"ethical consumerism" - there you go again with those highly subjective terms of which you apparently do not see the subjectivity of. Bottom line-the whole premise of your thread is one where your version of ethics assumes a higher moral ground, or one that is absolute. Therefore, you start off by being contentious, hence the implication of a troll thread.
Originally Posted by laverdure
Now, let me put this one on Ignore.
oh yeh, you're right, this has never happened in the 'developed' world!
Originally Posted by laverdure
I still have 40 rolls of frozen 120 Svema 64 film, that I bought fresh from the dealer USTAS.
Have no qualms about it at all. Looking forward to burning some; I have a roll loaded in my favorite Kiev 60
But in the US we can complain about it, write about it, propose legislation to stop it , and even boycott it.
Originally Posted by david b
Can't do that in China. They might throw you in prison and sell your nervous system to Katie Couric.
Pardon me for my lack of charity.
A healthy preschooler who loves Thomas the Tank Engine (always had one in hand, and often in mouth for the past three years of his young life) was diagnosed with lead poisoning and will be somewhat retarded for the rest of his life.
Things apparently are improving since I was last there in '88, more people are making more money and there are lots of lucerative deals going on I've been told but the kind of capitalisim that takes advantage of children is as repugnant and the totalitarian regime that cannot tolerate basic human freedoms as diabolical as the nazis (who incidentally also hosted the Olympic games)
Yeah, you can criticize the US and it's current un-constitutional experiment with illegal imprisonment and torture, and equally unconstitutional judicially enacted legislation, but the government is being scrutinized by the public who will vote thier concience. The chinese don't have a chance.
Many products come from China (and other nations as well as the USA) and we are free to question how and why and who made them.
That ain't a bad thing.
Shoot on! - The items are neither Russian nor Chinese.
Originally Posted by Nokton48
However, I would reconsider any new-build FK's (if there are any), as logging in Ukraine is cutting into old-growth forests in the mountains, and we can't guarantee that the wood didn't come from improperly felled trees.
The degree to which the environment and labo(u)r is exploited is excellent material for a troll! But I can't figure out - do we want to call for Shen Hao's that are built of free-range wood, or wood purposefully grown to be slaughtered?
OTOH - while developing countries are wonderful places to be white-collar workers, sometimes, consider the likelihood of living to a healthy, ripe old age as a coal miner outside of the US or EU. Not a pleasant thought at all.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
Shostka cheese is widely available in Moscow, and it's quite tasty - just like almost all Ukrainian cheeses
The Forte abundance in Kiev can be explained simply: the Polish film dealers got hold on some liquidation sales, bought everything for a very very low prices, and flooded Ukraine with it
I have a strong feeling that Svema itself makes film, but it's definitely strange - I've got a pack of Svema FN-64 in 9x12. A nice film, yet it's poured on a very thin base (like for 135 film), and it's blue tinted - and, of course, like all USSR film, it doesn't have any antihalation layer as well as the index punch on side.
Originally Posted by Jim_in_Kyiv
Sounds like they're re-purposing film made for use in medical imaging - most likely x-ray film. The thin base is puzzling though- Foma makes their 35mm photographic film on the same base stock that they use for x-ray film, which is why the base is blue-ish. But their LF film is not on thin stock- it is easily as thick as Ilfords.
I think that they simply coat whatever base they have - and this one looks like 35mm base, not the more rigid x-ray. The emulsion contains a generous amount of dust, but nothing serious
Originally Posted by TheFlyingCamera
First, I've got a PDF of an article (dated January 2007) originally published in a magazine called Smallformat that describes the recent history of Svema. Unfortunately, the URL where I first found it seems to no longer be valid. To sum up, though, the article claims that the Svema film manufacturing facilities are now completely idle, having been closed down in 2000. Film operations since that time have been restricted to liquidation procedures. Any Svema film still on store shelves is very old and/or is repackaged product from other manufacturers.
Second, concerning the validity of the initial point of this thread: Of course the environmental (and social, political, etc.) impact of our purchases are important. A few specific sub-points:
- An earlier poster mentioned per-capita pollution in the US vs. in China. This may be important from a global political perspective (in negotiating climate-change treaties, say), but the relevant metric for individuals purchasing film or paper (or any other product) would be the per-product pollution -- whether more pollution is created by the production a Chinese vs. American (or whatever) roll of film, box of paper, or whatever.
- Dragging in pollution in the computer industry or other fields is, again, irrelevant. The question was about film and paper, and so answers to the question must be about film and paper. If there are excesses in other fields (as there most certainly are), then that is of course cause for concern; but in deciding what film or paper to purchase, a photographer needn't take pollution in the computer industry into account. That's not to say that such pollution shouldn't be reduced, but it's not relevant to this discussion any more than hunting regulations or homeless shelters are relevant to this discussion.
- I personally don't know of any studies of the environmental impact of film and paper production in different countries or by different companies. The closest I've seen to this, in this thread or in others, are PE's comments about Kodak's efforts to clean up their production over the last few decades. If somebody's got some relevant data to contribute, I'd love to see it.
unless you attempt to buy everything from local stores and not support chain retailers of any sort this is very ironic.