@Cholentpot - so you're effectively implying that the notional Panatomic-X nostalgists can't really tell the difference between Tmax 100 and Panatomic-X in a double-blind situation (which is correct, I'd suggest) and could be conditioned by marketing/ branding alone to upgrade their material choice to something that's available now?
You are not Kodak's customer base.
As did I. So what? Neither of us is part of "Kodak's customer base" today.I shot Kodachrome exclusively for over 20 years!
FPP sells copy film or something that they rate at ASA 6 or something. Cinestill has 50D floating around. Film sells on the choices and novelty nowdays. Lomopurple, redrum, Cinestill, etc and etc.
Add all that up and it might get to be 1/10 of the amount of Kodak Gold 200 sold. .... probably not. Those are novelty items. Novelty items are marginal to the interests of the main customer base.
I am never sure whenever I see those kind of statements, if the poster is joining in with the spirit of the "let's all wish for the impossible" purely for its enjoyment or entertainment or if there is at least in part just the hint of a notion that such things could happenIf only Ilford would make a good color slide film at a more affordable price than Ektachrome.
Film photography is a novelty!
No. Film photography is a niche market. Only a small percentage of the population uses film. Many are not using it as a novelty but just because that's what they've always used. Those people want film like Kodak Gold - not respooled copy film. No one is grabbing Kodak Positive Release film and using it as their main film.
Well, maybe someone is. No matter what, there's always someone doing it.
. They are delighted that Gold is coming out in 120 because it's exactly the kind of thing their customer base wants. It's going to sell like hotcakes.
The folks that were born a decade after Panatomic-X was discontinued will buy gobs and gobs of it if the marketing is correct.
Err, they don't & won't. At least not those working towards more serious creative aims (and you need to start from the understanding that they are definitely not your old cheapskate 3rd-party-lens-gobbling-AdAm's - they understand that going up in format is always going to deliver better results than trying to extort fractional improvements from a smaller format film). FX has been off the market for longer than I've been around - and I know that a large chunk of your putative market would try it once, see that it's noticeably grainier than Delta 100 or 100TMX - and closing in on 400TMY-II - & return to their 4x5 (why do you think Intrepid and Chamonix have sold so many 4x5's?). That's the reality, they'll try a roll or two of a novelty film, but for anything serious, the speed/ grain relationship has to be much better. If you were serious about this, you would know that there is another once well-known slow-speed emulsion from a major European manufacturer (that could be manufactured by one of the successor companies) that would potentially offer a significant granularity improvement for the low speed (even if less sharp than 100 TMX or Delta 100) but which was withdrawn in the late 1990s due to low demand. And while we're here, why do you think Ilford has not invested into updating Pan-F to resolve anything beyond immediate batch-to-batch manufacturing issues?
My local camera shop, which does the majority of it's business selling NOS or used film cameras, film, processing and accessories does report that a lot of young people are coming in wanting to buy a film camera. Of course they also want to buy film with it, usually colour print film. And the bottleneck in production of things like Kodak Color Plus and Fuji C200 plus the lack of consumer grade C41 120 film has been a problem. They are delighted that Gold is coming out in 120 because it's exactly the kind of thing their customer base wants. It's going to sell like hotcakes.
Since they now released Gold 200 in 120, Im more hopeful there are more releases coming. There was mention they may be working on a couple others down the pike. I don't remember where I read that. Im betting Plus X gets re-released again. That seems to be the most logical choice at this point. And its the easiest one to reintroduce, since it was only discontinued 10 years ago now.
Im also hopeful Panatomic X might get a chance again, but so far, no indication they will do that film. It would complete the triad of slow, medium, and fast B&W cubic grain films.
Not picking on you specifically ok?
Here's the problem with the film community in a shell nut.
'OH NO! My Modern Pana-X doesn't have cadmium in it! I mean it look and acts almost exactly the same but IT DOESN'T HAVE CADMIUM!'
You know what Kodak cares about? Selling more film. And if they can take Tmax 100, tweak it a little, slap a new label on it and sell it as Panatomic-X II then they'll do it. I'll bet you'll see Kodachrome 23 come out which is just Ektrachrome tweaked with a new label. And you know what? It'll sell like hotcakes. It won't be able to stay on the shelves.
If it does not have Cadmium in it, it will not be the same film nor act the same way. Cadmium was included for a reason and without Cadmium the whole formulation would be difference and handle differently.
As did I. So what? Neither of us is part of "Kodak's customer base" today.
@Cholentpot - so you're effectively implying that the notional Panatomic-X nostalgists can't really tell the difference between Tmax 100 and Panatomic-X in a double-blind situation (which is correct, I'd suggest) and could be conditioned by marketing/ branding alone to upgrade their material choice to something that's available now?
The marketing team would have to call it "NEW Panatomic-X" . It can be made from a Chinese film, maybe Lucky or Shanghai or whatever is available now. This would save them bundles, just putting it in NEW Panatomic -X cassettes and boxes.No.
The folks that were born a decade after Panatomic-X was discontinued will buy gobs and gobs of it if the marketing is correct.
.
Someone benefiting from Kodak's real transparency film customer base (motion picture film users for whom Ektachrome was reintroduced).I now shoot Ektachrome. So what does that make me?
You're ignoring reality. The difference doesn't matter to Kodak's real still film customer base:I don't need a double blind congame to see the obvious difference!
...They could take any black and white film, slap a Panatomic-X label on it and print money.
The marketing team would have to call it "NEW Panatomic-X" . It can be made from a Chinese film, maybe Lucky or Shanghai or whatever is available now. This would save them bundles, just putting it in NEW Panatomic -X cassettes and boxes.
see how many youngn's are shooting film
The 'they've always used it' crowd has moved past cameras and shoot their snapshots on phones
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?