• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

New ROLLEI Redbird and ROLLEI Crossbird

Status
Not open for further replies.

From the first reply from Rollei, it would appear that they are not willing to confirm that. It sure sounds like an E-6 film to me and apparently everyone else who has posted, however.
 

I've looked for the discussions in the mentioned forums as well and I can confirm your findings. In the original thread Mr Junghans give full quotation of the source, and it is there clearly said that the pictures on flickr are not made with the Rollei Redbird.
Therefore it is absolutely wrong to say the people at Rollei-Film are liars.

For those who are interested, here are pictures with Rollei Redbird:

http://www.flickr.com/groups/rolleiredbird/

http://www.spuer-sinn.net/blog1/?p=1206#more-1206

Regards, Michael
 

David, you are right.

A lot of apuggers seem to have a problem with Lomography, low fidelity photography, toy camera photography, experimental photography or whatever you will call these style(s) of analog photography.

They define themselves as "fine art photographers" and have a sometimes arrogant or snobbish look at those photographers who are going a different way.

I don't do low fidelity photography by myself. But I respect everyone who likes to do it.

And very very important: The low fidelity photographers are supporting us "classic photographers". Meanwhile there are more than 1,5 millions photograhers doing these new styles worldwide. They are buying millions of films and keep the production lines running.
Without these photographers we would have lost much more films.
Furthermore the Holga company,the Lomographic Society and some other companies in that area do active promotion for using film as photographic medium, as an alternative to digital capture.
And they give workshops worldwide for young photographers. Lots of young photographers have discovered film in this digital age by the lomography / low-fi movement.

There is indeed good reason to be thankful that this movement and these companies are deeply committed to film and very active.

You may have a look at this photographer explaining these styles quite good:

Dead Link Removed

Regards, Michael
 
I think it would be appropriate to explain up-front that the film might contaminate a C-41 process, especially if a lot of film runs through. I used to work at a pro lab, and the continuous testing and calibration of the various processes was painstaking, and I remember every time some cross processing came in there would be frowning faces among those that operated film processing.

Cross processing is cool. We have all seen the work of JD Callow on this web site, for instance. His X-processed images are just phenomenal, and the creative possibilities are exciting to say the least.

It's cool that Rollei has come out with these films, probably to satisfy the lo-fi types of photographers. But it would have been even cooler if there was a disclaimer about the cross processing. You may also want to invest some time in recommending to process these at home with a C-41 processing kit. They work quite well, are fairly inexpensive, and are a lot easier to do than most people imagine.

- Thomas
 

I have not read those forums. The link to which I am referring (which was removed less than two hours after I made post #11 in this thread) is (or was) exactly as I described it; from the Maco Direct Website, without credit, without permission (based on the Flickr lady's caption), and it strongly implied that the pictures were made on the Rollei film ("click here to see more pictures", or something like that). Please read posts before you respond. I am not talking about any forum posts at all; just the now removed link from the Maco Direct Website.

Labeling my and Ian Grant's anger as an anti-lomographic, snobby, fine art attitude is way off base. You know nothing about my attitudes toward photography of any kind. This anger has nothing to do with the intended uses of the film. Attempting to represent valid ethical complaints against a corporation as a supposed attack on lomography itself is vile and absurd. I am attacking the activities of a corporation, not a form/style of art.

Is labeling an E-6 film as a C-41 film with the sole purpose of pulling one over on minilabs not a lie? It is, plain and simple. A harmless lie for the labs' chemistry, but a lie nonetheless. The only difference between the film and CR 200 is that the label is a lie (and perhaps the all-important edge markings that allow Japanese photographers to be "individual"). Therefore, my use of the word lie is totally appropriate.

So, I shall make the points again, briefly, just to be extra clear (will try to be a bit more "mild" this time ):

1. Rollei Redbird is a convenience, and not unethical. Silly perhaps, but I see no harm in it.
2. Rollei Crossbird is designed to dupe mini labs, therefore I feel it is unethical and should be pulled. This is lying.
3. Rollei Redbird in bulk rolls seems incredibly nonsensical to me. (If anything, it is those Japanese people requesting it who are caught up in the pretentious world of supposed fine art photography.) No harm in it; just incredibly silly.
4. Someone's all-right's-reserved image was used without their permission by Maco Direct to promote the Redbird. This is thievery.
5. The image in question was passed off as being made on Redbird, when it was not. This is lying.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am confused about this redthingyfilm.
& I thought all analog photography was inherently experimental, by its very nature, but maybe that is another thread........!
 
2F/2F said:
5. The image in question was passed off as being made on Redbird, when it was not. This is lying.
Click to expand...

Re-read post 27. Do you wake up in the morning looking for a high horse to climb?
 
David A. Goldfarb said:
While strong opinions are welcome here, could we please dial back the drama a bit and express those opinions without the abusive language? Thanks.
Click to expand...

Thank you, David.
 
Great idea from Rollei.
Thanks!

Don't like it?.. don't buy it!
Get a life ;-)
 
johnnywalker said:
Re-read post 27. Do you wake up in the morning looking for a high horse to climb?
Click to expand...

Please read what I wrote before you give me grief for saying things I did not say. Those message boards were not mentioned in this discussion until Film Lover brought them in arbitrarily to confuse the situation. Obviously, it has worked, as evidenced by you post.

I am not talking about links from anything but the Maco Direct Website, which contained nothing except "click here for more pictures". As for the links from a message board that is not part of the Maco Direct Website, I never referred to them, and there would be nothing wrong with linking from one of them in a forum discussion. For the umpteenth time, the link to which I am referring (now removed since this thread) was on the Maco Direct Website, was uncredited, heavily implies that the image was shot on Rollei Redbird, and was immediately removed as soon as this thread got heated about it.
 
Rollei-Film said:
Dear 2F / 2F,
I am new here in the APUG forum.
Thank you for the nice welcome.
In the future, I will post about more products from our product range here, and I am looking forward to hear from the expert comments.

Sebastian
Click to expand...

Welcome, Sebastian. I am glad to see that Rollei Films is reaching out to camera enthusiasts who may be rediscovering film in the Lomo age. The more film being used, the better it is for all of us in the long run.

I assure you we are a friendly bunch.

Cheers,
 
I totally agree with you 2F/2F on the crossbird film. Some labs charge extra for cross processing and those extras help keep some labs afloat. I totally disagree with the crossbird film. However, I kind of like the redbird film idea. I am not big into the Lomo, but I like to be creative. I would be delighted to shoot redbird once in a while.
 
There seems to be some confusion here about who represents Rollei as an APUG sponsor for the purpose of this forum, whether the German Maco/Rollei representatives speak for their US distributor, which is a legitimate APUG sponsor, and who is officially representing Maco/Rollei, and who may be doing so without making their affiliation clear. Until we can sort all this out, this thread is closed.

We would welcome Maco/Rollei as sponsors, but only if they play by the rules. Advertisers must be clearly identified as such. They should only post commercial messages in their sponsor forum, though they may respond to direct queries about their products in other forums. They should not use the forums to attack other companies or their products.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Menu
Log in
Register