It depends on definition of the term “engineered”. It’s quite valid for a project engineer to take credit for, as an example, conceptualize a product AND assemble a group of more specialized subject-matter experts/engineers or consultants to do the technical engineering AND coordinate manufacturing/distribution AND legitimately claim to have engineered a product. It conceivably could all be done using a phone/computer from a rather humble remote location. One does not have to use a slide rule or wear a white lab coat or have a big complex to perform within the breadth of “engineering” activities. In this scenario, the analyses and intermediate/documentation products available would likely be limited to whatever was purchased under the contract(s). Analysis and documentation are extremely costly parts of product engineering so short-cuts in those areas to meet a price-point are quite logical.This I don't get. They say they "engineered" the film in-house. I am not exactly an expert, but don't you kind of sort of have to have some technical information to "engineer" a film?
Read between the lines. The statement of what can’t or won’t be shared is completely obvious and has be restated consistently and repeatedly. The basis of the 320 or the 200 speed rating is to be taken as an act of faith as a starting point.Come out with a statement about what they can`t or won`t share, and we can decide from there.
The above was my original question on page 1 to which CatLABS replied with one word "Yes" so one might have assumed that the word "Yes" applied to the whole question. If so it presumably had a team of photo engineers for at least part of the "4 years in the making" of this new film which is an expensive outlay. An alternative explanation is that one or more Catlabs employees had an idea to make a new film, approached one or more film makers and one of those thought Catlabs idea for a new film was good enough to spend 4 years of its R&D team's time to bring the film to fruition which now includes its productionCatLABS, as it has 320 in its name is this film an ISO of 320? With its unique emulsion is this an emulsion of your devising that you have contracted out to another film maker to make for you
pentaxuser
This I don't get. They say they "engineered" the film in-house. I am not exactly an expert, but don't you kind of sort of have to have some technical information to "engineer" a film? Is the technical information so super secret that they torched it in a burn bag or something? Did Agent K drop by their office and use his neuralyzer on the engineering team? How are they going to be able to do a second run? Or, is this it? One and done. Limited edition. Get it while it lasts. When it's gone it's gone.
Buy and try is how the film is being marketed. Who are we to try to change that?
It’s the continued arguments about not getting the answer and not liking the style of answer given that has made this an embarrassing mess… more for Photrio than for CatLabs IMO.
Yes, by Jove. And don’t omit the possibility that there might be investors in this project. Not our business, of course, but a likely possibility.That has to be quite an expensive undertaking for a film maker who now is relying on CatLABS sales alone to cover the whole cost of making the film and return a profit
It depends on definition of the term “engineered”. It’s quite valid for a project engineer to take credit for, as an example, conceptualize a product AND assemble a group of more specialized subject-matter experts/engineers or consultants to do the technical engineering AND coordinate manufacturing/distribution AND legitimately claim to have engineered a product. It conceivably could all be done using a phone/computer from a rather humble remote location. One does not have to use a slide rule or wear a white lab coat or have a big complex to perform within the breadth of “engineering” activities. In this scenario, the analyses and intermediate/documentation products available would likely be limited to whatever was purchased under the contract(s). Analysis and documentation are extremely costly parts of product engineering so short-cuts in those areas to meet a price-point are quite logical.
The above was my original question on page 1 to which CatLABS replied with one word "Yes" so one might have assumed that the word "Yes" applied to the whole question.
Yes, by Jove. And don’t omit the possibility that there might be investors in this project. Not our business, of course, but a likely possibility.
I'm not embarrassed.
And guess where CatLabs is trying to market this - here.
bbb
I have no idea what CatLABS means when they say they "engineered". It's another in a long line of secrets.
Why is that likely? Maybe he borrowed the money from his mother. That's possible.
Have you ever funded a product development effort? Mom would be an investor but why use that analogy as a back-handed insult? If Mom loaned money for a new film we should kiss her on both cheeks!
I think marketing is psyops, and I am interested in psyops, so my interest extends beyond the film itself.It doesn’t matter. Really. Marketing talk.
Yes, I even disputed my own results after I got them back the first time. This is why, I bought more film and ran the test again. The results were nearly identical, well within the margin of error. I actually, ran the test the third time. I would gladly continue testing and sharing my results but the OP made it clear that they are not taking this thread seriously, so I will no longer post in this thread. It's a waste of time.Read between the lines. The statement of what can’t or won’t be shared is completely obvious and has be restated consistently and repeatedly. The basis of the 320 or the 200 speed rating is to be taken as an act of faith as a starting point.
The 25 rating is based in an experimental analysis and has been disputed. The 80 is conjecture. All worth considering yet none so definitive that the others can be excluded.
Buy and try is how the film is being marketed. Who are we to try to change that?
It’s the continued arguments about not getting the answer and not liking the style of answer given that has made this an embarrassing mess… more for Photrio than for CatLabs IMO.
I think marketing is psyops, and I am interested in psyops.
So I'll ask again, why is it likely[/] that investors are involved in bringing the new CatLABS film to market?
As far as kissing mother on both cheeks, I'd say it turns on the quality of the film mother's money has produced.
I appreciate your entire reply and would only ask you to reconsider the part I have quoted, above. It is a WOT if the sole goal is to change the mind of the vendor or the product labeling/marketing. It is very valuable to most of the folks actively participating in this thread out of interest, especially those who are on the fence for whatever reason. I have other on-going activities that are financially-intensive so holding back on buying film right now but if you (or anyone else) has data, experiences, etc that can help others decide if the product is right for them or to better use it without having to do extensive testing... then that's a win for all in my book.so I will no longer post in this thread. It's a waste of time.
Crikey… your very persistent but don’t seem to want to think at the moment. Here’s why: it costs a whole big big o’money to pull off something like this. Haven’t you ever watched Shark Tank?
Generally speaking, when people reply to multiple questions with a single answer, the answer is unclear, but most likely only applies to the last question in the list.
...Buy and try is how the film is being marketed. Who are we to try to change that?...
...It’s the continued arguments about not getting the answer and not liking the style of answer given that has made this an embarrassing mess… more for Photrio than for CatLabs IMO.
...In other words I'm saying to CatLabs - read the room.
...Photrio appears to be one of many places CatLab has been to market the product. Personally… I would have abandon this venue for that goal a long time ago if I were them.
...I couldn't watch and listen to Mark Cuban that long. Sure, he's a billionaire, but that doesn't mean you can stand listening to the guy.
Last film I remember that was marketed at a fake ISO which gave poor shadow detail, was made in the EU and had a weird spectral sensitivity was Ferrania. Is that what this film is?
Sorry if that's already been debunked, I read the thread from the start but it's so long I have forgotten the first half already. Got distracted by the Pop Tarts. Haven't had those in years, I would probably just stick with cinnamon if they didn't tell you what the new taste was.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?