The Holga type of aesthetic would also be nice to try. It would also give me the opportunity to try medium format film which I have honestly never used if you can believe that.
You hit the nail on the head. I am of fan of the Holga/Diana cameras, but I'm rarely in that mood. That being said a few of the Holga photos I've taken are some of my favorites.fairly fixed nature of the aesthetic
I view the use of plastic cameras in terms of painting. When I'm using my better cameras, it's like having dozens of different tubes of color to put on canvas. With my Dianas/Holgas, it's like having only 2 or 3 colors to work with. The challenge is to come up with something worthwhile with a limited palette.
The “real version” of those cameras is a triplet folder, like a 40s or 50s Nettar or a Solida.You hit the nail on the head. I am of fan of the Holga/Diana cameras, but I'm rarely in that mood. That being said a few of the Holga photos I've taken are some of my favorites.
A ISO 24000 film with a TMAX 400 look, or close, would crush just about any digital camera trying to do B&W.An ultra high speed film would be interesting. I doubt I personally would shoot much of it, but would probably buy a play-around roll or two. My real concern for such a film is that it would likely be very sensitive to even low dose radiation. I would worry that somewhere in transit from Rochester to B&H/FreeStyle or shipment from the online store to my house or being mailed off to a lab, there would be enough low dose radiation exposure to fog the film. Creating a film which could also be processed well as a negative would at least remove one of those steps.
I can see how others would find this film useful. I do wonder about the overall demand for a product like this since this type of high speed performance is readily available with digital cameras. If Kodak really is working full-time to produce their current products, I find it unlikely they would retool at this time for a micro-niche product.
Kodak will bring two types of slide film, that's it. At a price of £16-17 per roll.
Perhaps two new films. One a reintroduction of a discontinued film, the other something new.
https://kosmofoto.com/2021/01/kodak...vEhMpui7Z3joQykhUBI-Cc6Yj-vJWFmK1xtkDdQaZKQIQ
Regularly people post that the costs of [fill in whatever brand you think is expensive] is priced high because the manufacturer is greedy. That company does not have a corporate goal to make a huge profit nor drain your bank account, they are covering their costs so that they can stay in business. The companies are working on very thin profit margins. It helps no one when someone claims that the prices are "outrageous". If one finds a product that costs less, than buy it but do not complain the company has priced the film to financially ruin anyone. If you have irrefutable proof that any company is raising prices to only line its pockets, then come forward and post it, but do not post statements like "The cost of TriX is just one step away from pricing itself out of the market." unless you can prove it.
Keepability would be a problem, as always with high speed film.
Indeed it seems that is the main reason why we don’t have higher speed film, and not as normally assumed strictly technical reasons.
The cure would be either better storage. And/or some kind of easy, benign home hypering.PE commented on that somewhere in photrio. Super high sensitivity film is techically possible but shelf life is the hardest problem to overcome becuase it gets fogged during storage with too much ease.
I´d say this "certain" info is at least to be taken with a good chunk of salt.Ah, you have inside information?
It's certainly possible but you sound very certain. Can you please clarify if this is your personal opinion or if you heard something from a reliable source.
It would require cooling and a more steady stream from manufacturing to consumer.If this hyper-fast film needs to be fresh....sold and used very quickly....then that will be a problem today. Not only would sales of said film be unpredictable and shipping affected by covid....I can see enraged users who didn't store it as directed and use as directed flocking to online forums and social medial to moan about how awful Kodak are....
No, that was one of them. The other was regular reversal.Something being forgotten here about the hyper fast film is that it was intended for dry thermal development - which would require a different processing setup than most people have.
Correct, the film I mentioned is developed via a reversal processes. Further, this was a film Kodak seriously thought about releasing in 2006, according to Troop and Anchell.The other was regular reversal.
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?