Wow, not bad! Are you wet printing colour negs?
... There are a very large number of people who work worldwide bringing Kodak branded materials to end users. There is just as much a reason to remain brand loyal to them as to any other brand that has a worldwide presence.
Do you avoid Ilford branded chemicals because they are owned by a holding company and don't manufacture anything themselves?
If Eco Pro can self-replenish, why wouldn't the manufacturer brag about it? This would open the commercial lab market for them! There must be a reason for them not claiming this capability, we just do not know what that is.
I don't disagree about the question.I don't think who owns it is triggering the current crisis of brand loyalty. I think the fact that they are turning out numerous defective products under a brand name once associated with stellar quality is causing people to question whether loyalty to the Kodak brand is a smart idea going forward. And I think the fact that Ilford seems to have established a reputation for being dedicated to quality may have something to do with people remaining loyal to them.
There's a bit of a difference in this time. Kodak Alaris has sold the entire photo chemical and color negative paper division to the largest distributor of these products. All color chemistry is manufactured in China, I believe that the manufacturing of ALL Kodak labeled chemistry will come from the more than capable hand of Sino PromiseTherein lies part of the problem. Sino and formally KA are middle men. If I understand the relationship its EK that outsources photochemical production and KA/Sino who distributes it. Of course this isn't to say that going forward Sino won't be chatting with EK regularly, but really what can they do to ensure product quality? Iford, Adox, Freestyle, etc are all directly responsible or their products.
As far as I can tell, all the problems - backing paper and photo chemicals - did not become observable until the products had long been out of the hands of the manufacturers and distributors. And most of them relate to product that either was a rushed replacement, or at least the packaging was a rushed replacement, due to having to deal with the Tetenal bankruptcy.I understand that the 120 backing paper issues were problems which developed after product was shipped, and slipped past EK's quality control, but KA's chemistry quality control seems almost non-existent (I suspect quality-control was outsourced also), I have also considered that the lack of problems with other distributors may be related to lower expectations or lower sales volume, but I don't see long threads on Photrio about Photographer's Formulary or Legacy Pro chemistry.
I don't disagree about the question.
If there hadn't been a significant outside event - the bankruptcy of Tetenal - that initiated all the current problems,...
Potentially by Kodak Alaris insisting on being paid for its product.Interestingly there came up the thesis here a Apug, that it was Kodak Alaris who drove Tetenal into its crisis.
Is that true with motion picture chemistry?Eastman Kodak has no role in the production or marketing of photo chemistry.
I don't really see this as being a comparable question. Yes, Ilford is subsidiary, but Ilford remains an intact photographic production and supply company who makes film and paper, outsources custom made chemistry, and is active in marketing and branding of all of these products. All the players are down the hall from one another, eat at the same lunch room, and might even visit one another for dinner.Do you avoid Ilford branded chemicals because they are owned by a holding company and don't manufacture anything themselves?
I don't believe that they do. They don't have a large chemical manufacturing capacity.Is that true with motion picture chemistry?
Carestream in Colorado. Sino Promise may still have a partial interest in Carestream's plant, because Kodak Alaris originally did.Sino likewise calls up someone (who?) to make RA-4 paper.
Ilford is merely a brand owned by Harman, because Ilford itself went bankrupt.Yes, Ilford is subsidiary, but Ilford remains an intact photographic production and supply company who makes film and paper, outsources custom made chemistry, and is active in marketing and branding of all of these products.
Real or not I can see the difference between Ilford and the Kodaks. All I really care about are the two main staples of photography: film and paper. Someone else will always manage to fill the gaps of the other elements. However, I do believe that Kodak (Sino) will make B&W photo-chems less attractive to many Photrio types because of production stumbles, poor product, less innovation, poor to non-existant marketing, etc. Why do I say this? Because Kodak (Alaris/Sino) b&w chems have been struggling for a couple of years. Other companies faced exactly the same issues, yet didn't have the same problems. In short, the other companies are doing a better job. I think a big reason for this is the morass of participants in the Kodaks world and the fact that photo-chem is an after thought for these companies.Ilford is merely a brand owned by Harman, because Ilford itself went bankrupt.
I thought EK has a specialties chemistry division. Of course that doesn't mean that they wouldn't outsource. From the EK's website it looks like they sell (through regional agents) chemistry for the film industry (ECN-2 and b&w reversal chem).I don't believe that they do. They don't have a large chemical manufacturing capacity.
PE had said in the past that there were Kodak guys lurking in this forum, but didn't participate, or reveal their identity. For a long time, this forum had been very hostile against Kodak, so this didn't really help.What I find strange, is that with 1200+ employees at Alaris, we don't have a single one here commenting on these issues, even if anonymously. I lurk on several communities (automotive, computer) and they're all full of industry insiders, current or retired, sharing insights. I can tell you **exactly** how anything is made, from Gmail to a Dell laptop or your BMW. The only two exceptions are Apple and Kodak. Apple forces employees to sign draconian NDAs, and with Kodak... Don't they have a single person with a product passion comparable to @MattKing or @Team ADOX ?
..... Maybe I'm an outlier, but I think Chinese quality standards are on the rise as western quality standards are on the decline. History is repeating itself. What people now say about cheap Chinese products is also what was once said about cheap Japanese cars (and cameras).
Just a side note - and probably user error - but one of my Xtol stock had white particles in it. I assume I probably rushed when mixing part A.
Kodak has always stood behind its products. Kodak has great quality control. Sometimes problems slip through quality control. Kodak will replace any bad products as quickly as they can. Every industrial company has these problems. Get over yourselves.
PE had said in the past that there were Kodak guys lurking in this forum, but didn't participate, or reveal their identity. For a long time, this forum had been very hostile against Kodak, so this didn't really help.
Replacing product is not enough. "Kodak" can't replace opportunity. I am over "Kodak" chemicals, not yet film.
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?