Take a MF shooters poll and ask them how many of them use 220.
That would be unfair, because you cannot use products that do not exists. You should ask how many would use 220, or are using 220 of those products that are sold in 220, which is quite rare.
Originally Posted by Athiril
I would like to use 220 in my Mamiya 7 for most films.
And, as we know, it's not a matter of manufacture, but more like a matter of organization of the packaging and retailer chain.
The only way to get anything more in 220 and keep it alive, like most things, would be to use it I am personally going to give some 220 a try. I have never tried 220. I do have the back for my camera but it has just sat. 220 is quite a bit of color for me to shoot though. I would be cool to see Ektar in 220.
Helping to save analog photography one exposure at a time
Like HRST, I want it for my Mamiya 7. Ekta made an interesting point about the back. The 7 is the only MF I have ever used and I thought everyone could use 220 easily.
Most MF shooters can.
Originally Posted by Sysygy
Even if they need to buy a separate insert, or even full back. These things are lot cheaper than a pack of five 220 films nowadays.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Indeed, and for the most part - 220 backs can be used with 120 film without problems (except if one forgets that there are only half as many frames as indicated on the counter)
Originally Posted by Q.G.
I think we're very lucky in this day and age that they are making it in 120 at all, and it's too much to expect when just about every manufacturer is discontinuing 220 film to expect Kodak to start.
It's misleading to use such wordings as "we are lucky that film is manufactured", or words like make 220 or so. As I said, it's the same product, only cut to different length with different backing paper and different carton, and a different product number in a catalog.
This is simply a problem of the end of the chain and it is possible to fix it. There are many niche products and the key is to keep marketing costs down per product. If it's easy to manufacture, as in case of 220 film for companies that already produce 120 film, it can be done even if the markets are very low, if done correctly.
But it is not done, for some reason or other.
Optimizing the chain from factory to end-user for current business situation may be very important in the future anyway. 220 film may become viable at the same time.
Please understand the fact that selling one 220 film is equivalent of selling two rolls of 120. Selling bigger "family packs" is a basic thing in any business; you can sell more and selling more means more profit. In 220 film, you don't even need to drop the per exposure price.
This is a state that can change anytime or, again, it may not change.
Originally Posted by hrst
This is hardly a trivial change.
This isn't exactly true, although there is a lot of truth in it.
Originally Posted by hrst
Selling two rolls of 120 is like selling two rolls of 120. If a manufacturer wants to sell ProPaks of 5, then that's a pretty easy way to up the exposure count, and a lot simpler than a completely new manufacturing line.
You have to keep in mind that film is a number of products, not one product. The Master Roll product is a raw material for the slitting plant.
Granted, Kodak owns 220 confection lines, so it's not a giant stretch to think they could supply it easily enough if it's profitable.
I think the "best" strategy is to begin getting folks to think that the remaining film users are likely to be quantity hobbyist buyers, not casual mom and pop buyer. So somehow we would need to get the marketing projectors at K thinking in terms of *US* rather than the ordinary consumers as their target.
I know I can pop off 20 shots on a roll of 220 in an afternoon. I'm sure everyone else here can, too. If I go out to shoot something, I'm likely to shoot *THE WHOLE ROLL* regardless of whether it's 120 or 220. The question becomes whether I'll reload a second roll if it's 120.
As I understand it, there are probably only two 220 finishing machines left in the world that work (1 for Kodak and 1 for Fuji), they are very old, and they would be very, very expensive to replace.
Simon Galley has posted about Ilford's 220 machine. It was old and not economically repairable. To have a new one manufactured would have made no economic sense, given any reasonable projections about sales. Ilford investigated purchasing time on other manufacturers' machines, but were unable to make an arrangement. As a result, Ilford doesn't sell 220 film.
PE has posted as well that it is becoming difficult to obtain different backing papers for roll film, as there are very few sources that remain in business.
I expect that it is the nature and condition of the finishing machinery that has the greatest influence on 220 film choice, followed closely by the relative difficulty of obtaining special purpose backing paper. It can all be done, but most likely at an increased cost.
“Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”
Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2