Azo and Kodachrome, it does not make sense to me.

[ilya1963]

Thank you.

We have paper resin coated car mats we use when we sell a new car , just like the old KODAK lab paper it has KODAK stamp all over it's back

I don't mind paying a premium for packaging ,but to have 5 times more packaging material in my darkroom would leave me with no space to work...may be if they make it out of paper that I could coat with emulsion then I could recycle it...

It seem like we will be supporting their other paper production and not PHOTOGRAPHIC MATERIAL...

It's just seems that they made their descision based on that

and
Has nothing to do with FILM, I mean why not keep a box with 50 sheets instead 10 sheets or even do what ILFOR does and use 25 sheets

The 50 sheet boxes are already devided in two 25 sheet packages inside.

Sorry , Ijsust can't get over this descision.

Reminds me of something GM would do with their Marketing , like having Tiger Woods for their face for Buick

ILYA

 

[Paul Howell]

As Kodak has lost 90% of its market, of the current 2 billion 1/2 is film and paper, of that 1 billion what % are small users either or professionals? If 15 years ago small users were a very small or % of sales so Kodak did need not need to pay much attention to us, we just reaped the benefits of all the R/D that Kodak did for the commercial market. But now perhaps we are a big fish in a small pond and Kodak needs to address our needs as a primary revenue stream. It may be that the legacy of scale that Kodak is build on is just too big and Kodak has no economily viable means to produce products that I need and want at a price I can afford to pay and Kodak will follow Polaroid and Bell and Howell and become just another a brand. If we are indeed a large % of the current market then Kodak needs to take a page from Ilford's manual and see what they can do to make me happy.

Now that Kodak b@w paper is off the market I have little incentive to use Kodak film or chemistry.

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Kodak, from what I can tell, has cut their sheet counts per box on all 8x10 materials to 10 sheets and 50 sheet sizes. In color emulsions, it is 10 sheets, with RARE exceptions. 8x10 color neg is ONLY available in 10 sheet boxes. On the flip side, 8x10 b/w emulsions are ONLY available in 50 sheet boxes.

 

[Terence]

Yes, they did cancel it in a bad way, but as far as I can determine, sales were good at the time they made the original statement and they told the truth then that it would be continued. Later in the year, sales made a big drop and they had to reasess the situation when the quarterly review came up.

I suspect customers became disgusted with the first cancellation and moved on to other B&W IR products or stopped doing IR. IDK, but the sales dropped. Then they just made a plain announcement. They should have given more information, I agree. That was the 'Edsel' type of decision.

However, I said that this thread was started, not in an attempt to bash Kodak, but to find out why others who can make these products do not.

Fuji, Ilford, and other can all make IR films, Kodachrome films and Azo paper. Well, Fuji does but does not sell it in the US as far as I can determine searching their web site. So, why not?

If the market is too small to get into in spite of having formulas, then Kodak was right to cancel Azo and IR films. If you can make money in these products then these companies are dumb not getting into them or restricting their sales market.

That is the point of this thread. We are told there is a profit opportunity. Why isn't anyone taking advantage of it?

PE

Efke and Rollei have released IR film for consumer consumption. Admittedly, the Efke is a retread of what they made for Maco. It's got a weaker IR response than HIE, which IS a pity, but is fine with a true IR filter (as opposed to a red #25 or 29). The Rollei stuff, as near as I can tell, is really more like an extended red sensitive aerial or traffic film. Takes a bit more work to get a real "IR look".

Alas, I only got into contact printing after the demise of AZO. I'd love to try some, but am afraid I'd like it too much. I'm guessing the demand is not enough for a large producer like Ilford, but wouldn't be surprised if a smaller comapny could get away with it.

But then, given the apparent popularity of platinum/palladium printing, I'm surprised some small-timer hasn't put out a platinum or palladium paper like those that existed early in the last century. I'd be much more willing to give it a go if I didn't have to coat my own. And given the obvious "primitive" technology used to produce the original product, I'd think it wouldn't be that hard. Maybe the machines of the time have no modern equivalent on a small scale? I would have thought it would be similar to producing the POP products.

 

[ilya1963]

"On the flip side, 8x10 b/w emulsions are ONLY available in 50 sheet boxes."-

Scott
_________


Till now

They changing it with introduction of the new TMY to 10 sheets a box,

 

[aldevo]

Thank you.

We have paper resin coated car mats we use when we sell a new car , just like the old KODAK lab paper it has KODAK stamp all over it's back

I don't mind paying a premium for packaging ,but to have 5 times more packaging material in my darkroom would leave me with no space to work...may be if they make it out of paper that I could coat with emulsion then I could recycle it...

It seem like we will be supporting their other paper production and not PHOTOGRAPHIC MATERIAL...

It's just seems that they made their descision based on that

and
Has nothing to do with FILM, I mean why not keep a box with 50 sheets instead 10 sheets or even do what ILFOR does and use 25 sheets

The 50 sheet boxes are already devided in two 25 sheet packages inside.

Sorry , Ijsust can't get over this descision.

Reminds me of something GM would do with their Marketing , like having Tiger Woods for their face for Buick

ILYA

EK's rationale for switching to 10 sheet boxes must be one of the following:

a) They are not certain how soon purchased 8x10 film is consumed and must find out to operate profitably.
b) To produce this product profitably at all they must operate with smaller and more frequent batches.

Maybe PE can think of a "c". I certainly can't.

At this point do we know how much more expensive 5 10 sheet boxes would be than 1 50 sheet box, anyhow? I have not heard that EK has announced pricing yet to their distributors...

 

[John Kasaian]

Packaging should cater to the customer. The consumers of sheet film are now mostly artists and hobbyists, not professional studios doing say. catalog work.
TMK, no film company has asked "us" what size boxes we's prefer but now they have all this marketing research (this thread and another onTuan's site) for free! Heck of a deal! Lets see if they listen.

 

[aldevo]

As Kodak has lost 90% of its market, of the current 2 billion 1/2 is film and paper, of that 1 billion what % are small users either or professionals? If 15 years ago small users were a very small or % of sales so Kodak did need not need to pay much attention to us, we just reaped the benefits of all the R/D that Kodak did for the commercial market. But now perhaps we are a big fish in a small pond and Kodak needs to address our needs as a primary revenue stream. It may be that the legacy of scale that Kodak is build on is just too big and Kodak has no economily viable means to produce products that I need and want at a price I can afford to pay and Kodak will follow Polaroid and Bell and Howell and become just another a brand. If we are indeed a large % of the current market then Kodak needs to take a page from Ilford's manual and see what they can do to make me happy.

Now that Kodak b@w paper is off the market I have little incentive to use Kodak film or chemistry.

Paul,

Everything (absolutely everything without exception) that I have read here or elsewhere regarding the economies of film production strongly suggests that no manufacturer could support its operations with just the business from the personal-use, "film-enthusiast" market.

Maybe the new ADOX scheme to resurrect the old APX films using AgfaPhoto's old R&D infrastructure could change that - who knows? But there are not any exceptions known at present.

I'd easily venture to say that education is a much larger % of overall demand at present. Scary thought.

 

[aldevo]

Packaging should cater to the customer. The consumers of sheet film are now mostly artists and hobbyists, not professional studios doing say. catalog work.
TMK, no film company has asked "us" what size boxes we's prefer but now they have all this marketing research (this thread and another onTuan's site) for free! Heck of a deal! Lets see if they listen.

You are speculating without any facts that hobbyists are now larger than the professional market.

Let's not forget that any given Sinar monorail in commercial use will likely consume more film in a week than a couple field cameras will all year.

Nobody has published anything reliable regarding the relative sizes of the LF hobbyist vs LF professional market. Tuan's thread is simply a survey of a very small community of hobbyist users and does not answer this question.

 

[ilya1963]

Packaging should cater to the customer. The consumers of sheet film are now mostly artists and hobbyists, not professional studios doing say. catalog work.
TMK, no film company has asked "us" what size boxes we's prefer but now they have all this marketing research (this thread and another onTuan's site) for free! Heck of a deal! Lets see if they listen.

I have used over 5000 sheets of 8x10 film in the last 3 years

In which category should I fall?

I sell cars for a living

ILYA

 

[Terence]

But how many Sinars are still doing commercial work?

 

[TheFlyingCamera]

Frankly, I'd like to see 12 or 24 sheet boxes, not 25. It's pretty easy for me to go out and shoot a whole box, but I don't like having the leftover end of a single sheet kicking around until the NEXT time I shoot- and I often forget that one leftover sheet lingering lonely in the bottom of the box.

 

[John Kasaian]

I have used over 5000 sheets of 8x10 film in the last 3 years

In which category should I fall?

I sell cars for a living

ILYA

So you shoot a bit over three 50 sheet boxes of 8x10 a year? That about where I'm at.Theres nothing wrong with 50 sheet boxes ( I prefer them actually) but 10 sheet boxes seem like a waste of packaging to me. Of course 50 sheetsof 8x10 is quite a financial commitment (about $160 or 30 margaritas) for some people:rolleyes:

 

[Photo Engineer]

So you shoot a bit over three 50 sheet boxes of 8x10 a year? That about where I'm at.Theres nothing wrong with 50 sheet boxes ( I prefer them actually) but 10 sheet boxes seem like a waste of packaging to me. Of course 50 sheetsof 8x10 is quite a financial commitment (about $160 or 30 margaritas) for some people:rolleyes:

Check your math!

PE

 

[RoBBo]

So you shoot a bit over three 50 sheet boxes of 8x10 a year? That about where I'm at.Theres nothing wrong with 50 sheet boxes ( I prefer them actually) but 10 sheet boxes seem like a waste of packaging to me. Of course 50 sheetsof 8x10 is quite a financial commitment (about $160 or 30 margaritas) for some people:rolleyes:

Thats actually more like 33, 50 sheet boxes a year.
...
Shit.

 

[Mick Fagan]

Ilya, I don't think I could afford to buy a car from you

Mick.

 

[eddym]

Frankly, I'd like to see 12 or 24 sheet boxes, not 25. It's pretty easy for me to go out and shoot a whole box, but I don't like having the leftover end of a single sheet kicking around until the NEXT time I shoot- and I often forget that one leftover sheet lingering lonely in the bottom of the box.

VERY good point! I have had the same problem.

 

[John Kasaian]

You are speculating without any facts that hobbyists are now larger than the professional market.

Let's not forget that any given Sinar monorail in commercial use will likely consume more film in a week than a couple field cameras will all year.

Nobody has published anything reliable regarding the relative sizes of the LF hobbyist vs LF professional market. Tuan's thread is simply a survey of a very small community of hobbyist users and does not answer this question.

I should have included schools, but I think Kodak and Ilford's own statistics indicate that the days of 8x10 being consumed in 100 sheet boxes by catalog shoots has fallen off a trifle. More new LF cameras seem to be on the market now than anytime in recent memory but who is buying them and for what purpose? Certainly not J.C. Penny or Hedrich Blessing.

As far as the commercial use of Sinars go, I'm sure that Williams and Sonoma, Eddie Bauer, Rigid Tools and Cold Stone Creamery keep a lot of Sinars with those fancy digital backs busy.

Its not that LF cameras aren't being used by Pros anymore---nothing could be farther from the truth---but all the Pros I know will be the first to admit that in the commercial enviroment LF is a small portion of the overall market. So who is buying up all those Shen Haos, Tachis and Canhams? I'd think those people are the up and coming market for sheet film and gaining their loyalty should be the business of any film maker.

Remember when you'd get a box of detergent with a new washing machine or dishwasher? If say, Kodak included a chit for a sample package or rebate for TMY with every new Shen sold, what do you think that would accomplish? Maybe...just maybe...it would bring more customers to Kodak (or Ilford...or whomever!)

 

[John Kasaian]

Check your math!

PE

Darn that dyslexia! No wonder my check book balence is always off:confused:

 

[gr82bart]

It's the case of the hotdogs sold in 10s and buns sold in 8s. Why is that?

Regards, Art.

 

[removed account4]

It's the case of the hotdogs sold in 10s and buns sold in 8s. Why is that?

Regards, Art.

not anymore art
now they are 8 and 8

major breakthrough

 

[Photo Engineer]

It's the case of the hotdogs sold in 10s and buns sold in 8s. Why is that?

Regards, Art.

Doggone, I eat the extra 2 dogs plain!

PE

 

[Sirius Glass]

It's the case of the hotdogs sold in 10s and buns sold in 8s. Why is that?

Regards, Art.

I am not ready for that problem. I am still trying to figure out why olives come in saltwater and sardines come in olive oil.

Steve

 

[Michael Kadillak]

I am still going back to my question

10 SHEETS PER NEW BOX OF 8x10 TMY

WHY?

WHY EVEN BOTHER ?

IT COSTS MORE FOR THE PACKAGE THEN WHAT'S INSIDE


PE , Could you inlighten me as to how this makes any financial sence?
May be I am missing somethig here?

I am going back

ILYA

Sounds like there is only a minute to go in the fourth quarter of the championship game. I know that we all have a considerable passion for photography but try to put things into some perspective.

Kodak has spent $ in R&D to improve TMY in a market that was simply not supposed to be here if you listened to the naysayers several years ago. But here we are vibrant and optimistic about the future. I am not pleased with the loss of Kodak paper but sometimes you make a hard business decision for the sake of the remaining product line and the future. Get over it.

The Achilles Heel for photographers that do not want to do the digital capture dance is quality film. Kodak could have milked their existing film line for all it was worth and not spent a dime but they stepped up and did something to differentiate themselves from their competition and for that they should be applauded. We can always find a way to make prints.

Kodak has cut TMY in ULF sizes (and will do so again shortly) and has also listened to our request to keep the UV coating off of sheet film. Wow. Best Christmas present we could ask for. I contend that we have everything to be happy about and we have the ability to change things if we go about it intelligently. The packaging announcement was an effort to lower costs in targeting a more diverse customer group that cannot afford $160 for a box of 50 sheets. Kodak is responding to what customers have been asking for. Don't take it personally if you have a different opinion. It is just business.

Cheers!

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

But how many Sinars are still doing commercial work?

Well, I bought my 8x10" P a couple of years ago from a commercial food studio in the photo district that was selling off two backups, which they had replaced a while back with new P2s, one of which was in use when I picked up the camera.