Email Campaign to save Kodak HIE-135

DarkroomExperimente · Nov 24, 2007

I just got 10 rolls of HIE...even though I rarely use it

RE: manual cameras.....one main advantage is when you're doing long exposures at night...easier with a manual camera w/ mechanical shutter IMHO

pentaxuser · Nov 24, 2007

nick mulder said:
I have some Ilford SFX 200 and a red filter here waiting to be trucked out to the beach

I suppose it depends on the red filter but in my experience SFX will not do the "wood effect" i.e. white grass and leaves without the SFX filter or a red filter which is way beyond the wratten 25 for normal B&W unlike HIE. On the other hand with a normal red filter it does gives an enhanced black sky and water and asks that question: Is that brilliant sunlight or moonlight?.

It still looks other-wordly on most sunshine shots. A beach minus foliage may well be the place to go. If the next day is dull( normal in the U.K.) you have the added advantage of a film that behaves perfectly normally.

pentaxuser

nighthawkjw · Nov 29, 2007

Response to Negative Posts

Many thanks to those of you who have emailed into Kodak to save HIE-135.

Many of you have put forward your negative opinions regarding this effort. If you disapprove, that is your choice, but why try to influence others to be negative towards it? Why resign yourselves to allow something to become obsolete when a simple email might have some influence?

Too many forums are host to too many people with too many negative opinions and I am very disappointed that this forum is one of them. I had higher expectations when I read that Ilford had brought back their SFX200 IR film after a similar campaign from APUG. The majority of people who have responded so negatively to this cause have ruined this group for me.

Maybe if some of you regulars who agree with my views here would let those nay sayers know how you feel, this might be a better group. I do not care to associate myself with them.

James C. Williams

Andy K · Nov 29, 2007

James, there is one big difference. Ilford actually listen to their customers. Kodak do the odd survey every now and then, but it appears they are mostly conducted purely for publicity purposes.

Sirius Glass · Nov 29, 2007

Andy K said:
James, there is one big difference. Ilford actually listen to their customers. Kodak do the odd survey every now and then, but it appears they are mostly conducted purely for publicity purposes.

Frankly, I find that this posting is a gross understatement of reality.

Steve

nick mulder · Nov 29, 2007

nighthawkjw said:
Many thanks to those of you who have emailed into Kodak to save HIE-135.

Many of you have put forward your negative opinions regarding this effort. If you disapprove, that is your choice, but why try to influence others to be negative towards it? Why resign yourselves to allow something to become obsolete when a simple email might have some influence?

James,

If I am included in this group of negative people you refer to (?) can you please directly respond to my original post - if you dont mind can you do so regardless.

thanks,
Nick

PhotoJim · Nov 29, 2007

I think the Ilford situation was quite different. SFX was a bit of a niche film but Ilford stopped producing it primarily because it was having financial difficulties and had no choice. I suspect that Ilford planned to restore some discontinued products once circumstances changed, and indeed that is what happened.

I am not aware of Kodak bringing back any discontinued products (although in its long history it is possible it has happened). This decision was not made out of financial duress but out of economics. Kodak does not feel that HIE is economical to produce anymore. The decision is not being made out of short-term cash flow but out of concern for long-term profitability.

As I mentioned above, I would love if HIE would come back, and would buy some, but honestly, I only shoot a couple of rolls a year. Kodak needs several thousand people like me to make a difference, and I am concerned that if a bunch of people who have no intention of using HIE ask Kodak to bring it back, and Kodak does, and it doesn't sell again, the next time we ask for a product to come back - one that many people actually *would* shoot - Kodak will refuse because of its experience with HIE.

TomWB · Nov 29, 2007

nick mulder said:
They could simply guess "hmmm, lets guess at %90 aren't true" - More likely their 'guess' will just conform to the sales/market research data they have already ...

Besides the point ... I'd actually like to use it ... in 120 that is :rolleyes:

I'm with you - my reasoning is why would a big company like Kodak discontinue a product if they didn't have the market research and declining sales to back it up? I think some of this here and on photo.net is being stirred up by people who've never used HIE. If you've never shot a roll of HIE, I'd like to know now. I've probably shot a half dozen rolls of 35mm HIE since 1980, and a box of HIE 4x5 (which I liked). Not much, but it's time to move on.

walter23 · Nov 29, 2007

If Kodak would do a run of fresh 4x5 HIE I'd spend all of my money on it and then sell half of my posessions to get more money for more of it.

TomWB · Nov 29, 2007

nighthawkjw said:
Dear Fellow Photographers,

________________________________________________ It will mean that perhaps the best infrared photographer, Simon Marsden, who has dedicated 35 years to producing thousands of images on HIE-135, will have to either adapt or end his career now.

He will if he hasn't already. The photographer for "American Ruins" which is an infrared pic book that was discussed on CBS Sunday Morning, used a 5D converted for ir.

nick mulder · Nov 29, 2007

TomWB said:
I'm with you - my reasoning is why would a big company like Kodak discontinue a product if they didn't have the market research and declining sales to back it up? I think some of this here and on photo.net is being stirred up by people who've never used HIE. If you've never shot a roll of HIE, I'd like to know now. I've probably shot a half dozen rolls of 35mm HIE since 1980, and a box of HIE 4x5 (which I liked). Not much, but it's time to move on.

Well, there's no reason not to write a letter to Kodak - go for gold I say... I'm just trying to stop people who wont/cant shoot HIE from chirping in - it doesn't help the cause at all, in fact I believe it would hinder it.

airgunr · Nov 30, 2007

I sent my copy of the e-mail. I hope it works for another run as I will stock up again. I have one roll left in my fridge.

Simon R Galley · Nov 30, 2007

Dear All,

ILFORD SFX 200 was discontinued during the 'administration' period of the previous company : As were many products, when the MBO took over in February 2005 and HARMAN was formed our strategy was to return all products that were viable, as quickly as possible two were not, ILFOFIX powder and SFX 200 :

So why did we bring this product back ?, our strategy is to have the widest range of products of any monochrome manufacturer, obviously we could still make it and we decided to take a risk, one of the deciding factors in taking that risk was that our customers told us they would buy it, through our own web site and forums such as APUG ( which we consider the most important in relation to our business ).

I would therefore encourage you to give e.mailing KODAK a try, it can surely do no harm and it may just work, it certainly did encourage and re-assure the board of HARMAN to make SFX again, which is a great success. Obviously KODAK is huge compared to us but I am sure it will register.

Simon : ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

MattKing · Nov 30, 2007

I don't use HIE.

That being said, it seems to me that Kodak might very well be influenced by email or snail mail campaigns.

It probably depends most on whether they interpret recent sales performance as being indicative of a continuing decrease in interest in, and intention to purchase the film. The mail campaigns may counteract that impression.

For those who actually do use the film, I would certainly suggest that you indicate how much, and how much you intend to use it in the future.

If I was BWKate, I'd want to send them an HIE postcard too

Matt

TheFlyingCamera · Nov 30, 2007

Simon- what about possibly reformulating SFX to make it perform more like HIE, now that HIE is defunct??

Andy K · Nov 30, 2007

TheFlyingCamera said:
Simon- what about possibly reformulating SFX to make it perform more like HIE, now that HIE is defunct??

THAT I would buy by the bucketload!

TheFlyingCamera · Nov 30, 2007

Andy K said:
THAT I would buy by the bucketload!

Oh, and even more wonderfully, if it were made available in sheet film sizes!!!

Simon R Galley · Dec 3, 2007

Dear FC,

I will ask the question...cannot do more than that at this stage.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

keithwms · Dec 3, 2007

Simon, I would definitely welcome an Ilford IR film in 4x5 sheets, perhaps even SFX. Until that happens I will shoot the Rollei/Maco stuff. Based on my own trials, I'd say the new prototype Rollei film will be quite popular if and when it comes to market; it's a couple stops more sensitive than their current film and SFX, which are both regarded by some as mere extended pan films. So... I'm just saying that Ilford might engage in some "strategery." SFX may not be special (=IR sensitive) enough to fill the impending void. A more IR sensitive film will definitely sell more briskly. It may make no sense to bring out 4x5 SFX, frankly, but a film with deeper IR sensitivity would sell well in medium format and 4x5.

Regarding format size, let's look at this from the perspective of competition with digital IR. My own opinion is that 35mm IR film has no chance in today's market. The issues are sensitivity and signal/noise vs. grain. Medium format film does better in terms of tonality and exceeds 35mm digital IR in some respects like highlight differentiation, but the real advantage for IR film is in 4x5, with which it is possible to get grainless enlargements with beautifully smooth tonal transitions and without obvious posterization. And on 4x5 gear it is also possible to make use of inexpensive APO process lenses that overcome most of the focus shift. So as far as I am concerned, for IR, 4x5 is where it's at. If HIE had been freshly available in 4x5 or at least medium format, I would have used it. (That Kodak was only selling it recently in 35mm made no sense to me, from a business standpoint, but I digress...)

Another possible advantage film has (or should I say, had) is halation. I personally have no use for it, but nevertheless it is/was popular as a compositional element. And you can't get halation in digital capture except by screwing around in PS. So there is a void being created by the absence of HIE, the most strongly halating IR film. So perhaps Ilford (and others) should consider producing film without an AH layer in parallel with their current offerings.

TheFlyingCamera · Dec 3, 2007

Simon R Galley said:
Dear FC,

I will ask the question...cannot do more than that at this stage.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

Simon-

Thank you again for being here and making the effort. I'll understand regardless of the answer - I know I and many others here appreciate your presence and willingness to bring ideas to the researchers and the bean-counters from the seething masses of the hoi-polloi that is APUG.

Terence · Dec 3, 2007

While SFX in 120 is by far my favorite film, I long for a film like the Konica IR. High IR sensitivity, anti-halation and fine grain.

nighthawkjw · Dec 4, 2007

Simon,

Regardless of the outcome of the email campaign to Kodak, I look forward to what Ilford/HARMAN may do. I have used Ilford films in the past and will be very happy to use it again in the future. Thank you so much for your support of the email campaign!

I have made some wonderful new friends from this effort and that is a reward I had never expected. Many people have written me, thanking me for making this happen. I did it because I know that so many of you are producing such beautiful photos using this film and if it goes, the future of this art form goes. So many lovely photos by so many talented photographers that may never exist without this film!

This campaign will at least let Kodak know that they are responsible for the past and future of an art form. They have heard responses from the best photographers using HIE-135 and know what it means to them to be able to get their film of choice. Other friends have written in who have never used HIE-135, but are fans of infrared photography.

If you care about film photography, be it infrared, color or B/W, Kodak needs to hear from you. This is not my opinion, it is a fact. If they get enough responses, they will not be able to ignore it. Yes, the idea might seem crazy, like jousting windmills. Don Quixote is one of my heroes! Write! Even if you don't think it will work, do it! What will it cost you? How much effort will it take? Who will criticize you?

This campaign has also become a banner for ALL FILM! So keep the wheels turning. If you have written and know someone else who should write, tell them. If you know someone who can do a magazine article about this, the exposure would be a great boost to the effort. If you are a photographer with an email list of clientelle and galleries, email them. If you are in advertising and have co-workers that might use IR photos, get them to write. Pay no attention to the nay-sayers... THIS IS MAKING A DIFFERENCE!

Sincerely,
James C. Williams

JanaM · Dec 5, 2007

nighthawkjw said:
If you care about film photography, be it infrared, color or B/W, Kodak needs to hear from you. ....If they get enough responses, they will not be able to ignore it. ...

Sincerely,
James C. Williams

Hi James,

I think you are right. We as consumers must use our power. Being quiet is no solution.

Perhaps I have some information which may be helpful for you:
There is a official statement from Mirko Boedekker from Fotoimpex on his website in the lab forum concerning the real reasons of the HIE discontinuence. He said the problem was the confectioning which get too expensive due to too low demand.
For normal films Kodak uses IR light and IR glasses for the employees working at the confectioning machines. Of course this is impossible for the HIE. Therefore Kodak has a special building and unit for only confectioning IR film in total darkness, with special skilled workers.
Now this special confectioning parallel to the normal procedure is not cost effective anymore.

But perhaps manufacturing the film (only masterroll) may be possible. So there could be a theoretical chance to rescue HIE:
- pool all photographers who use HIE
- raise a fund to pre-finance the production together with the distributors (Freestyle, Fotoimpex etc., whoever is interested)
- ask some of the smaller companies if they could make the confectioning, e.g. Fotokemika (Efke), Photostar, Foma, Tasma, Filmotec, perhaps Ilford
- buy masterrolls from Kodak
- sell the films under a different name, because Kodak will give no guarantee concerning quality control, if the confectioning is not made by themselves

Perhaps this is worth a try....A similar action has worked with the 220 format production of Tri-X and the 8mm order of Wittner. Kodak wanted a minimum order of 50000 $ to make this batch of 220 Tri-X and the 8mm Film.

Mirko Boedekker wrote in his statement, that they will evaluate the possibility to design a high speed infrared film on basis of the Agfapan 400. If the market will be great enough.

Best regards,
Jana

PeterB · Dec 7, 2007

Simon R Galley said:
Dear FC,

I will ask the question...cannot do more than that at this stage.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

Wow ! The fact that you are even inclined to ask, testifies to the notion that Ilford cares about what its (potential) customers would like.

Thanks Simon,

regards
Peter

walter23 · Dec 7, 2007

Simon R Galley said:
Dear FC,

I will ask the question...cannot do more than that at this stage.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :

I would buy hundreds of dollars worth of the stuff right off the bat. I discovered my calling (HIE) long after it was discontinued in 4x5 with an expired box someone gave me for free. Took my best photograph ever on it (it's really a fantastic image, not to be immodest - most of my stuff sucks). And now I've got less than 20 sheets left to make a couple more masterpieces (found a cheap, partly used, expired box in unknown condition last week)

Yeah, there's other IR stuff (efke 820IR for example, which I have a few boxes of), but the problem with the slower speed IR is that the most interesting cloud formations are usually moving... and sometimes you just want a static image without cloud blur.

Oh to have been alive and photographing when HIE 4x5 was freely available in the stores...

I've tried digital IR as an alternative but it's not very good with an unmodified camera (w/ opaque IR screw-on filter). Taking most of the input from the red channel makes for blurry noisy images it seems - something to do with the interpolation I guess. Too easy to blow out the whites too.

Email Campaign to save Kodak HIE-135

DarkroomExperimente

pentaxuser

nighthawkjw

Andy K

Sirius Glass

nick mulder

PhotoJim

TomWB

walter23

TomWB

nick mulder

airgunr

Simon R Galley

MattKing

Moderator

TheFlyingCamera

Membership Council

Andy K

TheFlyingCamera

Membership Council

Simon R Galley

keithwms

TheFlyingCamera

Membership Council

Terence

nighthawkjw

JanaM

PeterB

walter23

Email Campaign to save Kodak HIE-135

Moderator

Membership Council

Membership Council

Membership Council

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency