Ken Nadvornick
Allowing Ads
Maybe that perception of $15/sheet is part of the problem. That's only the price required to get the elephant to stand up and start walking. By the time he's able to run, he might be running at $6/sheet. But he can't run until he walks first. And he can't walk until he stands up first.
If I thought that the final end-game price was going to remain at $15, I'd never even have bothered to pledge. $150 for 10 sheets? I don't think so. But I honestly don't believe that would be the case. And at $6 I'd use it.
That's the visionary versus pragmatic thing I was referring to...
Ken
Maybe that perception of $15/sheet is part of the problem. That's only the price required to get the elephant to stand up and start walking. By the time he's able to run, he might be running at $6/sheet. But he can't run until he walks first. And he can't walk until he stands up first.
If I thought that the final end-game price was going to remain at $15, I'd never even have bothered to pledge. $150 for 10 sheets? I don't think so. But I honestly don't believe that would be the case. And at $6 I'd use it.
That's the visionary versus pragmatic thing I was referring to...
Ken
I've supported a number of KS projects, but this one set an unusually high bar for pragmatic reasons. I can't argue with Bob Crowley's reasoning, but it may not be the best strategy for KS. If you're pitching NEW 55 at $15/sheet, it sends a stronger message than speculation about a lower price. Most KS projects offer the final product at or below the final market price. The New 55 KS tests whether photographers are fanatical enough to pay $15/sheet today. If so, the project may be viable.
I haven't pledged anything yet because I haven't seen negatives from it that look to be consistent enough in quality for me to justify spending $6/sheet, let alone $15/sheet. If I saw images that looked more like old Type55 (or even a more standard Tmax or Tri-x negative) and less like sloppy wet plate work, I'd be there to help out. But why should I pay $15 a sheet for something that is no better than a wet plate pour when I can do 4x5 wet plate for a lot less per negative?
You shouldn't. Because it sounds as if your use case is definitely different from the New55 set of target cases. My potential use, street portraits in a 4x5 Crown, would be a different case entirely from yours. One more closely aligned with the New55 target model, I think.
It may all be moot, however. With the release of the new project update this morning there has been a burst of pledge activity, both new and upgrade. But I fear they are still way too far behind the curve. This KS project never really went viral in the way I think they were hoping it would. I'm still convinced that there are probably 3,000 interested parties out there. They just have not yet been reached. And likely won't be.
Ken
Yea, the KS seemed short, is this a normal timeframe?
Actually I think that's a really relevant question. I don't know what the KS rules are for project timeframes, but it sure seems like only 43 days to raise US$400,000 isn't very long. I mean, that's US$9,300+ per day. That's a lot. Outside of the first week or so, I wonder if they've averaged that for even just a few individual single days at all.
Ken
There is a max time of 60 days, but KS urges all projects to be 30 days or less in an effort to impress "the urgency" of the project.
43 days, is on the longer side of most project, and the stats show that the length of a project has nothing to do with it being funded, or that shorter project often get funded more. In any case the length is not the problem with this project.
The petzval lens project raised 1.2M$ in the same time frame, that makes for 30K$ or so a day on average....
There is a max time of 60 days, but KS urges all projects to be 30 days or less in an effort to impress "the urgency" of the project.
43 days, is on the longer side of most project, and the stats show that the length of a project has nothing to do with it being funded, or that shorter project often get funded more. In any case the length is not the problem with this project.
The petzval lens project raised 1.2M$ in the same time frame, that makes for 30K$ or so a day on average....
Well then it's even more depressing than it appears. When he arrived in my mail that NOS Polaroid 545 holder was grinning from 'L' to 'P'. There was a swagger in his voice that was unmistakable. As if his endless patience was finally paying off.
Now he has trouble even getting out of bed each morning. I've considered a clinical dose of expired original 55 P/N, but fear that might only make things worse in the long run. I won't let him look at KS anymore.
I tried telling him that it's better to have loved and lost, than never to have loved at all. But I don't think he was listening.
Ken
There is a max time of 60 days, but KS urges all projects to be 30 days or less in an effort to impress "the urgency" of the project.
43 days, is on the longer side of most project, and the stats show that the length of a project has nothing to do with it being funded, or that shorter project often get funded more. In any case the length is not the problem with this project.
The petzval lens project raised 1.2M$ in the same time frame, that makes for 30K$ or so a day on average....
FWIW, just now they went over US$150,000. A big jump today because of the distressing update letter. So it took them about 8 days and 7½ hours for the last US$50,000. They have 18 days remaining...
Ken
Then maybe KS isn't the right venue for this. Couldn't they set up something themselves with their own web site and promote through photography online media?
Photography online media (whatever it may be) is not interested in film, unless its a camera that happens to be an open source 3D printed gizmo, nothing more then a curiosity.
lomography is a store, not a media outlet.
This is slightly incorrect, they have newsletters and of course if you don't really know about a lot of other film companies and have other sources, then Lomography is really your only source of information when it comes to film and such without having to seek out your own, so the newsletters that they send out could be considered a media outlet for the less knowledgeable.
This is slightly incorrect, they have newsletters and of course if you don't really know about a lot of other film companies and have other sources, then Lomography is really your only source of information when it comes to film and such without having to seek out your own, so the newsletters that they send out could be considered a media outlet for the less knowledgeable.
Photography online media (whatever it may be) is not interested in film, unless its a camera that happens to be an open source 3D printed gizmo, nothing more then a curiosity.
Certainly can't argue with such pragmatic reasoning.
Interestingly, I pledged precisely because he laid out the apparently unvarnished facts. In my line of work it's almost impossible to find anyone willing to tell the honest truth about anything. [snip]
Ken
I haven't pledged anything yet because I haven't seen negatives from it that look to be consistent enough in quality ...
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?