Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,929   Posts: 1,585,219   Online: 781
      

View Poll Results: How many rolls would you shoot?

Voters
57. You may not vote on this poll
  • <5 rolls/year

    34 59.65%
  • 6-20rolls/year

    15 26.32%
  • 21-50 rolls/year

    4 7.02%
  • 51-100 rolls/year

    3 5.26%
  • 100-250 rolls/year

    1 1.75%
  • 250-500 rolls/year

    0 0%
  • 500+ rolls/year

    0 0%
Page 6 of 10 FirstFirst 12345678910 LastLast
Results 51 to 60 of 93
  1. #51
    StoneNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    8,006
    Images
    227
    Quote Originally Posted by Ken Nadvornick View Post
    Damned good point.

    Ken
    I was thinking long and hard about this, but if my understanding is correct, the "5 and under's" of the world were really kodakchromes bread and butter, once that market dried up (went digital) Kodahrome was unsustainable....

    You think the professional market was really supporting kodakchrome? No, I doubt it was... So the statement that the <5 were a "drop in the bucket" and unimportant... Well, that's foolish to think that way.
    ~Stone | "...of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong." ~Dennis Miller

  2. #52
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,553
    Images
    65
    I would have to say zero.

  3. #53

    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    OK, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    340
    If someone else is paying for the film and processing.

    But really, what's all this hoopla about Kodachrome? Back in the day when I used it, it was just slide film. You picked it up at the gas station or grocery store and stuck it in your camera to take some snaps. Did something happen that I may have missed? All my chromes still look like ordinary slides to me. Nothing magical to report.

  4. #54

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    ... So the statement that the <5 were a "drop in the bucket" and unimportant... Well, that's foolish to think that way.
    I agree with you about the pro market. When I was shooting slides pro we used E-6 to get quick processing turnaround from a local lab.

    But: Right now there are 26 "5 and under" people, several of whom indicate that ZERO was their number. That's not much film being bought.

    In fact, even if all the folks who committed to buying the film on this poll actually bought what they said they would... it still isn't much film being bought.

    Back in the good ole days there were hundreds of thousands of "5 and under" people. That was a lot more film being bought.

    I suppose they could look at this kind of venture as a loss leader... but I haven't a clue how they would make up the loss considering the small market today for film... and what might be a smaller market for film tomorrow.

    But maybe lots of folks would come out of the woodworks; I'm sure the hipsters would love such an opportunity to go old school.

  5. #55
    Ken Nadvornick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Monroe, WA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,656
    Images
    48
    (Psst... It's already been stated many times... see Ms. Pasterczyk... a prerequisite... the problem of micro-production would have already been solved beforehand... thus, hundreds of thousands would not be required... this is 30 years later... look at everyone else already doing it...)



    Ken
    Last edited by Ken Nadvornick; 01-01-2014 at 12:45 AM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: <Sigh...> Yet more clarity...
    "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. #56

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,278
    Oh... sorry... I forgot. So what's the number? Would 930 rolls per year do it... cause that's all the world seems to want (if everyone bought the maximum amount they indicated).

  7. #57

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,278
    ... and now that you mention it, where DID the time go? Thirty years ago feels like yesterday to me. Ah, the good old days...

  8. #58
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,553
    Images
    65
    I'll say again that National Geographic and its photographers were the worlds largest single customer for Kodachrome. They are all digital today.

    PE

  9. #59

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    I'll say again that National Geographic and its photographers were the worlds largest single customer for Kodachrome. They are all digital today.

    PE
    What about other magazines, like Life and Time and Arizona Highways; did they tend to shoot Kodachrome also?

  10. #60
    Ken Nadvornick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Monroe, WA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,656
    Images
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by BrianShaw View Post
    Would 930 rolls per year do it... cause that's all the world seems to want...
    The world? The entire world? Really? You're really saying that?

    Quote Originally Posted by BrianShaw View Post
    Thirty years ago feels like yesterday to me. Ah, the good old days...
    This appears to be the crux of the problem with quite a few here.

    "Jim, it's dead..."

    You guys really are entertaining. Not very discerning. But entertaining.



    Ken
    Last edited by Ken Nadvornick; 12-31-2013 at 11:45 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    "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



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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