Damn, I knew I’d make a mistake somewhere!Errrm.
A bit of advice. The plural is not apostrophised, to wit:
"Chevys suck". "Mopars rule".
The posessive gets the dangler though: "Mopar's big block engines were about the toughest". "Chevy's 283 was my favorit small block".
Oh, and listen to John Bonham.
Now a few Old School drummers: how about Louie Bellson, Gene Krupa, Joe Morello?Damn, I knew I’d make a mistake somewhere!
Also, I love John Bonham! The first time I heard Bonzo’s Montreax off of Coda, I was amazed. His and Buddy’s playing styles are both which I incorporate into my own playing. Him, Ringo, and Buddy were the people who inspired me to get my first Ludwig kit. It’s one of their new Club Date series kits that replicates the sound of drums from the ‘40s and ‘50s. It sounds incredible! Super thick and warm sounding, and it sounds way bigger than it is. I would’ve gone for a big set like Bonham, but trying to lug a 26” kick down a staircase every time I play a gig isn’t gonna work. So I ended up going with a classic smaller jazz configuration, which is the same size as Ringo’s Oyster Black Pearl Ed Sullivan kit. Realizing this, I decided to get them in Black Oyster as a Ringo tribute. The Club Dates that they reintroduced now are just like the original Club Dates from the ‘50s, with the single lug in the center of the drum. I’ve got some pictures I took that I’ll attach, taken on Tri-X of course!
WHEN... how about after they show some new Ektachrome. First things, first.
Now a few Old School drummers: how about Louie Bellson, Gene Krupa, Joe Morello?
It doesn't matter what they thought. What matters is what they found.
Of course the letter would be ridiculous. It is sarcasm. You would not convince Kodak of anything, just like you are not going to convince anyone here of a Kodachrome revival because your ideas are baseless. Therefore, continuing to post here about it is just as ridiculous. So what is the point?
What I find ridiculous is your insistence to claim you have more evidence on what the future market will be than I have. By definition the future is unknown from both of us. No matter how many times you state my arguments are stupid, it doesn't make any of yours more legitimate about the future.
What I find ridiculous is your insistence to claim you have more evidence on what the future market will be than I have. By definition the future is unknown from both of us. No matter how many times you state my arguments are stupid, it doesn't make any of yours more legitimate about the future.
Again and always Ron, your participation here is priceless. Although I guess it's a bit like a professor overwhelmed of kindergarten kids who all jump and run around screaming "kodachrome!".Flavio, I am a poor second or third to those who really know the product(s) in question. In fact, I am not in contention.
PE
APUG's Godwin law is based on Kodachrome instead. The probability of discussing "Kodachrome" approaches 1 as any thread becomes longer. The equation hasn't been modeled yet but bear in mind there's a multiplier whenever color reversal and/or Kodak is amongst the topics.Have we hit "Godwin's Law" yet in this thread?
The future is not entirely unknowable. In fact, most of it is predictable. Else you wouldn't be able to get out of bed, fix your coffee, and get off to work in the morning. A Kodachrome revival is not impossible, just highly unlikely. You yourself admitted as much a few posts back, so I don't know why you are continuing to beat the issue to death.What I find ridiculous is your insistence to claim you have more evidence on what the future market will be than I have. By definition the future is unknown from both of us. No matter how many times you state my arguments are stupid, it doesn't make any of yours more legitimate about the future.
The future is not entirely unknowable. In fact, most of it is predictable. Else you wouldn't be able to get out of bed, fix your coffee, and get off to work in the morning. A Kodachrome revival is not impossible, just highly unlikely. You yourself admitted as much a few posts back, so I don't know why you are continuing to beat the issue to death.
Since when the majority is always right? Yes I already addressed your wrong claims about my arguments many times (read post #696 again, carefully this time).That issue has already been addressed. Please go back and re-read this thread. I am not going to re-hash it all again. The answers are there if you use some reasoning. That is your problem. You can't reason it out. I am with the majority here in that, you are in the vast minority.
Kodak is in deep financial trouble. They have a payment due next year in excess of 300 million dollars. They do not have this money. Currently Kodak's bond rating is junk status. They cannot borrow more except at exorbitant interest rates.
What makes you think Kodak has the financial strength to resurrect a product so complex and capital intensive as Kodachrome?
What possible reason do you think that Kodak would be successful doing this instead of being financially destroyed?
Because some people continue to beat their agenda against any potential reintroduction of Kodachrome to death. Ignoring simple logic and refusing to consider any out of the box reflexion.The future is not entirely unknowable. In fact, most of it is predictable. Else you wouldn't be able to get out of bed, fix your coffee, and get off to work in the morning. A Kodachrome revival is not impossible, just highly unlikely. You yourself admitted as much a few posts back, so I don't know why you are continuing to beat the issue to death.
Since when the majority is always right? Yes I already addressed your wrong claims about my arguments many times (read post #696 again, carefully this time).
I never implied Kodak needs to reintroduce Kodachrome right now. So Kodak's bond rating is junk these days, you mean as bad as Apple's bond was a few years ago? What happened then? Apple decided that based on the poor bond rating they couldn't afford R&D on some new products like the iPod and the iPhone?
Because some people continue to beat their agenda against any potential reintroduction of Kodachrome to death. Ignoring simple logic and refusing to consider any out of the box reflexion.
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?