Kodak Gold vs Colorplus

[BrianShaw]

I know what he meant Brian. Can't a guy have a little fun sometimes?

Sorry. I thought you may have known. I must have been in a “ too literal” mood at that moment.

 

[Agulliver]

@trendland you didn't just suggest that Foma Retro 320 might be based on Fomapan 800....you stated that Foma were lying about it's provenance and that Retro Pan 320 was old, chilled, outdated Fomapan 800 repurposed.

I have difficulty taking your doubts about Colorplus and Gold 200 seriously when you have a prior track record of making assumptions and passing them on as confirmed facts.

I am happy to trust PE.....mischevious as he sometimes can be

 

[trendland]

@trendland you didn't just suggest that Foma Retro 320 might be based on Fomapan 800....you stated that Foma were lying about it's provenance and that Retro Pan 320 was old, chilled, outdated Fomapan 800 repurposed.

I have difficulty taking your doubts about Colorplus and Gold 200 seriously when you have a prior track record of making assumptions and passing them on as confirmed facts.

I am happy to trust PE.....mischevious as he sometimes can be

Aguliver that's not quite correct. Just from remind : I stated that Foma Retropan 320 isn't a so callled " New Film " - so Foma find a new name with "Retropan 320" what is indeed no absolut serious behavior of Foma.
I can't remember such issues from the past. But beginning with Agfa Films (Just remember Agfa CT 100 Precisa with Fuji E6 inside the box) this changed.
BTW : With Fuji inside Agfa Precisa Box you got an advantage because of the better Fuji Film.
The same issue is to many bw films with different origin (Agfa bw inside).
Looking to "Lomo Films" - we all know that Lomo is such a kind of modern brand - so nowbody is wondering about.
The same is to classic rebranding companies like "Freestyle" I can see no problem from this.

But with that film Foma break a "rule" as an original film manufacturer. They decided to "modern marketing" with that film.
You may easily see this from the name they gave it : "Retropan" how "trendy" seems this?

And what I would have liked from Foma : The short information (with the introduction of Retropan 320) that this Film is "based" on FomaT800.
There have been a chance to state : "We are proudly presenting.....and we reformulated ....
some of you have it in mind as T800 .....it was a good film....a.s.o."

BTW "T" did not stand for "Thungsten" because it was in concern of T grain!
But from Fomas origion conception as smart T grain film against Kodak Tmax and Ilford Delta films
Foma has had no real chance caused from insuficient characteristics.
After more than a decade they decided to name it "Retro" - OK nice idea, but what makes a T grain film to a Retro film ? Its characteristics ?......? And what Retro should mean is a very special issue.
If I remember correct I was asked from what interest the origion is - and my answer was : "
If this film isn't from todays production it may be a short run (possible from old masterrols)"
Something in this concern was my motive to look at this film indeed.
So I doubt a bit Agulliver that it "could be".
Meanwhile - after introduction of Retropan 320 in 120 there is a very strong evidence that Foma is producing this film actually. Is it avaible in 4x5 inch AND 5x7 BTW?

with regards

PS : I may read this old thread again to find my formulation about " old, chilled, outdated " I can't
remember jet!
But at last : Why did you guys belive everything what a manufacturer stated. They are never lying
but between the "holy true" and commercial advertising is a real deep gorge. !

 

[BrianShaw]

“But at last : Why did you guys belive everything what a manufacturer stated. They are never lying
but between the "holy true" and commercial advertising is a real deep gorge. !”

If you are referring to what EK or KA has said about ColorPlus... please recall that they have said nothing at all. So all speculation might be fair game. The “deep gorge” is indeed very, very deep.

 

[Agulliver]

Fomapan T800 was one of Foma's attempts at a T-grain film. I know this because I used it. I quite liked it....though it performed very differently to RetroPan 320. T800 was quite contrasty and certainly grainy but responded well to pushing and pulling. It had a place in my box of tricks because it was useful in the darker months where I prefer not to push HP5+ or to use D3200 or P3200. It was great for shooting indoors too. Retropan 320 is anything but contrasty. It's soft too, whereas T800 was quite sharp. Processing times are different.

I don't know how much different the actual formulae and manufacturing might be for these two films...maybe it's a couple of simple changes and maybe they are very different. But they are different.

Did Foma ever state that Retropan 320 was based on T800? I find nothing on their website to this effect and a quick Google search only bring sup two rumours - one your own. I've used both. And while I view statements from manufacturers with a little scepticism (especially where describing the virtues of their products over the opposition) I am aware that in Europe at least they are not permitted to lie by law. If Foma says it's a new film, then it's a new film. That doesn't have to mean they invented something wholly new from scratch but that it's not simply a rebadging of something they already were making. If RetroPan 320 were the same as T800 don't you think they'd offer T800 as well....just putting it in different labelled cassettes?

What I got from your previous posts was that you believed Retropan 320 was cut from T800 master rolls which were old. That is, old chilled/frozen T800.

But this is getting way off topic. I've got my latest rolls of Color Plus to send off for processing. And I am confident that what's inside those cassettes is not Gold 200.

 

[trendland]

Fomapan T800 was one of Foma's attempts at a T-grain film. I know this because I used it. I quite liked it....though it performed very differently to RetroPan 320. T800 was quite contrasty and certainly grainy but responded well to pushing and pulling. It had a place in my box of tricks because it was useful in the darker months where I prefer not to push HP5+ or to use D3200 or P3200. It was great for shooting indoors too. Retropan 320 is anything but contrasty. It's soft too, whereas T800 was quite sharp. Processing times are different.

I don't know how much different the actual formulae and manufacturing might be for these two films...maybe it's a couple of simple changes and maybe they are very different. But they are different.

Did Foma ever state that Retropan 320 was based on T800? I find nothing on their website to this effect and a quick Google search only bring sup two rumours - one your own. I've used both. And while I view statements from manufacturers with a little scepticism (especially where describing the virtues of their products over the opposition) I am aware that in Europe at least they are not permitted to lie by law. If Foma says it's a new film, then it's a new film. That doesn't have to mean they invented something wholly new from scratch but that it's not simply a rebadging of something they already were making. If RetroPan 320 were the same as T800 don't you think they'd offer T800 as well....just putting it in different labelled cassettes?

What I got from your previous posts was that you believed Retropan 320 was cut from T800 master rolls which were old. That is, old chilled/frozen T800.

But this is getting way off topic. I've got my latest rolls of Color Plus to send off for processing. And I am confident that what's inside those cassettes is not Gold 200.

Agulliver - pls. do me a favour. If you want to talk more about Retropan/T800 so come back to my
Retropan thread. For sure I can tell you some more about Foma marketing with "New" Films.
And for sure we will have some fun - but this here is (as you mentioned = oft topic)

with regards

PS : What is the parallel to some new products of Apple ?
Answer : 1) a product has was never been avaible before because it has never been there before !
2) a product nobody actually need !
3) a product what is to the same moment a must have for everybody! .....!!!

 

[Adrian Bacon]

Several master rolls - in a scale Kodak produced between 2003 - 2008 ! I am not so sure if Kodak
proceed with backing Colorplus emulsions after this period. But Gold should be in production
(interims runs).
The story in fact is the massive lost of demand - so the planned storage for about 1-2 years can't be sold after 2008. But in the next future it has to come to an end.
I don',t think Kodak will discontinue Gold - but (just in short) COLORPLUS isn',t from todays production.

with regards

???!!!???!!!???!!!

You do realize that making big master rolls does cost money and putting them in deep freeze and maintaining that does cost money, not to mention you can’t guarantee how an emulsion will respond after being frozen for that long unless you’ve already done that and tested it before. Just from a financial perspective, that’s money you’ve spent and will continue to spend and won’t get back (if ever) unless you sell it. It’s extremely rare for companies to plan for more than a year out in terms of making stuff to sell because markets change, and you don’t want to get caught with a bunch of stuff you can’t sell. You want to spend the money to make your stuff, make it, and sell it to get your money back, ideally all that happening in a quarter or less. Longer than that and it’s capital you have tied up that isn’t making you money, so you better have a super good reason for doing that otherwise, that capital is better spent on stuff you can make and sell this quarter. Making a bunch of big rolls and putting them in deep freeze for use years later is incredibly fiscally irresponsible due to the high risk of losing your shorts and should be avoided at all costs unless you have very good reasons to justify doing that and am willing to tie up a bunch of capital to do it.

Companies do tend to act in totally boneheaded manners at times, and Kodak is no exception, however, you can’t do that on a continuous basis for very long before you have no free capital to even operate, and at that point, you go out of business.

 

[Adrian Bacon]

Oh, and I’ve shot and made scanner color profiles for both Colorplus and gold 200. They absolutely, 100% are not the same emulsion.

 

[trendland]

???!!!???!!!???!!!

You do realize that making big master rolls does cost money and putting them in deep freeze and maintaining that does cost money, not to mention you can’t guarantee how an emulsion will respond after being frozen for that long unless you’ve already done that and tested it before. Just from a financial perspective, that’s money you’ve spent and will continue to spend and won’t get back (if ever) unless you sell it. It’s extremely rare for companies to plan for more than a year out in terms of making stuff to sell because markets change, and you don’t want to get caught with a bunch of stuff you can’t sell. You want to spend the money to make your stuff, make it, and sell it to get your money back, ideally all that happening in a quarter or less. Longer than that and it’s capital you have tied up that isn’t making you money, so you better have a super good reason for doing that otherwise, that capital is better spent on stuff you can make and sell this quarter. Making a bunch of big rolls and putting them in deep freeze for use years later is incredibly fiscally irresponsible due to the high risk of losing your shorts and should be avoided at all costs unless you have very good reasons to justify doing that and am willing to tie up a bunch of capital to do it.

Companies do tend to act in totally boneheaded manners at times, and Kodak is no exception, however, you can’t do that on a continuous basis for very long before you have no free capital to even operate, and at that point, you go out of business.

Adrian let me state in short - you are right! It is from costs!
But don't forget that a "just in time production" from low scale does cost more money!
In lowest scales just in time is actual impossible ( in color - because bw is not that big deal in comparison)!
And comming to costs - remember professional films in the past - they came in "couled" condition in contribution. The costs between couling and freezing are indeed a costs factor ( more energy ) but that isn't a big deal !
A big deal are 4 smallest production runs (in color) in smal scale = 36hours emulsion backing every 3 - 4 month !
The efficiency is there indeed a big run every 18 - 24 month - Fuji did practice it also!
(This "big run" is relative - actual it is a L A S T option before discontinuation!) !

Think about

 

[Adrian Bacon]

Adrian let me state in short - you are right! It is from costs!
But don't forget that a "just in time production" from low scale does cost more money!
In lowest scales just in time is actual impossible ( in color - because bw is not that big deal in comparison)!
And comming to costs - remember professional films in the past - they came in "couled" condition in contribution. The costs between couling and freezing are indeed a costs factor ( more energy ) but that isn't a big deal !
A big deal are 4 smallest production runs (in color) in smal scale = 36hours emulsion backing every 3 - 4 month !
The efficiency is there indeed a big run every 18 - 24 month - Fuji did practice it also!
(This "big run" is relative - actual it is a L A S T option before discontinuation!) !

Think about

I never said just in time production. I said only producing what you can sell in the next ~3 months, 6 months tops. They are not the same thing. I’ve actually held a number of jobs where there was a lot of manufacturing involved and supported those systems and have a pretty fair amount of insight into the business decisions that drives what to make and when, and believe me, you’re way better off turning your cash and making your profit in 3-6 months than spending a massive amount of cash and making your profit over 2-3 years. If you’re going to discontinue a film it’s because it doesn’t sell fast enough for you to make the minimum run size and get your money back in less than a year, so you simply stop making it and allocate those manufacturing resources to what actually is selling instead. You don’t go make one last big production run to sell over the next few years. The whole reason why you decided to discontinue it is because it isn’t selling, so making more of it is a stupid thing to do. People lose their jobs over stuff like that.

Making 18-24 month run cycles is indicative of a company that did not respond to the film market, or never downsized it’s production capacity to match market size, again, the film market has been a lot smaller than it once was for the better part of a decade. Any company that takes that long to respond to market size changes either has supremely deep pockets, or went out of business long ago. Given what Kodak and the various other film manufacturers experienced in terms of market size reduction, they could have done a lot worse.

Let’s not forget, their business model is selling us film that we will actually buy today. Not making a big run of something that we might buy next year.

 

[trendland]

I never said just in time production. I said only producing what you can sell in the next ~3 months, 6 months tops.

Adrian the scale is much too low for economical calculation. That's not to all films but it is to most films (If you manufacture bw film you have not to care so much - thats the difference!
So even the demand of next 3 - 6 month is LOWEST SCALE and that's to a market : Worldwide!
Remember : Color Film c41/e6 is still an absolute high tech product (Ferrania noticed it ...)
And this is the todays situation in 2019! Wonder about? Yes but it is!
The problem from calculate a manufacturing of great efficiancy was never such great as today!
It has to do with the pricing of raw materials you need to manufacture it - all is "low scale" !
But the main impact is coming from calibration of a production process! That isn't such easy as to start the engine of a car - and after that is running!
The calibration need Film! That is the point - beside other points! There is a quality control!
Is everything is fine - you can start production!
But to compare with a pilots situation - it is no easy "check up" : " All systems are running - everything is normal - ready for take off " Medevac you are permitted to start! "
There is a test run with quality control - after this recalibrations - in case of trouble - a further test run- a.s.o. that can last a while ! Imagine you have the permission to start and next?

After just some hours ? That was it all systems have to stop! The key to understand is the relation
of wasted film! Ask Ferrania what about there first films - was there a quality control????
Was there wasted film - perhaps I can't say - but not all first films were ok!
The relation between wasted films (in volume) ...[ and there is your point Adrian " film is expensive" ] this relation between expensive film and film from production (100% fine ) wich is able to to sell.
Within the past (from highest volume production) this relation was (for many films) out of interest!
Who cares about some kilometer film coming into scratch? Calculated to the film price of some
million films for sale there wasn't a full cent per film (costs from calibration)!
Today (in parts) the relation can come in the near to 50%!
Therefore NO color film production under a minimal scale (per single run)! A solution would be
"less quality control" = minimizing costs from preperation/calibration (with a little luck films are
97,4% ok) but this procedure of course is a no go for the remaning players!
Who will buy films from "sometimes fine quality" !
If you are able to produce some more films from one bigger run : Films are much more cheap from
production process (costs/per unit) thats in short the basis from calculation!
Each child is knowing : mass production is most economical but this here is no mass production any longer - so we may speak (from minimalst scales/market demand/ sales volume)
from films "H A N D M A D E" but the max.market pricing give a restriction for production!
And in this small scales we also can not speak about "volume capital wich is bringing no short term profit" because that capital (the value of stored ready made products) is also from "SMAL SCALE"!
So there are still films produced within the past wich will come to discontinuation if manufacturers stocking of is going out :
Some films Fuji for example is planning to sell within this year have a volume you can order and you
may be asked : " Should it be shipped?" and you might can answer :" No I will come with my car"
You of course will have trouble to transport your ordered stuff with this :

But this here is quite enough :

The world is yours if you phone Fuji !

 

[Adrian Bacon]

Adrian the scale is much too low for economical calculation. That's not to all films but it is to most films (If you manufacture bw film you have not to care so much - thats the difference!
So even the demand of next 3 - 6 month is LOWEST SCALE and that's to a market : Worldwide!
Remember : Color Film c41/e6 is still an absolute high tech product (Ferrania noticed it ...)
And this is the todays situation in 2019! Wonder about? Yes but it is!
The problem from calculate a manufacturing of great efficiancy was never such great as today!
It has to do with the pricing of raw materials you need to manufacture it - all is "low scale" !
But the main impact is coming from calibration of a production process! That isn't such easy as to start the engine of a car - and after that is running!
The calibration need Film! That is the point - beside other points! There is a quality control!
Is everything is fine - you can start production!
But to compare with a pilots situation - it is no easy "check up" : " All systems are running - everything is normal - ready for take off " Medevac you are permitted to start! "
There is a test run with quality control - after this recalibrations - in case of trouble - a further test run- a.s.o. that can last a while ! Imagine you have the permission to start and next?

After just some hours ? That was it all systems have to stop! The key to understand is the relation
of wasted film! Ask Ferrania what about there first films - was there a quality control????
Was there wasted film - perhaps I can't say - but not all first films were ok!
The relation between wasted films (in volume) ...[ and there is your point Adrian " film is expensive" ] this relation between expensive film and film from production (100% fine ) wich is able to to sell.
Within the past (from highest volume production) this relation was (for many films) out of interest!
Who cares about some kilometer film coming into scratch? Calculated to the film price of some
million films for sale there wasn't a full cent per film (costs from calibration)!
Today (in parts) the relation can come in the near to 50%!
Therefore NO color film production under a minimal scale (per single run)! A solution would be
"less quality control" = minimizing costs from preperation/calibration (with a little luck films are
97,4% ok) but this procedure of course is a no go for the remaning players!
Who will buy films from "sometimes fine quality" !
If you are able to produce some more films from one bigger run : Films are much more cheap from
production process (costs/per unit) thats in short the basis from calculation!
Each child is knowing : mass production is most economical but this here is no mass production any longer - so we may speak (from minimalst scales/market demand/ sales volume)
from films "H A N D M A D E" but the max.market pricing give a restriction for production!
And in this small scales we also can not speak about "volume capital wich is bringing no short term profit" because that capital (the value of stored ready made products) is also from "SMAL SCALE"!
So there are still films produced within the past wich will come to discontinuation if manufacturers stocking of is going out :
Some films Fuji for example is planning to sell within this year have a volume you can order and you
may be asked : " Should it be shipped?" and you might can answer :" No I will come with my car"
You of course will have trouble to transport your ordered stuff with this :
View attachment 220121

But this here is quite enough :

View attachment 220122

The world is yours if you phone Fuji !

Your logic is non-sensical.

 

[trendland]

Your logic is non-sensical.[/QUOTE]

The smallest Rental Car is for a Fuji in special Format, the middle is for two high priced ones,
the big one is for small scales productioned films (interims runs)!

Thanks for comments