I'm just realistic that no one can sustain production without an adequate volume of sales, not even Ilford. Someone talking about their product means more to you than it does to me. Remember last man standing didn't mean much with Fuji.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikebarger
Still doesn't mean their business won't be in the toilet in 12 months (hope not as I use HP5+ in 4x5). I'm much more interested in how a product performs than listening to ads.
Mike
Pessimistic much?
steve
o, ok ...
its too bad they canned pop centennial!
now that i got that overwith,
i am happy to know ilford is doing OK ...
To back up my posts and just my .02 cents and what part of YMMV dont people understand?? Also to overt a flame war.... My post was about losing two of many peoples favorite films... which is never a good thing. The reference to PR departments was exactly that... Ilford is proactive, Kodak and Fuji is not. We hear news via rumors, and speculation over the various internet forums. Ilford regularly chimes in on APUG on their direction and regular press announcements like this one and they keep us in the know. Basically they see value in us. Fuji and Kodak do not post on here and appear to not have the same committment that I've seen anyway..
Maybe if we didn't all bash Kodak so much they would be on our side and be very proactive and interactive. It is almost as if 1 out of every 15 posts about Kodak is good around here.
You think Kodak might be sulking?
Now if this thread had been about Kodak and a similar article, the thread would be filled with vulgar posts about how Kodak management did not know what they were doing, that the article was full of lies, and that Kodak could not be trusted.
So where are the negative posts about Ilford? Fair is fair, if you would be nasty about Kodak, have the balls to be nasty about Ilford or never post anything bad about Kodak again!
Steve
P. S. I have nothing against Ilford.
In the twilight time of film, Kodak or Fuji have probably never even thought of proclaiming themselves the custodians of black and white (and/or analog) photography. They just would not have the balls to do it. THAT is peoples' beef.
I love Kodak and Fuji products. I just wish they would at least TRY to sell them as a viable alternative to digital, and tell us what their intentions are, as Ilford has done constantly! How is it that Ilford is doing well but Kodak and Fuji are not, when they all have excellent products?
I don't know what other post you are talking about, Ron.
As I said, I was joking - of course Kodak are not sulking. I don't imagine they care much whether a few APUGgers bag them or not.
Ian
I might remind you that Kodak is the only company to have directed major R&D towards both color and black and white in the last 5 years or so.
I don't want R&D. I want statements of intent regarding analog photography,...
All money that they should be spending on advertising, instead of trying to meddle with something that isn't broken in the current line of films.
R&D figures ARE a statement on the degree of commitment.
(To those who know them.)
Ian,
I don't think we've seen anything yet from Harman about the supposed new variable contrast Kentona and Bromide papers.
Tom
Or the Lith paper they are contemplating introducing.
Ian
R&D figures ARE a statement on the degree of commitment.
(To those who know them.)
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?