Kodak Alaris

[removed account4]

hope it works out for them !
i have a feeling papers won't be back anytime soon
seeing K ditched their paper concerns 10 years ago ..
even if it was only tri x they made in a handful of sizes,
that would be nice .. but 200$ a box of 4x5 sheets is a little
too rich for my blood, even if it is xxx ...

 

[Hatchetman]

In reference to the above post, Kodak's B&W film pricing is way out of line IMO. Is Kodak film 30% better than Ilford? I can't see how.

 

[DREW WILEY]

Some of you seem to be unaware that inflation is a fact of life if someone is going to stay in business. Constant film wars, with broad lines of
redundant products, kept popular film pricing artificially low at one time. All kinds of raw materials have gone up since then, and eventually
manufacturers have to retool and modernize their equipment. Those manufacturers who didn't have that kind of profit reserve are now gone,
and we lost a lot of good films and papers. Do I like spending $150 for ten sheets of 8x10 color film, plus the cost of processing. No. But I'd
rather take one good shot with an ideal film for my purposes than twenty so-so ones. When funds run low, I switch to 4x5, or simply shoot
black and white more often, or maybe film a deal on film pricing somewhere. Just how many damn shots do you need anyway. I figure I have
time only to print a small percentage of what I take. Kodak films are absolutely top-notch, and so are Ilford's. But I have little patience for
whiners.

 

[Hatchetman]

Not sure if you are referring to me, but I'm not whining. Tri-X 4x5 is $172 for 100 or HP5 is $115. You do the math.

 

[DREW WILEY]

I pick the film best suited to the application and output media. All these films have different specific personalities. Paying a little more up front is still a lot more cost effective than wasting several more sheets of paper, or getting compromised results, when one gets down to actually printing it. You do the math.

 

[Hatchetman]

I waste a lot of paper when printing whatever the film so it doesn't really matter to me. LOL.

I just don't see a lot of close substitutes in any marketplace being able to charge a 50% premium. Hopefully Kodak thrives with their strategy.

 

[removed account4]

...

 

[MattKing]

In reference to the above post, Kodak's B&W film pricing is way out of line IMO. Is Kodak film 30% better than Ilford? I can't see how.

I wonder how the prices compare in the UK where, strangely enough, some Ilford product appears to be more expensive than the same Ilford product is in the USA.

The photographic distribution system is in a fractured state - particularly with respect to product from the two big "colour" film producers. IMHO, the largest benefit we might see from Kodak Alaris, if they are successful, would be an improvement to Kodak distribution.

 

[hdeyong]

I live in France and Canada, and use Tri-X and FP4. I can buy Tri-X, made outside the EU, in New York, across the Atlantic, as cheap or cheaper here in France than in North America.
FP4, made within the EU, in England, 400 miles away, is much cheaper in New York than here in France.
Positively weird.
So, I buy my Tri-X here in France as I need it, and I get enough FP4 from Adorama to last me 'till I'll be back in North America the next time.

 

[Brac]

Prices are affected by taxes. In the UK "Value Added Tax" at 20% is added to give the final price the consumer pays.

 

[Pat Erson]

VAT is 20% in France too...

 

[Laurent]

I live in France and Canada, and use Tri-X and FP4. I can buy Tri-X, made outside the EU, in New York, across the Atlantic, as cheap or cheaper here in France than in North America.
FP4, made within the EU, in England, 400 miles away, is much cheaper in New York than here in France.
Positively weird.
So, I buy my Tri-X here in France as I need it, and I get enough FP4 from Adorama to last me 'till I'll be back in North America the next time.

This is surprising... at least for sheet film, I bought as much as I could in the USA, because it was soooooo cheap compared to France!

 

[GarageBoy]

In reference to the above post, Kodak's B&W film pricing is way out of line IMO. Is Kodak film 30% better than Ilford? I can't see how.

Better than the pricing Fuji adopted
$6.50 for Acros 135?

 

[braxus]

Gee and I was hoping for a possible return of Plus X and Panatomic X. I guess I can keep dreaming for now.

 

[pentaxuser]

I wonder how the prices compare in the UK where, strangely enough, some Ilford product appears to be more expensive than the same Ilford product is in the USA.

Wow I wonder how this can happen???. I think we have been here before. Another poster buying Ilford and Kodak in France seems to have the same puzzle to solve as well

There is no puzzle really.

pentaxuser

 

[visualbassist]

same in hungary, kodak is considerably cheaper