Some Good News.... Kodak sees resurgence of film

[Ian Grant]

So you never shoot Tri-X?

Seriously, your loss.

Not everyone likes Tri-X, some prefer HP5 or Tmax/Delta 400, or stick with slower emulsions .

Ian

 

[andrewkirkby]

If it makes anyone happy, i just ordered $5000USD worth of Kodak products for my business. I've got another order of about $3000 for Fuji in the pipeline.

Ilford will have to wait until i can find a distributor willing to sell to me. CR Kennedy here in Australia are a joke. (If you're reading this Ilford or CR Kennedy, sort it out! - i have cash!)

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

So you never shoot Tri-X?

Seriously, your loss.

And a bit overly presumptuous on your part, don't you think? That simply because you choose to use it, I should experience a sense of loss?

Seriously, that's not your determination to make.

Ken

 

[Ektagraphic]

If it makes anyone happy, i just ordered $5000USD worth of Kodak products for my business.

Super Awesome!

 

[marylandphoto]

So you never shoot Tri-X?

Seriously, your loss.

That's quite an assumption considering that he said Kodachrome was the last thing he was interested in...a COLOR film.

Then there's some of us don't shoot black and white. Yes, we actually exist.

FWIW, I just bought 20 rolls of Elite Chrome 100. Will be buying many more.

 

[Sirius Glass]

I just special ordered and received 250 sheets of 4"x5" Kodak VC 160. I will do what I can to keep it out the hands of the hoarders!

Steve

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

I will do what I can to keep it out the hands of the hoarders!

A thankless job, indeed. Beware the survivalist photographers lurking unseen in their 60s-era underground backyard darkroom shelters capable of withstanding all but virtual direct hits...

Mmmm... stale saltine crackers to go along with goosebumps music on the last Friday of every month at 10:00am... don't be alarmed now, this is only a test...



Ken

 

[Ektagraphic]

I just special ordered and received 250 sheets of 4"x5" Kodak VC 160. I will do what I can to keep it out the hands of the hoarders!

Steve

If you don't mind me asking, where could this be special ordered?

 

[Q.G.]

I just special ordered and received 250 sheets of 4"x5" Kodak VC 160. I will do what I can to keep it out the hands of the hoarders!

Equivalent of not even 7 rolls of 135 film?
Hoarding would not be the first thing that would spring to my mind.

 

[michaelbsc]

Equivalent of not even 7 rolls of 135 film?

?

By my math, and I've been know to be stupid before so please feel free to straighten me out, 4 sheets of 4x5 is approximately equivalent to one roll of 135-36. So 250 sheets would be about 62.5 rolls.

Did you mean 70 instead of 7?

 

[Q.G.]

I have never numbered the amount of pictures i have taken by surface area.
Quite a novel idea, that!


7 rolls of 135-36 film are 252 pictures (if you don't squeeze more out of a roll). That's 2 more than in Steve's hoard.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Michael;

5" x 4 = 20" so in a web that is 4" wide you get 4 sheets / 20". 3.6 x 4 = about 14 sheets in 72"

3 35mm rolls of 36 exp. = 6 feet of film about 4" wide or 72".

This means that about 50 - 60 rolls of 35mm film = about 250 sheets of 4x5. This was just OTOMH using a 4" coater figure from my research experience. That would be the rough yield. You are very close! (Unless I goofed too! ) Remember that mine is just a guesstimate with no big calculations, just what you see above as rough figures.

PE

 

[Sirius Glass]

If you don't mind me asking, where could this be special ordered?

Penn Camera in Vienna VA. Ask for Chip
703 893 7366
Dead Link Removed

Steve
Dead Link Removed

 

[MikeSeb]

I have shot a lot of Kodak in my lifetime but none in the last 15 years. It has been Agfa, Fuji, or Ilford.

Mike

Then you have very little right to complain about anything Kodak does.

 

[Q.G.]

Then you have very little right to complain about anything Kodak does.

Unless some legitimate complaint about Kodak is why he is forced to use the other brands' film for the last 15 years, of course.


Wait and see, i'd still say (about the original topic/title of the thread, that is).

 

[MikeSeb]

My lifetime association ends simply because Kodachrome is the last and final Kodak product that I still use. Kodak has chosen to take their company in a direction that no longer parallels my needs as a photographic consumer. And that was their right to exercise.

I am interested in neither their digital offerings, nor their transitional analog offerings. If I had been convinced by their past actions that their current analog offerings - including their updated Portra 400 color negative film - were not intended to be transitional, then my decision may have been different.

But sadly, I have not been so persuaded, as Kodak has already stated their desire to get out of the film business as soon as is practicable. And they have convincingly - at least to me - demonstrated that intent by already discontinuing the bulk of their analog products. So I am being forced to look elsewhere for my long-term analog needs.

Why this line of reasoning seemingly surprises you is a mystery to me.

Kodak is as far within their rights to unilaterally withdraw any of their products from the marketplace without consulting me as I am in deciding which, if any, of their remaining products to continue to use without consulting them.

You see 'clayne,' that's how business works. It's a symbiotic marriage of convenience, until it's no longer symbiotic for one or the other party. And your emotionalism aside, that level of acceptable symbiosis ("your loss") is not for you to decide for anyone other than yourself.

And just out of curiosity, why on earth would you continue shooting Kodachrome? At least after December 30th? Have you not heard? It's been discontinued...

:confused:

Ken

Lotta drama in that post.

You're obviously entitled to spend your dough any way you see fit. But I'm trying to make sense of this post. What direction has Kodak taken the company that doesn't meet your photographic needs? Still pining for Super-XX or Verichrome Pan?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but it kinda comes across as if---in a fit of pique, and to show Kodak you're not to be trifled with---you've decided to boycott ALL the rest of Kodak's products over some perceived past slight. Is that it?

Are there no Kodak products left worth having? Do you like Ilford or Fuji's offerings better (fair enough); or does indulging one's pique simply provide its own satisfactions?

"Long term analog needs"? There's an oxymoron for you. The love died between "long term" and "analog" a decade ago; they're just waiting for the kids to leave before finalizing the divorce. Same story at Fuji and Ilford, too, no matter what noble garb you'd like to clothe them in for their "commitment" to analog.

Folks, this is pretty simple, or it should be: if Kodak/Ilford/Fuji makes a product NOW that you like NOW---and they aren't clubbing baby harp seals (unless you like seal fur) or pouring benzene into the day-care center's drinking water---buy and use it NOW and for as long as they make it. If enough people do the same, it might be around a while longer. Anything else is just cutting your nose off to spite your face.

 

[Q.G.]

Folks, this is pretty simple, or it should be: if Kodak/Ilford/Fuji makes a product NOW that you like NOW---and they aren't clubbing baby harp seals (unless you like seal fur) or pouring benzene into the day-care center's drinking water---buy and use it NOW and for as long as they make it. If enough people do the same, it might be around a while longer. Anything else is just cutting your nose off to spite your face.

Pardon me, but you seem to miss the point: the announcement is that Kodak will stop (!) making two products we like NOW.
True, they will replace it with one (just one) new product. But whether we like it remains to be seen. Perhaps...

 

[michaelbsc]

Michael;

5" x 4 = 20" so in a web that is 4" wide you get 4 sheets / 20". 3.6 x 4 = about 14 sheets in 72"

3 35mm rolls of 36 exp. = 6 feet of film about 4" wide or 72".

This means that about 50 - 60 rolls of 35mm film = about 250 sheets of 4x5. This was just OTOMH using a 4" coater figure from my research experience. That would be the rough yield. You are very close! (Unless I goofed too! ) Remember that mine is just a guesstimate with no big calculations, just what you see above as rough figures.

PE

What a great juxtaposition! You're working from the beginning (the coating), and I'm working from the end (my fixer replenishment)!

I replenish Hypam based on use. And I measure that use based on surface area. (With a wink to Q.G. )

Ilford has a replenishment chart based on rolls of 135-36. I count my usage in units of "rolls" based on Ilford's suggestions.

Obviously, one roll of 135-36 counts as one unit.

I count one roll of 135-24 as one unit, too. Just to make my pencil marks on the side of the bottle record-keeping easy.

I count one roll of 120 as one unit. (And if there were any 220, I'd count one roll of 220 as two units. When I load two rolls of 120 onto a single reel, that's two units.)

I count 4 sheets of 4x5 as one unit.

I count 2 sheets of 5x7 as one unit.

I count one sheet of 8x10 as one unit.

Yes, I do replenish a little more than Ilford's recommendation because of the rounding errors in my system. But that's better than under-replenishing.

 

[Dana Davis]

So, once we are all in the lifeboats they decide that the ship isn't going down after all? 100 years of virtual monopoly does things to your corporate culture. Take heed...

 

[Sirius Glass]

So, once we are all in the lifeboats they decide that the ship isn't going down after all? 100 years of virtual monopoly does things to your corporate culture. Take heed...

Get over it, the monopoly was broken up in the 1920's IIRC. That is why Graflex was sold off. No one every held a gun to your head and prevented you from buying Agfa, Ansco, Fuji, Luminere, ...

... it is time for your get off your high anti-Kodak horse.

Jus' sayin'

 

[removed account4]

*YAWN*

 

[Toffle]

Oh, for crying out loud! Last I checked, this was the Analog Photography Users Group... not the "I hate Kodak" group, or the "I refuse to take pictures any longer because my feelings are hurt" group.
Find a film you like... Any film at all, or go coat your own glass plates. Stop the jibber jabber and take some freaking pictures already.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

Oh, for crying out loud!

[snip similar sentiments...]

Stop the jibber jabber and take some freaking pictures already.

Later this week I leave for an autumn swing through eastern Washington state with my 8x10 camera.

How about you?

Ken

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

*YAWN*

My sentiments exactly, albeit probably not in the way you intended...

Ken

 

[removed account4]

my big-yawn was because
name calling, posturing et C.
get old really quick.