Dan is Dan Bayer, who posts here as PKM-25. If you click on the Kodachrome Project link in his signature block, you'll be taken to some of his work. Note the copyright notice at the Kodachrome Project pages' bottom.Who's Dan?...
Dan is apparently just as weary of the wasteful, negative Kodak speculation in forum threads/posts as I am. His approach, despite a realistic appreciation of how unlikely it is that Kodak's film division will survive, seems to be an attempt to engender positive results by promoting Kodak products. While wishing him all success in that endeavor (after all, someone does occasionally beat the odds and win a Mega Millions jackpot), I don't hold out much hope. It just seems more productive to take a probabilistic approach and support Ilford....If you mean the poster I was replying to, his post is doubly puzzling in that case because the rest of the post sounded optimistic. That's why I was so confused about it...
Thanks Ken. I was trying to be generic so that those in Europe would see the items at Fotoimpex.
PE
Yet another instance of someone knowing the price of all things but the value of none.Wow, I wish I could flip through your book. That's a lot of money...
Yet another instance of someone knowing the price of all things but the value of none.
OK, time for more posts about how expensive film and paper are. :munch:
Wow, I wish I could flip through your book. That's a lot of money...
Yet another instance of someone knowing the price of all things but the value of none.
OK, time for more posts about how expensive film and paper are. :munch:
I understand completely. Your approach leads to two things. First, when practiced in retail book stores, it results in dog-eared books that nobody purchases; a loss to the merchant, distributor, publisher and author. Second, it assigns a monetary value of zero to Ron's labors. He spent years writing the book and preparing the CD. Your willingness to pay nothing for it indicates it (and his knowledge/effort) has no value.Uh...if I KNOW that I'm not going to use the information contained in the book to make my own films,etc, the value is pretty much known to me. Perhaps it is you who do not understand.
There's no need to make excuses for me. I always arise on the same side of my bed and never consume coffee. I posted in reaction not only to the quote included, but also in frustration with many, many others who have over the years complained bitterly with every Kodak price increase announcement. Thus the second sentence of my post.Sal may have just gotten up on the wrong side of the bed...or maybe he was posting before his morning coffee...
I understand completely. Your approach leads to two things. First, when practiced in retail book stores, it results in dog-eared books that nobody purchases; a loss to the merchant, distributor, publisher and author. Second, it assigns a monetary value of zero to Ron's labors. He spent years writing the book and preparing the CD. Your willingness to pay nothing for it indicates it (and his knowledge/effort) has no value.
There's no need to make excuses for me. I always arise on the same side of my bed and never consume coffee. I posted in reaction not only to the quote included, but also in frustration with many, many others who have over the years complained bitterly with every Kodak price increase announcement. Thus the second sentence of my post.
Reality sucks. Kodak has a large, high-volume film coating line it transitioned to in the 1990s. That line requires coating huge quantities of material to be profitable. With mass markets having moved to digital, the expense Kodak's coating approach must be amortized over ever lower sales, especially when spoilage in storage results. Can those posting on this and similar forums who sing the praises of Kodak products grasp how that must necessarily result in higher unit prices? Do they understand the value of Kodak film quality? No. Instead, they continuously complain about the price. Perhaps now you'll understand what I wrote.
Yeah. Now I remember why I have Sal on ignore at the LFPF. It's a little harder here, but it is possible.
I don't devalue Ron's work when I choose to spend my money on books about stuff I will actually use. I'm sure it's awesome if I were going to make my own film. I can't see myself doing that unless commercial film goes away completely so... none of us have unlimited money. We have to spend it where it will do us the most good. This has NOTHING to do with the amount or quality of work someone put in to creating it.
No offense Ron. I'm sure it's excellent. But I'm not going to be coating my own anytime soon (I hope, anyway, not as long as Ilford is around at least.)
and never consume coffee.
Nothing you wrote needed explaining. You have taken my observations and, instead of considering the possibility that they are valid, decided to attack the observer....I don't dog ear books when I read them in the book store....I have never once complained about the cost of film so you introducing this into your rant is again, nonsensical...It is shocking that something as basic as this needs explaining.
Wow...
Brian, why the recurring need to perform a Steve Jobs deathbed impression?Wow...
Gee Roger, that's the first time anyone has posted they've done so. I find it quite amusing since, unlike some members, my practice has been to avoid wordy, repetitive comments, mistaking a forum for a chat room or stating opinions as fact.Yeah. Now I remember why I have Sal on ignore at the LFPF...
The market environment we live in sets a thing's value at what someone is willing to pay for it. That you can't afford it is not the crux. Rather, that you "wish you could flip through it" without buying it is. You've valued it at $0. I made no assumption -- it's an observation. An uncomfortable one, perhaps, but valid....A book like PE's has ever right to cost what it does, because the appeal is very limited and so sales will not be high.
Just because I cant afford a $120 book does NOT mean that I dont value it. Such an assumption is pure nonsense.
Kodak had plants in: ...
All the business factors almost certainly preclude Kodak's film division
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?