An interview with ADOX's Mirko

ntenny said:

...and as privately-held companies, Ilford and Adox have more flexibility to engage in long-term thinking and/or "labor of love" activities than a public company would.

But let's not be unrealistic---Ilford wouldn't be spending money to send Simon here if they didn't see it as a business benefit. Which cuts both ways in terms of a "sense of reality"; on the one hand, it proves that they think APUG is a significant enough market and source of visibility to justify spending money on it, and on the other, it means that their support isn't a purely altruistic activity that will always put our interests first.

I can't prove a thing about this, but I still think that if HP5+ and TX were in danger of extinction (WHICH I DON'T BELIEVE THEY ARE; THIS IS A HYPOTHETICAL), we'd have a better opportunity to see the writing on the wall for the former. I'm not sure what we'd *do* about it, exactly, but even in case of catastrophe I guess we'd rather have a warning than not.

-NT

Click to expand...

Kodak Alaris is a privately held company.

pentaxuser said:

We really do need to keep a sense of reality about what APUG can do about the future of film and about what difference, for instance, Ilford's contact with us makes to film's "bottom line".

I welcome Simon Galley's contact with us. It is helpful and it may help Ilford promote the use of Ilford products but we need to ask ourselves what would happen if KA and Fuji for instance had the same presence here.

Would all of us buy more film of all three producers and if so in sufficient quantities to make a significant difference or would some of us switch back to Fuji and KA and possibly damage Ilford's volume of sales?
pentaxuser

Click to expand...

I would buy Kodak film if KA communicated to its customers anywhere at all, not just at APUG.

Here?
Dead Link Removed

This post, for example:
Dead Link Removed

Trask said:

Speaking of Adox film -- are any of Adox's current 35mm films available in bulk? I don't see it on Adox's store, but maybe I'm missing it somewhere.

Click to expand...

They never were.

I'll try again, this time with a very relevant story. Please note that I am not pounding my fist.

The Kodak communication problem isn't specifically about APUG, and it isn't specifically about rarified commercial/art photographers. If EK/KA is serious about a long-term commitment to film-based photography, this is the real problem...

I was out last Saturday visiting Paine Field here in northwest Washington state. I was watching a flying demo of antique WWII fighter aircraft. A German FW 190-A5, and an American NA P-51D. The FW 190 is the only flyable example of that aircraft remaining in the entire world. Very cool.

There was also a Boeing B-17G on display. While I was exploring that aircraft, a mom spied the beautiful pristine 4x5 Crown Graphic with Graflite and flashbulbs that I was carrying, and approached me.

"What IS that?" she asked, in some amazement.

"It's a 1955 model newspaperman's press camera." I relied.

She urgently motioned to her son to come over, which he did.

"You have to see this. It's amazing!"

Her son was maybe 14-years-old. A good-looking kid who was extremely polite. He was also sporting a lower-end DSLR with the kit zoom lens.

"He's VERY interested in photography. He takes photography classes in high school. Can you tell him about your camera?"

"Sure." I said, holding it up so he could get a better look. "Well, it's a perfectly working example of a..."

Whereupon I gave him the shorter version of the same spiel I routinely use every time I get these inquiries. He listened with wide eyes and rapt attention, hanging on every word. Couldn't take his eyes off the camera and flash. When I finished, the inevitable question came back,

"That's beautiful! Can you still get film for it?"

Followed immediately by,

"My teacher told us it's impossible to buy new film anymore. He says they stopped making film years ago."

The first question I expected, as do we all. But the second observation floored me.

This is what the real communication problem for EK/KA boils down to. As Ross Perot said, this is where the rubber meets the road. The problem wasn't the question regarding availability. That's a contextual misunderstanding. A logical conclusion borne of almost never seeing film being used anymore. It's easily corrected, which I did. And always do.

No. The real problem is that there is a teacher out there who is teaching his students that film is extinct. And he's doing that because the people who make film, and presumably want to sell film, obviously haven't bothered to communicate to him otherwise regarding the non-extinct state of their film.

So every semester, year after year, he is training new generations of baby photographers that film—and for the average person in the USA that means primarily Kodak film—is unavailable at any price because it's extinct.

How many times have we heard here that the current line-up is the best film that Kodak has ever made? Well, that doesn't mean diddly squat if this teacher teaches students that it's extinct.

EK/KA doesn't need to talk to us. They don't need to talk to commercial photographers. They don't need to talk to artistic photographers. They need to talk to this teacher. And all of the other teachers out there like him. Because if EK/KA is serious about its film products, and about wanting to sustain and even grown its film sales, they need to tell more people who inhabit the middle of the bell curve that their products are not extinct.

That is... if... IF... IF... they are truly interested in the continued long-term viability of those products. And if they are not, then they don't need to say another word about film. To anyone. Ever.

Ken

Ken, the average person is no longer a market for film. The average person will say to their dad that they are not interested in his K1000, so bring it to the thrift shop.

Or....the average person has just a much a chance in putting a roll of RVP50, HP5 or Tri-X in their dad's K1000 as a roll of Gold 200. So if that were the case, then you can't really single out this bieng Kodak's job, to momentarily bring back an average person who may or may not stick with film even after one roll and give Ilford, Adox & Fuji a hall pass.

That teacher is a symbol of a larger problem that well exceeds the hype of digital drowning out film by the way. The larger problem is people like him taking Internet hype at face value and not doing the homework for them selves, pretty sad for a teacher for sure.

And Ratty, you are on Fred Miranda and might even be interested in RFF, there are no spokespeople on either of those places from Ilford....but on the latter, Kodak has shown up to reply to questions in the past....

The problem Ratty, Ken is that Kodak is not doing *Exactly* what you want them to when you want them to, so you protest. Thankfully as seen by the majority of opinions on this site, your seemingly insatiable dissatisfaction with this particular aspect of Kodak Alaris is very much a minority issue...

Like PKM-25, I have to say that the photography teacher to whom Ken refers does seem to be remarkably ill informed about the existence of film. He/she sounds likes a history teacher who tells the kids that Nelson was defeated at the Battle of Trafalgar or that the U.S. joined the Second World War in 1939.

That's how bad I'd rate that teacher's knowledge. I fear for photography in general, including digital, if that teacher is representative of those charged with teaching photography to students.

pentaxuser

I get asked all the time when people asking me about my camera, having spotted a folder, which sort of sticks out like a sore thumb. "Can you still buy film?"

A very common question.

PKM-25 said:

And Ratty, you are on Fred Miranda and might even be interested in RFF, there are no spokespeople on either of those places from Ilford....but on the latter, Kodak has shown up to reply to questions in the past....

The problem Ratty, Ken is that Kodak is not doing *Exactly* what you want them to when you want them to, so you protest. Thankfully as seen by the majority of opinions on this site, your seemingly insatiable dissatisfaction with this particular aspect of Kodak Alaris is very much a minority issue...

Click to expand...

I'm registered at RFF, but that place is sort of a ghost town so don't go there regularly.

Ghost town? Maybe the folder section, not the 35mm RF section..

And I get asked that question too and I always reply, Google the phrase "Where to buy film". The top answer is B&H photo, click on the link and out of the top 10 films it lists, Kodak has 8 of them....

Fill cart, proceed to checkout, done deal...

PKM-25 said:

Ghost town? Maybe the folder section, not the 35mm RF section..

And I get asked that question too and I always reply, Google the phrase "Where to buy film". The top answer is B&H photo, click on the link and out of the top 10 films it lists, Kodak has 8 of them....

Fill cart, proceed to checkout, done deal...

Click to expand...

I don't shoot 35mm rangefinders so I"m not in that part of the board. However, I am thinking of getting an M3 one of these days so that would change things.

Answering the question where to buy film is easy. That the question keeps reappearing is the troubling part. It does not appear that the public even knows that Kodak exists anymore. Once the finest brand on the planet anywhere, now exists only in people's memory. Imagine people forgetting about Coke, Apple, or Google.

The question will die down, it is not so much a Kodak issue as it is a Kodak, Fuji, Ilford, etc. issue of film not bieng on the grocery or drug store shelf.

Anyone who is genuinely interested in actually getting a real answer for them selves will do a search and come up roses. The rest will likely never be a film using customer, they often just like to hear them selves talk...

The question is, and one that Ken has alluded to, if Kodak Alaris had no interest in film beyond what they could squeeze out of it until it died, what would they do different than what they are doing today? Sadly, I think the answer is, not much.

I forgot to say to Ken....a flying Focke Wulf 190??? Wow.....what an amazing sight that must have been. Absolutely amazing.

PKM-25 said:

Anyone who is genuinely interested in actually getting a real answer for them selves will do a search and come up roses. The rest will likely never be a film using customer, they often just like to hear them selves talk...

Click to expand...

Dan, this is exactly the attitude problem. This is the 1980s Kodak attitude. I still hear it all of the time around here, especially from some (but not all) ex-Kodak employees. Unrequited cockiness. The attitude is not unique to Kodak. Microsoft is currently suffering from the same pain as well.

In both cases it's an attitude that assumes: We are the best, our products are the best, we are a monopoly, so if people want our products, they know how and where to find us on their own.

In other words, it's up to the customer to seek US out, we're so good that we have no need or desire to waste our time seeking THEM out.

That works really well when you are (practically speaking) the only game in town. A de facto monopoly. But neither company is a monopoly any longer. Think that film is the only game in town to have been technologically disrupted? Think again. From a post last April...


Ring familiar? Today, like Kodak, Microsoft is having a hell of a time learning how to be responsive again to its customer base. And the attitude there is still, we're so much better than everyone else that we don't have to. Except, they've now lost 75% of their platform market due to that attitude. And it's still shrinking.

Worth noting, Apple has their customers camping out in tents overnight at store entrances in order to be first in line to buy the latest i-anything. Fistfights break out if someone tries to cut into the line the next morning. Think about that for just a moment in terms of what it means to actively cultivate your target markets.

Times have changed, Dan. This is the 2010s, not the 1980s. People need to let go. Attitudes that worked well 30 years ago don't work at all today. Neither do the marketing strategies. Many of those to whom they want to be selling their products weren't even alive in 1980. Constantly blaming the customers for a company's problems doesn't get much traction these days. Whether you're Microsoft, or EK/KA.

Ken

RattyMouse said:

I forgot to say to Ken....a flying Focke Wulf 190??? Wow.....what an amazing sight that must have been. Absolutely amazing.

Click to expand...

[Off-topic digression, but cool nevertheless.]

You betcha. These are Paul Allen's aircraft. I've been told by docents in the hanger that he has in excess of US$100 million into the acquisition, restoration, and maintenance of the planes. And they are all fully airworthy and certified to fly. (Except for some of the German rocket planes and his V-2 missile.)

Nice hobby. And the antidote to every time one of us thinks photography is "not for the faint of wallet..."



Check out the details on the FW 190 here: Focke-Wulf Fw 190 A-5

The fourth photo in the strip is a short movie of the aircraft being started. On the day I was there all of the employees went and stood on a hill to the right so they could experience the smells along with the sights and sounds. Amazingly loud, it's the original vintage BMW engine.

When it finally landed three guys in soft shoes immediately swarmed over it with cleaning equipment to erase any hint of exhaust grime or dirt. Engine panels were removed and the engine inspected. The thing looks brand new and they keep it that way.

If you ever make it to the Puget Sound region in the summer, this place is an amazing visit. They fly these aircraft almost every Saturday during the summer, weather permitting, for free public demonstrations. Just bring your cameras and coolers and walk out to the taxiway. Allen picks up the tab for everything. People here just love the guy.

Ken

But why should a company spread the "news" that film is still around if they take the view that this market is lost for new customers and those who care actually know where to find it.

A similar stand took other manufacturers too.

So, why just blame Kodak (EK or KA)? I have not seen ANY marketing effort for film aside from Impossible (via the media) and Lomography (by placing their assortment in non-photo related shops) for years outside our very tiny hardcore film photographers group.

What about Harman's earlier Defend the Darkroom initiative? Or their more recent world-wide Local Darkroom program to connect new users to nearby available facilities? What about their world-wide Image on a Box photo competitions?

All of these things serve to inform and involve their customer base and get the word out that black-and-white film photography is alive, not extinct. They are cultivating their markets. And reaping the rewards.

Ken

KA could simply add a roll of film to their advertising spreads, that would be a nice acknowledgment.

As for "creating" a market. There are many things that would never have been sold had vendors not promoted it - Pet Rock, Veg-O-Matic, Silly Bandz, etc. I'm not saying these are on par with film, just that millions were made on things with little, if any, practical use (my mom still uses her original style Veg-O-Matic).

With film being more far more practical/useful than these things, a little advertising to the "average" consumer couldn't hurt.

Edit:
I feel bad to have joined into the tangent that has taken this thread away from the OP.

I enjoyed reading the interview, and insights into how the company plans to operate - it actually has interested me in purchasing some Adox film. Perhaps a sampler package

Ken, why dosent Fuji promote film, why do they not have something similar to the 1,000 words blog, why do they not have a Facebook page about their films, why have they not helped to create a video of why photographers love using film?

Why is Simon only on APUG & not RFF when SOOOOOO many Leica and other RF users use film? Or why not LFF for the same reasons? Why would anyone expect him to be?

Why do people ask us if we can still get film for that "thing" when we are USING the darn camera?

I bet a LOT of people who have read this thread are indeed asking "why?"....but I doubt it has anything to do with Kodak...

Truzi said:

KA could simply add a roll of film to their advertising spreads, that would be a nice acknowledgment.

Click to expand...

In what publications? And once those publications are named, have you seen Fuji, Adox and or Ilford pay for film ads in similar spreads?

What would that acknowledgment look like? Who would it appeal to? Who would it sway, what would be the bullet points of the campaigns?

If Ilford came out with Delta 400 in 4x5, how should they spend their advertising dollars in promoting this format? If Ferrania succeeds in creating new transparency film, what is the best form of advertising?

PKM-25 said:

Ken, why dosent Fuji promote film, why do they not have something similar to the 1,000 words blog, why do they not have a Facebook page about their films, why have they not helped to create a video of why photographers love using film?

Why is Simon only on APUG & not RFF when SOOOOOO many Leica and other RF users use film? Or why not LFF for the same reasons? Why would anyone expect him to be?

Why do people ask us if we can still get film for that "thing" when we are USING the darn camera?

I bet a LOT of people who have read this thread are indeed asking "why?"....but I doubt it has anything to do with Kodak...

Click to expand...

Selling film cameras doesn't promote the use of film??

PKM-25 said:

Ken, why dosent Fuji promote film, why do they not have something similar to the 1,000 words blog, why do they not have a Facebook page about their films, why have they not helped to create a video of why photographers love using film?

Why is Simon only on APUG & not RFF when SOOOOOO many Leica and other RF users use film? Or why not LFF for the same reasons? Why would anyone expect him to be?

Why do people ask us if we can still get film for that "thing" when we are USING the darn camera?

I bet a LOT of people who have read this thread are indeed asking "why?"....but I doubt it has anything to do with Kodak...

Click to expand...

Truzi makes a good point. We should be talking about Mirko's interview.

ADOX is doing precisely what so many of us think is supposed to be the future of boutique film manufacturing, but the market is slowing his efforts down. People are unwilling to spend enough on film to support his efforts at the scale he's willing to risk taking them. And that's sad. Not least because ADOX is also an APUG partner. So in more ways than just one, he's already putting his money on the table. More of us need to stop with the damned 5-cents per roll price comparisons and do the same. Give up one or two Starbucks drinks per week and buy some ADOX film instead.

So I've been meaning to try the new CHS II film in 4x5. Summer is here, albeit not for long where I live. Maybe it's time to order up a box or two of 4x5 for the Crown. I can handhold 100-speed in sunlight in that format. It's a little more expensive right now than other options. But who cares? I'll give up something else. And it's the right thing to do, if we want ADOX to keep moving forward.

So here are my short speculative replies to your post...

Fuji doesn't advertise or promote any longer because I think they've made a decision to call the dogs home. I may be wrong, but time will tell. We all know that if only one person in the world still wants Fuji film, contrary to the famous quote, they will not still be making it. But maybe Ferrania will.

I can't speak for Simon, of course. But I might speculate that perhaps part of the reason for his presence here as opposed to other venues is that I believe he's an active photographer. It seems he's alluded to that before, if I recall correctly. Don't know how much time he might be able to allocate. Sure as heck can't be much less than mine right now. But if you are an amateur enthusiast, APUG is the more generalized, comfortable analog place to be.

Why people ask that question is one of the greatest illogical mysteries of the universe. It's like being in the middle of the ocean and having someone ask why you are in that boat. Just for grins, try answering "No" next time. Then watch their faces. (That was not my answer to the earnest 14-year-old. What a nice kid. A credit to his parents.)

And as far as those reading this thread, dollars-to-donuts says that there's not a single one, myself included, that want to see EK/KA drop Kodak-brand film for good. I would have given anything to see Kodak become the premier digital and analog imaging company for the masses. But sadly that's not what they wanted.

Others have managed it. Harman manufactures a highly regarded line of inkjet papers. Leica splits time between digital and film cameras. Each adjusts their products and production as the imaging markets evolve and change. Analog was the only thing. Then digital was the only thing. Now the digital luster has worn from overexposure and analog has made a few minor return inroads. Digital P&Ss, the technology that killed the mass film markets, are themselves now going extinct, killed by of all things... telephones?

Who knew??

Ken

Does anyone know if Adox makes a DD-X type developer?

PKM-25 said:

Why do people ask us if we can still get film for that "thing" when we are USING the darn camera?

Click to expand...

I know the feeling. It used to annoy me, but I've fixed my Grandmother's 126 camera and reloaded cartridges with fresh film. Now, when people ask, I can say, "If I couldn't get film, would I be using it?" Followed by, "As a matter of fact, they don't make film for this camera anymore."
I'd only do this when asked smugly, not when asked in earnest. Unfortunately, most questions have been of the former sort.

PKM-25 said:

In what publications? And once those publications are named, have you seen Fuji, Adox and or Ilford pay for film ads in similar spreads?

What would that acknowledgment look like? Who would it appeal to? Who would it sway, what would be the bullet points of the campaigns?

If Ilford came out with Delta 400 in 4x5, how should they spend their advertising dollars in promoting this format? If Ferrania succeeds in creating new transparency film, what is the best form of advertising?

Click to expand...

I feel this is a bit nihilistic.
Also, i feel it is somewhat like asking me how Chevrolet should best spend their money to get people to buy one of their vehicles. While I can throw about ideas, I do not know much about advertising. However, I do know that Chevrolet does advertise each of their models. All of their advertising bullet points and expenditures neither sway nor appeal to me - but I'm not everyone, and have always been cognizant of that.

Today I was talking to a friend at work (in IT) who is also a professional photographer. He was telling me how people seem to just want CDs of their weddings now, not albums. These aren't smart-phone pictures of office parties or vacations. It has changed a lot in just 10 years.

By attempting to increase printing, it would seem KA is already investing funds to increase a market. To do so, they either have to persuade the same people to print more, or recruit more people to print photos. Either way, they are actively trying to expand a market in a world where those who want it already know, and the rest appear content with something else.

I was just addressing some of the comments in this thread. Perhaps some people here would feel a bit better seeing something related to film in the regular advertising campaign, even if it did not take center stage. I already suggested (off the cuff, and not in a negative tone) the acknowledgment might look like a roll of film.

You may notice that I have not bashed Kodak on this BBS. Suggesting it wouldn't kill them to add an image of a roll of film to a Personal Imaging ad is just an harmless opinion. It may even remind people who used to use film that it is still out there, and who knows, it might lead some to dig out their old cameras.

A few film companies (among other vendors) advertise here on APUG. Ironically, perhaps, most people on APUG would know of these companies and where to purchase their products even if said companies had absolutely no presence on APUG. We don't need to see them advertise here, yet they still do.

In this light, I might ask why actions by companies like Ilford and Adox were used in your example as they were, without also fully reversing the example. A question like that may seem an (intentional) faux pas of logic on my part, but could be amusing none-the-less.