilford getting into color film would be a great risk. They do what they well and have a reputation built upon that and that is B&W film and paper of great quality. Do you think that is possibly worth losing if the company goes under with a costly attempt at color?
    Bachelor of Fine Arts and Bachelor of Arts: Journalism - University of Arkansas 2014

    Canon A-1, Canon AE-1, Canon Canonet GIII 17, Argus 21, Rolleicord Va, Mamiya RB67, Voigtländer Bessa

    http://darkroom317.deviantart.com/



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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