Just replaced all Kodak Chemistry with Ilford

Well, first at Kodak we called it the "Big Yellow Jello". So I can take a joke and do know where you are coming from, but I refer to the tenor of many posts here and the OP which started it.

It is negative to Kodak in the sense that Kodak cannot be all things to all people. They are trying, and I get to hear it from their side in regular meetings where they give the Kodak POV. I was able to quesiton Antonio Perez in person on leaving the paper business and his comment was "we are hemorrhaging out of the B&W paper unit and we have to get out now". The income from B&W paper sales were running below the cost of manufacture even though they were being made in Brazil and China. This was due to a 35% loss in analog sales in 1 quarter.

That is a big loss!

So, Agfa failed and Ilford had financial problems and things are still not rosy anywhere in analog photography. In spite of this, Kodak has an R&D team working on new films for B&W and color. Now, I don't think that is abandoning the customer. But, if enough customers leave Kodak, that leaves Fuji and Ilford.

Oh, BTW, where is a Fuji guy here?

PE

Okay everyone....

step away from the keyboard and go make some photos.

I just got it from making 6 shots and this thread is still going.

GO OUTSIDE!!!!!

sorry if I offended anyone with this post...

Jeffrey--I don't know about anyone else--but I am not offended. You just pointed out your thoughts as did many others, myself included. It is a tuff situation---do you spread your business around or try to put all your eggs in just one or two baskets. I have tried using many many different products and I truly believe that there are no "bad" products out there, just different. I have found that I could tailor my shooting and processes in such a way the Ilford fills 90% of the bill. I still love Dektol and D-76 and like to shoot Efke film.

David b--I just got home from a 7 day road trip shooting---now I got 28 rolls of 120 B&W, 3 rolls 35mm B&W to develope and 11 rolls of color slide to send off mostly 120 but 2 rolls of 35mm. Anyone wanta help

I thought your post was actually quite funny and that is why I posted my OP in this thread.

But I really want to keep us from driving Kodak away and get them to participate here. There is a fine balance.

PE

23mjm said:

David b--I just got home from a 7 day road trip shooting---now I got 28 rolls of 120 B&W, 3 rolls 35mm B&W to develope and 11 rolls of color slide to send off mostly 120 but 2 rolls of 35mm. Anyone wanta help

Click to expand...

I have a Jobo ATL-1500 which does 5 35 at a time (I think 3 120 at a time) and gives very consistent results every time. If you need help, happy to help although I assume you were kidding.

Jeffrey--- Thanks but I am out in Calif----I like to do it the old fashion way nikor steel reals and tanks--can only do 2 rolls of 120 at a time. But that is a job for next weekend---hopefully it will rain so I won't feel so bad about being indoors all day!!!!!!!!

I have for the time being, given up on Ilford. It's not because I don't like them; here in Japan their film is more expensive than Fuji (obviously) and Kodak (surprising.)

Also a few months ago I bought a roll of Delta 400 120. When I opened the foil I found half of the spool top was missing, thus ruining the film before I could even get it into the camera. Not nice, not nice ...

I do use ID-11 though.

When I first got interested in photography some 30 years ago, Kodak was really the only name I knew. Now for some reason (and who knows now?) I took against Kodak and started using Agfa slide film, which would definitely have been cheaper than Kodachrome and would also have been a full iso/asa 100, as opposed to the 25 or 64 on offer from Kodak. Sure, they had that strange Ektachrome stuff that went up to 200, but we newbies wanted our films process paid and Agfa was the choice.

The choice later became Fuji for colour and Ilford for B&W, but to this day I can't recall why I set my mind against Kodak. I was using their colour print film at work and the films were OK, but I guess I just liked Fuji's outlook on the colourful world, whereas Ilford was always a choice for choosing a home-grown quality product. This doesn't mean that other films are in any way inferior, it is just that these are the choices I made and which I more or less follow to this day. In fact I have 4 Tri-X 120 rolls in the fridge just because I feel I should at least try it, but I've also just bought some Pan F as I've never tried that either.

I guess what I'm trying to say here is that it is all well and good to have preferences, but sometimes you have to accept that your preferred candidate is unlike to win, so you give your vote (money) to your next choice if they seem to have a realistic chance of winning/surviving..

I bought a roll of Delta 400 120. When I opened the foil I found half of the spool top was missing, thus ruining the film before I could even get it into the camera.

Click to expand...

Here's the beauty of APUG. Simon from Ilford posts here frequently. PM him regarding your problem. I wouldn't be surprised if he deals with it.

Oiy.

Regards, Art.

Here we go again.

I really think this site needs an Anti-Kodak forum for threads like this. Then the rest of us could just put that forum on Ignore.

Well, of the 37 posts so far, only two posters have said that they have moved away from Kodak because of some sort of feeling of disloyalty, and others have said they use the products they like whether from Kodak or otherwise, so from this end it looks like the "anti-Kodak" sentiment is really not that widespread.

You are right David, as usual. I am speaking though as if I were a Kodak mgr looking at the first page. So, as 'me' I agree with you but changing hats so to speak, I would give this thread a pass as being somewhat anti-Kodak.

But, IDK for sure, maybe they would (should) read it as a lesson in salesmanship.

PE

I remind myself that no matter how much I'd like to feel that Ilford and/or Kodak could or should be warm fuzzy buddies, in the end, they're in business to make a profit. I use Ilford Delta 100 most of the time and Tri-X the rest. I used to always develop in ID11, but with the dollar doing so poorly against the pound, I've switched to D76 with excellent results because it's less expensive. After all, it's my bottom line that counts and that's what matters to me.

David A. Goldfarb said:

Well, of the 37 posts so far, only two posters have said that they have moved away from Kodak because of some sort of feeling of disloyalty, and others have said they use the products they like whether from Kodak or otherwise, so from this end it looks like the "anti-Kodak" sentiment is really not that widespread.

Click to expand...

David,

I'm glad to learn of this.

But perhaps it's the whole premise of the OP - and that the thread now sits here inviting a rant. And it has already invited at least one "vote for your favorite manufacturer" post.

I could understand switching one's chemicals from Manufacturer A to Manufacturer B on the basis of personal artistic preference. Or because of a perceived, albeit unverifiable, sense of superiority etc. But to base it upon the OP's "sense" of the manufacturer's "commitment to film photography" is why I would "ring-fence" such a thread as this as an "Anti-Kodak" one. And thus, if such a forum existed, put it in such a place.

I don't know anything more than what he's said here, but I am given to understand that Art is trying to get a Kodak rep to visit this site.

Why would anyone from Kodak do so now?

One poster above talked about "votes" for your favorite - and which company "loses". This isn't some kind of high school Student Council type of popularity contest!

This site should to be open and inviting to all film photography manufacturers - and negativity to one, any or every should be discouraged because it is counter-productive to the preservation of traditional photography - our primary goal.

I'm not suggesting that threads like this should not be posted. And would never ask for such to be "closed". But they should be "ring-fenced" and available on an "if you want it" basis.

To my way of thinking, the OP's argument is unhelpful to what we are hoping to preserve.

The bottom line I ask here again is "Where is Fuji"? They keep getting KUDOS here, but cancel products quietly and never speak up directly.

Think about that!

PE

The APUG anti Kodak thing is totally overblown. Six people hate them, and post as such. The other thousands don't give a gnats @ss about what those six think. I think the vast majority of us use what is available, that works, what we are comfortable with. I'm fooling around with hc110, because it is locally available, cost effective, especially without shipping, has a great lineage, and keeps well. If I can get it to work with my process, that's what I'll probably use. I'm also benchmarking my pyro stuff, by having a go with the 110. A pyro reality check, so to speak.

Kodak does things that I don't understand, but I'm not going to subvert my process, and spite myself.

Kodak's presence would be welcomed here. I have seen Simon have to answer some hard questions, and he does, simply, and factually. Some actual guerilla level PR on Kodaks part would go along way to shutting up the anti Kodak thing spouted by a vocal minority.

As to Jeffrey's OP, he has been a courteous and thoughtful participant here for quite a while, and I don't think his OP was intended to be a troll of any sort. I believe he made an honest decision, and gave voice to his sentiment. Far from discouraging big yellow, a thread like this shows the need to communicate. A thoughtful response from a Kodak rep would be the most appropriate, intelligent, and correct action the company could take.

Photo Engineer said:

The bottom line I ask here again is "Where is Fuji"? They keep getting KUDOS here, but cancel products quietly and never speak up directly.

Think about that!

PE

Click to expand...

That's it! I am not going to use Fuji chemistry [chemical] anymore because they never post here!

Steve

a friend who loves Fuji film named his dog Fuji


the dog died

I use products that meet my needs, balanced with the pocketbook in mind. I don't understand why people hate Kodak. I can appreciate the fact that some of us feel their commitment isn't there but the fact is they have contributed significantly to film photography for generations. I use many of their products and will continue to do so. Ilford, Fuji and other companies have their place and I will patronize them as well. We need to consider that a healthy mix of vendors will give film photography life.

Thank you Kodak for your products.

JBrunner said:

I will use whatever fits the bill. I don't make my purchases based on vengeance, or emotion, or whatever. I make my photographic product decisions based on availability, cost, and effectiveness. Ilford makes great products, and I use many of them, that said, Kodak's remaining product line is probably the best quality in the world.

Click to expand...

Exactly. It is only rational to base one's purchases upon quality, cost and availability.

Switching from D-76, HC-110 or X-tol to ID-11, HC or DD-x because Kodak stopped producing B&W printing paper is...well, irrational in the extreme.

Photo Engineer said:

The bottom line I ask here again is "Where is Fuji"? They keep getting KUDOS here, but cancel products quietly and never speak up directly.

Think about that!

PE

Click to expand...

So what? Fuji get KUDOS because they offer quality products at a competitive prices just like kodak and Ilford.

Well done Brad. Where is a thread that questions any Fuji policy then?

PE

Photo Engineer said:

Where is a thread that questions any Fuji policy then?

PE

Click to expand...

If we start slamming Fuji as well, I motion that we refer to them as "The Big Green Mother".