• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Kodak Alaris Promoting Film

I think the main problem won't be film availability as much as the labs to process them. Labs are shutting down every year and its getting smaller and smaller. Sure you can develop B&W and E-6 at home, but not everyone can do that. My options for developing have come down to mailing it out now, as no local options to send out anymore are there. As motion picture labs shut down as well, movies using film will get smaller too.
 

So what? I order my film online, I send out my E6 and C41. I have a Jobo so I COULD do those but it's not worth it to me. Totally fine with me.
 

I strongly disagree. Portra 400 is a remarkable, terrific film in my view. Its ability to retain highlights is amazing. I've used hundreds of rolls of Portra 400 over the past several years and am thankful for it. It's what virtually all of my work is made with.
 
Xmas said:
I have the appreciation you have not understood marketing,
Click to expand...

You are right. I dont understand marketing. I was only commenting that Kodak has a strong color C-41 portfolio over other manufacturers. When I go on-line to buy film, Kodak has the most choices for C-41.
 
Hatchetman said:
Do they do any marketing that isn't free?
Click to expand...

Marketing on Facebook isn't free. The page might be, but all the ancillary services to promote it are not.
 
It's ironic that Kodak discontinued slide film just when they had reached the peak of their own E6 quality with E100G. But they had to decide which arm to amputate to cut overhead. Now their color neg film selection is simply the best ever, anywhere. So I hope that is enough to keep momentum going awhile. But common folk more and more share images digitally from the get go, and don't even bother with prints, and really aren't very concerned about quality either. George Eastman must be rolling over in his grave.
 
fotch said:
You get what you pay for. In the long run, the best cost less. JMHO
Click to expand...

You are correct with Kodak C41 or Kodak bulk mono I don't buy any so the cost is zero.
The Uni students cause me a problem they empty my shop of Fomapan film cause it is the cheapest.
Kodak are training the student's to use Foma film.

So I'm not the only one who does not buy Kodak film.
 
If Kodak wants to be competitive, then they should lower their prices. I stopped buying TMY-2 8x10 because it is priced out of this world. They just don't get it.
 
Depends what you need. TMY 8x10 can often do things with one piece of film that required two or more sheets before. Take a so-so EU 8x10 film: about every other sheet had scratches or zits, so I didn't save a penny going that way. Or let's take something high-quality like HP5 in a high-contrast situation: I'd need an attached sheet of 8x10 FP4 acting as a contrast mask to get the same tonality in the same contrast range, so didn't save money that way either. A typical summer day here in the redwoods and our natural fog softbox conditions in the morning might change to twelve stops of range in direct sun an hour later, or a few hundred feet higher in elevation. Just how many filmholders can I carry to begin with? So damned if you do, damned if you don't. Can it get worse? Sure; I also shoot color 8x10! But I'm at least glad I bought a bunch of Kodak sheet film when it was about a third the current price and put it in the freezer! And I do shoot Ilford
products too, when the situation is compatible. FP4 is nice, but it's often too windy here for slower speed films in the 8x10. When I just can't afford 8x10 either way, I shoot 4x5.
 
Also realize part of its our Arizona light conditions...
 
Try Ektar. But first learn the importance of correcting it for gross Kelvin color temperature issues typical of shadowed scenes under blue skies. Analogous to chromes in this respect.
 
Have tried Kodak Tri-X. Not my cup of tea. I know, everybody says HP5+ and Tri-X are almost the same, but to my eyes they are not. HP5+ is the better film IMHO. When it comes to B&W Infrared, I like the Rollei IR400S. For color negative, 95% of the time it's Kodak. Their color negative is very very good. But none of these are what I mostly shoot. My favorite film type that's currently produced is color reversal, aka slide film. As of right now, Fuji's the only game in town, with Ferrania reportedly starting production this year. Ferrania's trying to do what Kodak has had a very hard time doing - building a factory that's the right size for today's and tomorrow's film market. I wish Ferrania the best of luck, unfortunately I can't help them with my film purchases at the moment since there's nothing to buy yet.

Go Ferrania, Ilford, Fuji, and Kodak!
 

Nah, it's right up ol' George's line. You push the button... convenience was the selling point, not quality. It always has been in mass consumer "photography" at least until it got so crappy (110 and disc) that even most of them didn't like it. But if it looks even a bit like the subject most people are happy. Quality, whether in image quality, audio quality, build quality and durability, any area really, has always been an appeal to a minority compared to cost and convenience.
 
Disc cameras live on! ...well, at least parts of them got reincarnated. Edmund Scientific bought the jillions of little electric leftover motors to sell off for micro toy and gadget projects. My mother used a box Brownie most of her life and never once took a picture that was held level.
She'd take her eye off the camera, ask the family to smile, and then tweak the Brownie a bit sideways when she punched the shutter. George
Eastman didn't die happy; but it would be bad taste to elaborate.
 
Well no, he comitted suicide but it was apparently related to chronic pain from some kind of spinal condition. I doubt it was distress over the quality of photography.
 
peter k. said:
Also realize part of its our Arizona light conditions...
Click to expand...

For some this is an incredible statement, our cloud cover is 100% for long intervals, so that sunny side /16 is battle ship grey /4 to lighter grey /5.6. We have whole picture in zone 1 to 3.
We can use PET film with no bloom risks.
Yesterday storm force winds refuse bin had managed to get 1/3 of way down street, it is not built like tumble weed.
Today a real exception /10-11 in 'bright sun', but may be tropical rain in an hour again.
 
Photo Engineer said:
"My work is done, why wait?"

That was his note.

PE
Click to expand...

Thanks Ron.

Jump cut to Somme down land 1915, Ge (obs) officer and (comms) NCO in deep bunker forward of own trenches, playing chess, as Tommie's heavies and mediums, have a hate (bombardment).
One notices that the bombardment stops, so they both run up several stair cases to the surface (some 50 foot above) and their Obs post concealed slit.
The officer looks trough the smoke shell mist with his trench binoculars and requests his NCO to call down an artillery barrage on the heavily laden Tommies advancing through the churned up mud, barbed wire and lifting mist.
As he waits for the Morse code keying to be completed he says in disbelief the immortal words.
'... they have even brought their Kodaks.' ie 'Mein Gott ...'
It was a miss-identification they were power buzzers for communication.

Eastman had got a word into English and German...
 
Not Alaris, but the movie guys are on a real Kick to promote film. (for movies). They have a current Twitter tag of #FilmWorthy. and if you go to http://www.kodak.com/go/motion the landig page is mostly about that promotion, BUT the graphics also have a stylized version of the old "giant K' Logo that Kodak dropped a few years back.

.
 

Attachments

  • filmworthy_home-top.jpg
    42.2 KB · Views: 157
I would think that KEH's website would be a great place to advertise Kodak film.

Or the websites lf any of the survjving labs.

There are alternatives.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register