RattyMouse
Allowing Ads
35,000 rolls seems like a doable amount. A shame Fuji could not keep Acros alive or at the very least make one more master roll and TELL people this is it.
No idea where they got that from, other than their overheated imagination connecting what Adox & Ferrania have been doing & misreading what Kodak had said. For what it's worth, that minimum coating will net approx 35000 135/36 films, but it'll be less because it's being split with the S8 50ft loads. A number of Ilford's products are made in similarly small quantities quite successfully, some at fairly lengthy intervals.
35,000 rolls seems like a doable amount. A shame Fuji could not keep Acros alive or at the very least make one more master roll and TELL people this is it.
Fuji can be a pretty opaque organisation - and doing an annual coating run with pre-orders +10% would probably have not been beyond them. Their whole product range would have benefited from an aggressive standardisation, rather than piecemeal cuts.
It's quite sad that Fuji was not able (or did not care) to keep ONE B/W film alive.
When Fuji discontinued Acros 400, it appeared likely to me that Acros wasn't long for this world (It reminded me of Kodak's stepwise discontinuation of its EliteChrome line). Keeping up the equipment to manufacture one production run once every few years likely is not a good return on investment. The only current manufacturer producing just one B&W film is Ferrania, and that is an entirely different situation. Even smaller players like Foma produce multiple different films.It's quite sad that Fuji was not able (or did not care) to keep ONE B/W film alive.
This is a very important point. If Kodak has scaled down to an Ilford scale line, that bodes well for the long term.That is the approx 1 mile minimum coating length. Same as Ilford or pretty much any similar coating technology setup (even Adox & Ferrania) - you scale by width, not length of coating. Kodak used to coat 5-6x that amount as a normal batch. This is the scaled down coating amount
I do know that we get all the pharmaceuticals floating down river from Detroit here. It's present in the Lake water. And after the lead in the pipes and paint, arsenic in the ground, asbestos in the walls, and about a thousand other things, I'm not too worried about some fixer ending up in a garbage truck. The leaking tranny on the truck that's dripping into the direct storm drain makes up for all the years of flushing stupid stuff down the P.S. toilets.
Let's also not mention the food industry. I work occasionally in very large commercial processing plants. Even for seemingly benign stuff there is a massive amount of chemistry that goes back into the environment. My washing machine detergent that gets used at least once a day is worse than the C-41. My sisters hair dye has the same stuff as the blix, every time you flush you're dumping another load of toxic gifts back into the environment.
Do all of you recycle all your film chips and leaders?
Borax, bleach, washing soda, stain remover, tide pods. Remember the kid who chewed one of those and inhaled the fumes? I've inhaled C-41 fumes many a time and I've not needed to go to emergency room because the lining on my trachea burned away.
Health warnings (for ingestion) published by P & G for Tide Detergent: May cause transient gastrointestinal irritation. Recommended Treatment: Drink a glass of water.
Health warnings (for ingestion) published by Kodak for HC-110: CAN CAUSE KIDNEY DAMAGE, MAY CAUSE LIVER DAMAGE, MAY CAUSE BLOOD DISORDERS. Recommended treatment: Call a physician or poison control centre immediately..
I know which one is safer to ingest.
That is good to know. I will not drink HC-110.
Regarding Tide and HC110, in the quantities dumped, Tide probably is worse to the environment than HC110, but the reverse may be true for their effect on humans. The effect of Tide will probably be longer lasting in the environment than HC110, as the latter contains chemicals that decompose rapidly.
PE
Does anyone think that Kodak will resurrect the 'Development included in purchase' from back in the day? I would happily buy Ektachrome if it included a little envelope to send back and get developed and mounted.
I just saw EK's/KA's announcement referenced in post #1362. I'd say this is pretty good news for Ektachrome, though I'm surprised that they're planning on using their wide coater in Bldg 38. I was thinking they'd bought a new coater whose max width was narrower...
It would seem to be a sensible approach to overcome the scarcity of E6 labs and maintain QC of the processing. And maybe enthusiastic users would accept the slight delay in getting results?
If they could keep it a tidy package and the price point of the whole thing in a decent ball park a few weeks wouldn't hurt me. I don't develop the day I shoot anyhow, if I want instant I have other cameras.
It seems a bad idea to place the future of E6 developing in the hands of a company that is teetering towards a second bankruptcy.
The podcast made no such claim. The down scaling was in the production of the emulsion. So they wouldn't have to coat ten miles.It was mentioned by someone from Kodak in a podcast. Apparently a misinformed Kodak person.
I'll stick with your hated Kodak.
The podcast made no such claim. The down scaling was in the production of the emulsion. So they wouldn't have to coat ten miles.
Otherwise they mentioned using their narrow development coater for, well, development.
And of course they mentioned a wide coating event being due, which happened.
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?