• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

A little More Feedback From The HARMAN FILM SURVEY

Simon R Galley

Member
Allowing Ads
Joined
Nov 2, 2005
Messages
2,034
Location
Cheshire UK
Format
Medium Format
Dear Apuggers,


As promised, a little more feedback from the film and paper survey that many of you took part in, again many thanks its greatly appreciated.

http:goo.gl/T540tc


Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited
 
86% used roll film! That's an amazing number I think. I wonder if sales of roll film are really that much more than 35mm.
 
Dear Rattymouse,

Whilst lots more film photographers do have access to 120 cameras ( due to the huge release of these 'higher' value and in most cases quality cameras after digital photography took hold, as well as the HOLGA 'bubble' ) 120 or roll film is still much smaller by value and volume than miniature film ( 35mm ) although as a 'proportion' it has increased. In addition, its exactly as Fotch stated, it is who responded to the survey.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :
 

Sounds logical. I shoot 120 film every month, but overall the amount of 35mm cartriges I buy is a bit higher than the amount of 120 rolls i buy. I'd say it's about 2:1 or 1.5 to 1.

In 35mm i am lately almost exclusively using Delta 100, by the way; let's hope Ilford never ever discontinues that film. The combination of spectral response, sharpness, tonality, speed, and fine grain in that film is perhaps the most well-balanced on the market.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
For me the amount of frames I use is about equal between 135 and 120 formats. So I shoot about three rolls 120 for every roll of 135.
 
Just to save anyone the math.

26.37 135-24 rolls per m2
17.58 135-36 rolls per m2
19.55 120 rolls per m2
5 x 4 sheet film 77.5 sheets per m2
10 x 8 sheet film 19.39 sheets per m2

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited:
 
Image engaging the brain before taking a photograph. What an amazing retro idea. Do you think it will fly with the general public?
 
flavio81 said:
Delta 100, by the way; let's hope Ilford never ever discontinues that film. The combination of spectral response, sharpness, tonality, speed, and fine grain in that film is perhaps the most well-balanced on the market.
Click to expand...

I agree completely !

Karl-Gustaf
 
We're rapidly approaching the era when everyone's brain will live forever by removing it at preschool age and putting it in jar containing a solution of high fructose corn syrup and MSG, with some electrodes to a computer, just like in the '50's B-movie sci-fis, except that nowadays the "computer" is likely to be an I-phone rather than a big wall of vacuum tubes. All imagery and human experience thereafter become virtual. As one of those still resisting this worldwide conspiracy of the consumer electronics cartel, I'm happy to have any format of real film,
though my favorite happens to be 8x10.
 
Hey... my response seems to have been omitted, "Too cheap to buy new modern gear".
 



Right there with you, except I do have a cell phone. After eight hours of work in front of a computer screen I'll do anything to get away from one. Shooting, processing, or printing some film is about as far from that as I can get, which is part of why I enjoy it so much. I'm very happy to have film to shoot, and to have companies like Harman/Ilford around that seem to care about the future of it. Very cool.
 
Simon,

Based on this can you reduce my age to the 20 to 30 year range or at least by a factor of 2, please?

Sirius Glass
 
Simon,

really nice of you lot to give us feedback on the survey.

But could I just ask you to make the announcement a bit more readable? It sorely needs some sorting out, such as better spacing beteen the paragraphs.
 
Interesting that a roll of 120 requires roughly the same area of film as a single sheet of 10 x 8 film. However the 120 is about a pound cheaper, or 4/5 the cost. Presumably this is down to sales volume.
 
The paper backing of 120 film costs more than the film itself. At least, that is what I learned when I took the Ilford factory tour!
 
ghart said:
The paper backing of 120 film costs more than the film itself. At least, that is what I learned when I took the Ilford factory tour!
Click to expand...

I don't believe it. Can you tell us more? Perhaps you misunderstood the information. :confused:
 
ghart said:
The paper backing of 120 film costs more than the film itself. At least, that is what I learned when I took the Ilford factory tour!
Click to expand...

I know that I have read around here that sourcing the backing paper is very difficult- but didn't know that the cost was like this! I know that New55 had a great deal of trouble with finding the right paper, and the Frugal Photographer has started making their own. It is odd to me that there are not other applications for such a paper that keep it more readily available
 
I have a feeling that much of the cost associated with various products have more to do with than simply material cost.
I would suspect that sales volume, and level of automation in making a certain size and packaging would play a major role in the final cost.
Maybe even risk is a consideration? How likely are they to sell boxes of 8x20 or 7x17 film compared to rolls of 120?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register