Film from Italy -- Ferrania starting production 2014

Nzoomed · Oct 25, 2014

Photo Engineer said:
Yes, I see hope. Provided such as you and others buy Kodak products and quit bashing Kodak. They are hardworking people trying to make a living, and they have the best C41 products on the market and the best MP stocks on the market. They can make it with just a tad of support here!

PE

Well im shooting my first roll of Portra today in my new olympus XA4!
I guess that counts as supporting Kodak lol
Ill try to support kodak as much as i can, but as ive said before, I mainly shoot E6, so naturally i will support those who produce it.
However i think its a good idea if the community can make their voice heard at Kodak.
A good start would be if we could get the APUG community to share their voice on Kodak's Facebook page, then they might listen, especially if we bought up the subject of ferrania.
If Ferrania achieve production of multiple film types, so can Kodak.

RattyMouse · Oct 25, 2014

Photo Engineer said:
Yes, I see hope. Provided such as you and others buy Kodak products and quit bashing Kodak. They are hardworking people trying to make a living, and they have the best C41 products on the market and the best MP stocks on the market. They can make it with just a tad of support here!

PE

PE, has Dan hacked your account??!!

Come on! I expect more rigor in your replies and less emotion. Kodak themselves have stated that their production is down 90% this year. That represents X amount of less square feet of film produced. You probably know what X is with a reasonable amount of accuracy. You also know, I hope, about what level of sustainablility this may or may not represent. It's my belief that there are very few products, or product lines that can suffer a 90% drop in demand and still remain viable. Certainly a shame, or even a tragedy, but facts are facts, at least to people trained in science.

Finally, you also know that if APUG did not exist, or it were filled with 100% positive Kodak posts, that Kodak's production would not have changed one bit.

I can certainly sympathize with people who have lost there jobs, as I went through that once for nearly 1 year due to a non compete clause that I signed. I could not find any work for 10 months.

And as a show of my support for Kodak, this morning I shot a roll of TMAX 400 and this afternoon it's hanging processed in my bathroom, er lab drying as I type.

Xmas · Oct 26, 2014

Ken Nadvornick said:
Where in the UK do you live Noel?

I have friends who live in the UK. I want to check with them to see why the UK postal services cannot be relied upon to correctly deliver small packages of film to and from your location.

Ken

Our postal system was uber reliable during the darkest days if the blitz.
It is not so good now.
North London near to box14 Hemel Hempstead.
Similar at Malvern Worcestershire
Simular at Ricardos address.
Truzi said hers was not suitable either...

Last Sat I had a signed for package under my doormat, it was larger and 5x times thicker than my door mat and was not actually addressed to me.

During WWII many of our radio hams were asked to monitor comms traffic on HF and copy verbatim. They were given a large wodge of OHMS envelopes to send to a box number, days after they posted the transcript would be returned with a gloss.

These were weak signals that Ge Intel services were using in a hand cipher. They used decrypts of this traffic to break into the Intel rotor traffic and thereby to control deception before D- day.

Noel

pdeeh · Oct 26, 2014

What a bizarre generalisation about UK mail services.

Your posts are often interestingly eccentric, Xmas, but this is just rubbish

I've lived all over England and in 40 years of sending and receiving mail have only ever had one thing go astray.

R.Gould · Oct 26, 2014

Xmas said:
Our postal system was uber reliable during the darkest days if the blitz.
It is not so good now.
North London near to box14 Hemel Hempstead.
Similar at Malvern Worcestershire
Simular at Ricardos address.
Truzi said hers was not suitable either...

Last Sat I had a signed for package under my doormat, it was larger and 5x times thicker than my door mat and was not actually addressed to me.

During WWII many of our radio hams were asked to monitor comms traffic on HF and copy verbatim. They were given a large wodge of OHMS envelopes to send to a box number, days after they posted the transcript would be returned with a gloss.

These were weak signals that Ge Intel services were using in a hand cipher. They used decrypts of this traffic to break into the Intel rotor traffic and thereby to control deception before D- day.

Noel

My Experiance of the postal service is somewhat different to yours, I have no choice but to get everything I need for my photography, and also for my Classic cars, mail order, I have done so for at least the last 28 years, I have had one parcel go astray in all that time, signed for and special delivery items are always here on time, unless we get fog problems which prevents the mail plane getting here, so I have nothing but praise for both the Royal Mail and the Jersey Post Office
Richard

Chris Livsey · Oct 26, 2014

Whilst this is wandering dangerously OT in defence of the Post Office doubter whilst I have no issues at all in my postcode area ( PR3) we have relatives in the RM16 area, Grays Essex, where we need to send birthday cards in "ordinary" envelopes. Any card in "card looking" envelope seems to never arrive. It may be linked to the common practice of enclosing folding money in birthday cards but I cast no accusations just saying what we find.
No service of that size can be 100% fantastic or indeed honest, that is just life.

Photo Engineer · Oct 26, 2014

RattyMouse said:
PE, has Dan hacked your account??!!

Come on! I expect more rigor in your replies and less emotion. Kodak themselves have stated that their production is down 90% this year. That represents X amount of less square feet of film produced. You probably know what X is with a reasonable amount of accuracy. You also know, I hope, about what level of sustainablility this may or may not represent. It's my belief that there are very few products, or product lines that can suffer a 90% drop in demand and still remain viable. Certainly a shame, or even a tragedy, but facts are facts, at least to people trained in science.

Finally, you also know that if APUG did not exist, or it were filled with 100% positive Kodak posts, that Kodak's production would not have changed one bit.

I can certainly sympathize with people who have lost there jobs, as I went through that once for nearly 1 year due to a non compete clause that I signed. I could not find any work for 10 months.

And as a show of my support for Kodak, this morning I shot a roll of TMAX 400 and this afternoon it's hanging processed in my bathroom, er lab drying as I type.

Dear Rat; (Sorry, again I use the familiar of your name, or do you prefer Ratty? )

If 70,000 people bought one roll of film each from Kodak, the sales picture would change dramatically! This is the approximate membership of APUG. If you consider the number of negative comments about Kodak films, you can say that there has been some influence on Kodak sales for the worst. IDK if it has, but APUG comments could certainly have an adverse effect on sales or a positive effect. So, my post was meant to bolster positive comments in the hope that sales would increase.

Now, 90% is a one quarter figure AFAIK. I would have to re-read the article. But, if it is 1 quarter that represents only 25% of yearly sales, and we do not yet have a yearly sales figure. I do know that sales early in the year were up a bit with all analog sales. This was good. In fact, Kodak sales of products other than MP were and still are up a bit I am given to understand.

So, there, you have some of my reasoning in my post.

Now, at Kodak they are trying to re-engineer and re-schedule products such that an optimum is obtained for WW sales. Paper production is rather optimum and they are climbing. These are good signs.

PE

railwayman3 · Oct 26, 2014

Photo Engineer said:
Yes, I see hope. Provided such as you and others buy Kodak products and quit bashing Kodak. They are hardworking people trying to make a living, and they have the best C41 products on the market and the best MP stocks on the market. They can make it with just a tad of support here!

PE

Fair enough, but for "Kodak products", you could substitute Ilford, Fuji, Adox, Ferrania, etc. I am sure that they are also all equally hardworking people trying to make a living, who can use our support ?

Yes, Kodak C-41 products are unsurpassed, IMHO. But I'm not a Hollywood producer so MP stocks are irrelevant to me. Ilford B&W films and paper give me everything I need, with all of their ranges easily available, and a fantastic processing and printing service from the factory if I need it (yes, Kodak B&W is equally good, but less choice of film and, of course, B&W papers long discontinued).

I also happen to be an oddball who still enjoys sometimes using transparency film....but no Kodak E6 anymore (and FWIW now, no more Kodachrome!), so I have a choice of Fuji or Fuji, or possibly Ferrania if their plans succeed.

I'm not bashing Kodak, but what Kodak products shall I buy?

railwayman3 · Oct 26, 2014

pdeeh said:
What a bizarre generalisation about UK mail services.

Your posts are often interestingly eccentric, Xmas, but this is just rubbish

I've lived all over England and in 40 years of sending and receiving mail have only ever had one thing go astray.

My own experience of the UK mail services is similar over many years for personal and business use. It's most unusual for anything to go astray, although, over the years in my business work, I've quite often heard people say "I've never received it", and "it must have been lost in the post". Curiously, this usually seems to be such documents as invoices due for payment, notices from the Inland Revenue which have not been acted on within the legal time limits, and similar items.

Ken Nadvornick · Oct 26, 2014

Photo Engineer said:
If 70,000 people bought one roll of film each from Kodak, the sales picture would change dramatically! This is the approximate membership of APUG.

But we've been told repeatedly in the past that the 70,000+ members here don't represent anywhere near a statistically meaningful slice of the remaining film market. We've been told (with not just a little snark) to just get real and get over ourselves.

Constantly hearing from Kodak supporters how little my business really means to Kodak, and hearing nothing from Kodak to the contrary, I tend to look elsewhere for my analog photography supplies. At least for those supplies I need and the few of them Kodak still manufactures.

Photo Engineer said:
If you consider the number of negative comments about Kodak films...

Not true. I can't ever recall hearing members here disparage Kodak film. To the contrary, it is precisely because Kodak film is of such extraordinarily high quality that people here get so upset every time Kodak discontinues another of their favorites. If it were worthy of negative comments, no one would care if it was discontinued.

No, it's Kodak's often inexplicable business decisions that have driven people nuts. Including many stakeholders completely outside the world of film photography.

Ken

Ricardo Miranda · Oct 26, 2014

/Off Topic
About Royal Mail services: I haven't had a problem in sending or receiving parcels. The only times I had a problem was when a government agency told me they sent a letter and i never received it. I'm an optimistic and like to give the benefit of the doubt. But, as it happened twice within a year, I tend now to think they never send it in the first place.
Now, about private couriers, that is another matter, with damaged parcels being one of them.
/End Off Topic

TheToadMen · Oct 26, 2014

Ken Nadvornick said:
(...) No, it's Kodak's often inexplicable business decisions that have driven people nuts. Including many stakeholders completely outside the world of film photography.
Ken

I think I agree with Ken. The big Kodak company is not governed by analogue photographers but by businessmen (as should be). And in the big picture of Kodak business plans I think (analogue) photography isn't a factor anymore.
This makes me wonder if buying Kodak film is going to make any difference in the big company decisions.
I'm even afraid they might also discontinue Kodak Tri-X (not based on any inside knowledge, just an uneducated feeling on my behalf, mind you!). So I might get me some bricks of Tri-X not to support Kodak but just to stock up my fridge.

No, if I was going to buy extra film to support film makers, my vote would go to Ilford, Fomapan and Adox film.
Or even better: Washi Film! (I bought 10 rolls to support and see what is about).

Then why didn't I support Ferrania? I was thinking about it and was following them on Kickstarter. In the end I didn't because they didn't need me to reach their goals, so I prefer to steer my money to Dead Link Removed. This is also a fine project (see other threads here on APUG) and they need my (and your) support even more (only 8 days left, Dead Link Removed). I backed them for 10 Rolls of 120 CineStill 800T for $135 (incl. international shipping).

But Kodak and Fuji aren't totally forgotten: I ordered 3 bricks of Porta 160 and 3 bricks of Provia 100F.
For what it's worth, I hope Kodak and Fuji film will be around for quite some time.

Photo Engineer · Oct 26, 2014

Ken Nadvornick said:
But we've been told repeatedly in the past that the 70,000+ members here don't represent anywhere near a statistically meaningful slice of the remaining film market. We've been told (with not just a little snark) to just get real and get over ourselves.

Constantly hearing from Kodak supporters how little my business really means to Kodak, and hearing nothing from Kodak to the contrary, I tend to look elsewhere for my analog photography supplies. At least for those supplies I need and the few of them Kodak still manufactures.

Not true. I can't ever recall hearing members here disparage Kodak film. To the contrary, it is precisely because Kodak film is of such extraordinarily high quality that people here get so upset every time Kodak discontinues another of their favorites. If it were worthy of negative comments, no one would care if it was discontinued.

No, it's Kodak's often inexplicable business decisions that have driven people nuts. Including many stakeholders completely outside the world of film photography.

Ken

Ken, others that wrote similarly;

The 70,000 figure is becoming more statistically important as sales drop for Kodak (and others). And, I assure you that although this isn't a big figure in WW sales, it might mean coating an extra roll of product. That means something.

As for all of the companies being comprised of hard working people, quite true, but Kodak is losing these skilled workers faster than the others are at the present time, and this will hurt when it comes to sustainability in the future.

As for bashing? You say Kodak products are the best? How many comments do we hear about the tone reproduction of a Kodak pro film being inferior to Fuji? How many times do we hear of a Kodak B&W film being inferior to an Ilford product wrt tone scale or some other property? And how many times is that an opinion of one or do we have general agreement and proof?

You say that the EK range of B&W is narrower than that of Ilford, well, if that is so use Ilford for the products that Kodak does not match and use Kodak where there is overlap. But noooo. Most bashers state here that they are converting to Ilford. Good strategy but hard on EK.

I hope you see at least some of my points.

PE

Xmas · Oct 26, 2014

Chris Livsey said:
Whilst this is wandering dangerously OT in defence of the Post Office doubter whilst I have no issues at all in my postcode area ( PR3) we have relatives in the RM16 area, Grays Essex, where we need to send birthday cards in "ordinary" envelopes. Any card in "card looking" envelope seems to never arrive. It may be linked to the common practice of enclosing folding money in birthday cards but I cast no accusations just saying what we find.
No service of that size can be 100% fantastic or indeed honest, that is just life.

Well I did not mean to imply dishonesty my point was on topic as I was posting Fuji prepaid E6 processing envelopes to Fuji lab in 2006, the envelopes were serialized twice one serial you removed and retained.

When a second envelope failed to reach the lab I switched to c41 cause there was a 20 minute c41 lab open on Sunday where I was shooting

When I used Kchrome25 this had not occurred but I normally dropped the film into 'box 14' as I passed by.

As to the more general problem of the post office my local post office has moved from 800m to 3km distance which makes insured or registered post less practical.

pdeeh · Oct 26, 2014

I wouldn't worry about making offtopic posts in this thread, it's got posts on almost any topic you care to name somewhere in it already.

Mind you, we haven't yet covered the Post-Modernist critique of 1980s South American magical realism, of course, but I'd guess it's only a matter of time ...

Nzoomed · Oct 26, 2014

railwayman3 said:
Fair enough, but for "Kodak products", you could substitute Ilford, Fuji, Adox, Ferrania, etc. I am sure that they are also all equally hardworking people trying to make a living, who can use our support ?

Yes, Kodak C-41 products are unsurpassed, IMHO. But I'm not a Hollywood producer so MP stocks are irrelevant to me. Ilford B&W films and paper give me everything I need, with all of their ranges easily available, and a fantastic processing and printing service from the factory if I need it (yes, Kodak B&W is equally good, but less choice of film and, of course, B&W papers long discontinued).

I also happen to be an oddball who still enjoys sometimes using transparency film....but no Kodak E6 anymore (and FWIW now, no more Kodachrome!), so I have a choice of Fuji or Fuji, or possibly Ferrania if their plans succeed.

I'm not bashing Kodak, but what Kodak products shall I buy?

I completley agree with you, i dont want to bash Kodak, but at the same time they dont really offer much in the way of films that i want to shoot, I am only occasionally shooting a little portra and ive never touched Ektar.

I hate to say it, but the best thing Kodak did was stop Kodachrome, as all the media attention is what has got me interested in shooting film again, i dont know if im part of a minority, but kodak should have embraced this and sat it through, i think their E6 sales would have increased if not stayed at a stable level, even if it was only lomography shooters who were picking up the sales, it still counts as sales at the end of the day and lomography is ever on the rise. Ive had to stockpile my e100g as have other photographers, but that doesnt help kodak. Kodak dropping E6 is not helping it, not everyone likes fujichrome.

cmacd123 · Oct 26, 2014

RattyMouse said:
PE,
there was news that movie film production for 2014 is down 90% compared to last year.
That's a stunning drop in film production.

Could perhaps that be somewhat related to the striking change in demand for Eastman Color Print 2383?

<http://motion.kodak.com/motion/Products/Distribution_And_Exhibition/2383.htm>

Now that theatres get encrypted hard drives rather 12000 ft film prints.

Xmas · Oct 26, 2014

Photo Engineer said:
Ken, others that wrote similarly;

The 70,000 figure is becoming more statistically important as sales drop for Kodak (and others). And, I assure you that although this isn't a big figure in WW sales, it might mean coating an extra roll of product. That means something.

As for all of the companies being comprised of hard working people, quite true, but Kodak is losing these skilled workers faster than the others are at the present time, and this will hurt when it comes to sustainability in the future.

As for bashing? You say Kodak products are the best? How many comments do we hear about the tone reproduction of a Kodak pro film being inferior to Fuji? How many times do we hear of a Kodak B&W film being inferior to an Ilford product wrt tone scale or some other property? And how many times is that an opinion of one or do we have general agreement and proof?

You say that the EK range of B&W is narrower than that of Ilford, well, if that is so use Ilford for the products that Kodak does not match and use Kodak where there is overlap. But noooo. Most bashers state here that they are converting to Ilford. Good strategy but hard on EK.

I hope you see at least some of my points.

PE

HiRon

Your points are well made, but I buy on price not toe contrast, or dynamic range, or grain.

Sept13 bought 800 feet 5222 cause it was cheapest.
Oct 13 Kodak announce 15% cine price rise for Jan 14

So I need to reconsider and
Trix bulk 100 foot
twice the price of HP5+
three times the price of Kentmere bulk each of the three bulks from same retail outlet.

So I switch to Kentmere bulk hassle of 5222 too difficult margin could be + or -.

So what would you do?

The cine 15% hike was bound to hurt small budget users and reduce cine volume. Digital cine may well have got cheaper year and year on?

Bought two cassettes of trix on Saturday cause never used it in 135 before. Cheap from street market vendor.

In business you need to be cheap and good. Trix should not be twice the price of HP5+? If Ilford offer a cheaper option to HP5+ then some people will buy the Kentmere.

Price is not subjective?

Noel
PS It is good to see you back in the fray, keep well.

Photo Engineer · Oct 26, 2014

Thanks for your kind comment Noel.

Yes, price is a problem. Maybe ALARIS can do something about that to be more competitive. But OTOH, milking a profit making product may be going on and that is bad.

PE

ME Super · Oct 26, 2014

I think most folks here do what works for them. When I returned to shooting film, I wanted E-6, but was price-sensitive. So I went with Fuji's E-6 offerings instead of Kodak's, as they were more in my price range. In the days of my youth, Kodak Ektachrome and Kodachrome was what was available, so that's what I shot.

When it comes to B&W, I tried Kodak's Tri-X back in my 20s, and didn't really like it. A couple years ago I tried Ilford's HP5+ and loved it, so generally when I shoot B&W, I reach for Ilford HP5+. Sorry, Kodak, but HP5+ has a look that's more to my liking. I would have loved to have tried Kodak's HIE, but alas, could not find any place that could develop it near me. When I finally was ready to get into IR again, I did some research on the world wide web, and decided that I liked the results of the Rollei IR400s, so that is what I went with (Kodak at this point no longer made HIE). I've not been disappointed.

On those rare occasions, though, when I want color negative film, I always reach for the Kodak. Their C-41 films are top notch, and worth the higher cost (Fuji is available at the local Wal-Mart, Kodak isn't, I have to hunt for it or mail order). Their Ektar and Portra films are da bomb when it comes to C-41 films.

So for me, it's not about bashing Kodak, it's about picking the film that will do what I want it to do, with a look that I like and at a price that I am willing to pay. If I think it's too expensive, or it transmutates into unobtainium (as the case is now with the Kodak E-6 offerings), well, I pick something else.

Roger Cole · Oct 26, 2014

Skipped ahead on some of this. Kodak has superior C41 products to Fuji, IMHO, and I shoot 100% Kodak when I shoot C41. Fuji is pretty good but AFAIK or can tell has only Pro 400H in 120. I prefer Portra and Ektar, which also gives me some choice in saturation.

Kodak black and white films are second to none in any respect except price, and in rolls that's still close enough to make no difference. Thus I use a fair amount of Tri-X. But Kodak discontinued Plus-X and I changed to FP4+ for medium speed. I just seem to get along better with "semi-traditional" films in smaller formats. Kodak discontinued TMZ so I moved to D3200 because I had to, and that was easy because I already knew and liked the D3200 film from using it in 120, in which TMZ was not available anyway. I have planned to go to Ilford for 4x5 but it has nothing to do with the quality of Kodak film, which is superb and I will miss my TMY-2. But given the price difference between TMY-2 or TXP and HP5+ I think HP5+ will be fine for my needs. I do also shoot some Foma but that's more to play with than any other reason. It's in addition to, not instead of, anything I shoot from Ilford and Kodak. (And that only in the Arista brand because it's so cheap to do so.)

RattyMouse · Oct 26, 2014

Photo Engineer said:
Thanks for your kind comment Noel.

Yes, price is a problem. Maybe ALARIS can do something about that to be more competitive. But OTOH, milking a profit making product may be going on and that is bad.

PE

Absolutely agree with you here PE. One of the major problems Alaris has with their near total silence is that they give the strong perception that they are milking film for all it is worth, refusing to put any money back into this product line in order to insure a long future (the next 100 years).

You have to admit, if Alaris internally declared to themselves that they wanted no part of film long term, there would not be a much different look to them as they appear to us today. They'd simply sell film until the spreadsheets told them to shut it down.

Nzoomed · Oct 27, 2014

All I know is that i want to see all current film types available in the future, e.g C41, E6 and B/W.
Naturally i will support those who are making a point of producing such films, in Ferrania's case, they are starting off with E6 and intend to bring back more films and formats which i feel is even more important, since we pretty much only have 120 and 35mm as the main formats available today, this should be of huge interest to photographers who want to use vintage cameras. Ferrania will get the business if they package the film in such formats.
Anyway as Roger said, Kodak do make very good film and i would agree that their C41 products are the best as are their B/W, but of course this is a personal opinion and im not rubbishing Ilford, their films are good too, its really a matter of what each photographer likes, i will grab kodak film first when i want to shoot C41, but i will be using Fuji and Agfa for E6 until the Ferrania comes off the line.

I hope we can see Kodak and Fuji continue in film for years to come, the question is will they adapt to the market, or just quit completley?
If film ferrania did not come to fruition, i think it would be safe to say that E6 would die completley if Fuji pulled out, but in saying that, i think that Velvia is such a famous film, they would have such serious backlash if they ever dropped it.

I like choice, and I dont necessarily think one brand is the best, its essential to support all manufactures of film and im going to start to shoot more Fuji. Ill always be the most fond of Kodak, but now that they have dropped E6, it changes the landscape dramatically.

May be a good idea if the community could petition Kodak to bring back E6, but will they listen? IDK.
Feel free to hammer their Facebook page, if its full of comments from people wanting E6, it may make them rethink...

Ricardo Miranda · Oct 27, 2014

Roger, here is some Plus-X for you: http://www.filmsnotdead.com/13mntpleasant/#film
The site is run by a lovely young couple.

TheToadMen · Oct 27, 2014

Roger Cole said:
Skipped ahead on some of this. Kodak has superior C41 products to Fuji, IMHO, and I shoot 100% Kodak when I shoot C41. Fuji is pretty good but AFAIK or can tell has only Pro 400H in 120. I prefer Portra and Ektar, which also gives me some choice in saturation.

Hi Roger,
Fuji has more types of 120 roll film, like PRO160NS (very good portrait film) and Superia 400 X-TRA (perfect for pinhole).
See: http://www.macodirect.de/medium-format-films-c-746_748_757.html
Bert from Holland

Film from Italy -- Ferrania starting production 2014

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency