Your logic is very convoluted. My wife's remark was an outsiders "general public".reaction to the long delays by Ferrania. Its the outsiders buying, or otherwise,of Ferrania products which will make or break the company, not the relatively few who spend their time making "proper assessments" of "the actual situation". The outsiders buying can only depend on their impressions of Ferrania's behaviour. Else, why not just buy Ilford, Kodak, Fuji, Adox, etc., which they see as OK. Even buying Lomo, you know what you're getting, if that's what you want.
If I buy custard at the grocers, I don't spend time "making proper assessments of the actual situation" of the manufacturer. I buy on the known quality of the brand, whether it's readily available when I need it, and at a fair price....and, yes, rightly or wrongly, perhaps advertising and attractive packaging helps. And I want a reliable product, I don't want to pay to be the tester of something which may have faults.
Ferrania is a start up. A far different set of expectations should be used for a company that is building itself from one which is fully operating and has been for years. Ferrania's behavior has been exemplary. They have been more communicative to us than almost any other kickstarter I have followed. They have had to overcome numerous *unexpected* problems re-starting their factory than one could ever imagine. I am *amazed* at what they have accomplished.
Uninformed people are free to make their own opinions. They can do this without any facts or information. It happens all the time. The most recent election confirms this.
common sense?Given your substantially inadequate answer, her misunderstanding is understandable.
How can you expect someone who is uninformed of the actual situation to make a proper assessment of the situation?
common sense?
I think it's mostly about the way negatives worked with the analog print processors that were dominant up into the 90's. Once all the consumer labs went to digital, there was no practical disadvantage to using positive film for making prints. The workflow is identical. The colors are corrected the same way. I don't remember what film prices were like in the 90's so I might be off base here, but it was probably primarily the difference in price for E-6 film and processing that prevented it from becoming dominant once digital printing became the norm. By the time the analog minilabs were all phased out, digital photography was already starting to threaten the film market, and another revolution in the industry just wasn't in the cards. Had there been another generation of development at the industry's peak, I do think positive film would have become the dominant medium.
Not that it matters much to the discussion of time-lines, and perhaps I'm being a bit pedantic, but wasn't film production already committed to, and the Kickstarter was to support purchasing equipment that was earmarked for the scrap heap? Wasn't color slide film the reward, but not the direct purpose, of the Kickstarter?
Thanx. I wanted to point-out/confirm that, as I think some of the comments have missed that point.The reward batch, which was originally to be made using the last of the 3M-era chemicals, was not the direct purpose but a present for Kickstarter Backers. Had there been no delays, there would have been a window of opportunity to produce these films before the work began on formulating new emulsions. However that didn't bank on the Italian government building a new highway through the power and gas supply lines to the LRF or the asbestos in the building.
The main aim has always been, and as far as I can tell remains, to make a new line of E6 colour reversal films in 120, 135, super 8 and 16mm.
The kickstarter funds were to rescue the equipment, secure a lease on the LRF, get a small team of capable staff together, and prepare the LRF for production of new film.
As far as I know, they're on track to achieve all that.
Thanx. I wanted to point-out/confirm that, as I think some of the comments have missed that point.
I'm not worried, as I am confident they will produce the film/rewards. I consider the P30 as a pleasant surprise, and I thought it would take longer to come up with something other than the chromes.
I should have guessed (but didn't think about it) that it is likely cheaper to test with B&W until everything is working. There still has to be testing of color coating, but a lot can be done, and money saved, by testing certain things first with B&W.
EK would improve Kodacolor products in the later fifties, but still did not spool Kodacolor onto 135 until 1958.
Note that at this time, most family pictures were still black-and-white prints. Kodak started doing extensive promotional work on Kodacolor, seeing that mothers love handing out prints of their growing kids, and knowing that color negative technology did have practical advantages (exposure latitude, color balance correction in printing, enlargement to any reasonable chosen size, etc.)
1963 was the year that the lid was blown off the pot. Kodak introduced a faster Kodacolor (Kodacolor-X, ASA 64) and a new line of cameras and film cartridges (Instamatic/126) that together worked well with less light than older Kodacolor products. This came the same year that Polaroid introduced its first instant color print film. In very little time, color pictures were the norm and monochrome was seen as an "art".
I counter that it is not common sense to say "I know nothing about this but despite input from the people doing the work and from experts I am going to scream".
That's not common sense. Decency prevents me from saying what I think it is.
I grew up in the 50s and 60s and this is this is pretty much they way I remember it.
And when the availability of slide and CN film became on equal footing, projecting slides still had fair popularity but CN film and prints became dominant.
Was widespread printing from slide film available at that time? Was it more expensive than printing from color negatives? I never worked myself on the analog color printers, so I don't remember what our process was or whether we even offered prints from slides before digital printers came on the scene. I do remember a stand for making negatives and positive duplicates from slides. Did labs have to copy the slides onto negative film to make color prints from them?
So when will P30 start shipping?
I disagree. History is the proof. Negatives have always been the medium of choice for the consumer over slides. Few project today, so negatives are even more favorable. The consumer has no other real use for slides, since both can be scanned with good quality. The better quality of prints from negatives, lower cost, and ease of processing and printing is the icing on the cake.
Negatives have their place, and I think slide film can live a new youth especially in the home-developing, home-scanning community, basically people like myself.
There was a bit of excessive "enthusiasm" in communicating the reaching of certain "milestones", but what is important to me is that the milestones are reached, not that the relative deadlines are met. I agree with the criticism about that, and I would agree in suggesting all future "deadlines" to be outlined with more caution, but the overall picture, to me, is extremely encouraging, and it deserves the loudest praises.
It was my favorite thing. I can still remember the smell of the screen and the Argus/Airequipt ?? projector that would jam. I transferred all my Dad's slides into Carousels when the slide tray purge hit about 10 years ago. My Dad didn't waste a shot not when he was paying a silver dime a piece for a 25B press bulb (remember the crackle of the blue plastic film as it melted onto the bulb?) By the late 70's he had a Beseler Topcon Auto 100, My sister and I were grown up and he just banged away like everybody did.I remember suffering through family slide shows as a kid. I think I'm still scarred by the experience!
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?