22 out of over 67,000 APUG members isn't very impressive.
Survey - Kodachrome Revival Price Point?
-
A
- Thread starter TheFlyingCamera
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
Want to Buy WTB: Toyo Field 45CF
- Started by Jessxi
-
For Sale Deardorff 5x7 (V5) Camera
- Started by Barlow
-
For Sale Deardorff 5x7 (V5) Camera with 4x5 Back
- Started by Barlow
-
Free 3 kits of kodak flexicolor developer, Free in Portland Oregon
- Started by Early Riser
-
For Sale Horseman 6x12 roll film back
- Started by OlliJ
Forum statistics
- Status
22 out of over 67,000 APUG members isn't very impressive.
Oh dear...
It's the sampling that counts. The percentages. Not the absolute values.
In election cycles do the polling organizations count every single registered voter for each published poll?
Trust me here, if it ever were to happen, people beyond only those who voted in this poll would still be allowed to purchase Kodachrome. As well, there are obviously far more than 37 who would not.
Ken
Last edited by a moderator:
Unfortunately nobody seems to know how many of the 67K APUG members are discrete individuals ("discrete" meaning with no redundancy or overlap, not polite) or even still alive, let alone active. The percentage numbers presented for a variety of discussions based on "67K members" seems seriously flawed.
Yes, they are. That's why I said earlier that any conclusions drawn would necessarily be only shadows.
Ken
The only reason I say that is that I know at least one deceased member who I doubt has been dropped from the rolls, and suspect a few others have operated under different user names over the years (if not simultaneously).
p.s. My deceased APUG friend would vote "< $40 per roll" and I know he would buy a bunch if for no other reason than to simply possess them.
p.s. My deceased APUG friend would vote "< $40 per roll" and I know he would buy a bunch if for no other reason than to simply possess them.
My deceased APUG friend would vote "< $40 per roll" and I know he would buy a bunch if for no other reason than to simply possess them.
Ha! There you go! Another skew!
There is no option for those who would never use it, but would buy it once anyway just to complete their collection of Kodak memorabilia. Heck, even my single remaining "sniffer" box of K64 in the freezer could use a friend too...
Ken
In this case, unlike the political polls, no 'scientific' sampling was involved; participants were 'self selected' making the results next to worthless.
In addition, I learned from in my statistics work in industry (Ford and Kodak) that hypothetical pricing questioning is next to useless; the only thing that counts is when customers actually 'plunk down' their money.
If you already knew this, then why did you attach any significance at all to the number 22 in your previous post?
At least I used the term "shadows"...
Ken
I would agree, except that the rapid disappearance of E6 makes that problematic too. Let's get the Ferrania product on the market, hopefully to good reviews, and maybe get Fuji to bring back a couple of emulsions (see my wailing and gnashing of teeth regarding Astia and Provia 400X above) then go for the Ilfochrome! We're probably way, WAY more likely to get ALL of that than to get Kodachrome back, and it would be way better and cooler. The odds are tiny - but not as tiny as resurrecting Kodachrome.
Last edited by a moderator:
Nah, why? Both good films, but nothing near as magical as Kodachrome. Shoot the same image on FP4 and see how many people can tell the difference, not to mention TMX, Delta 100, Acros and the new Adox 100 film if it comes out in 120. Medium speed black and white is abundantly served and the differences are tiny compared to the differences between Kodachrome and E6. (And I liked Plus-X a lot, but mainly because it worked so well in Diafine that Plus-X in Diafine was my preferred 400 speed film in 35mm. None of the survivors does this. Fortunately, modern 400 films, even the pseudo-traditional current versions of Tri-X and HP5+, are so good that I probably wouldn't do that anyway - or go to TMY-2 or Delta 400...)
If I were bringing back a defunct medium speed black and white film it would be APX 100. But still, nothing like Kodachrome. We have plenty of really excellent 100 speed (or thereabouts) black and white films.
Alas, I have to admit I had moved away from Kodachrome to its E2/4/6 cousins and then color negative material about three or four decades before it went away. I'm sure to some it's a classic warm fuzzy feel good sort of thing, but I doubt I would even think about going back unless it was down in the $10 - $15 a roll with processing category (and my last E6 roll, processing alone nudged out of that limit!) I've pretty much relegated color shooting to "that other stuff." Now Plus-X, yeah, now yer talkin'!
I still maintain 22 positive responses is not very impressive.
BTW, I 'used' the 67k figure because someone used it in another discussion I was involve in and at that time I asked if anyone had the actual daily/weekly/monthly participation figures (I''m sure some one has that data), but no one ever replied. I suspect the average weekly participation is somewhere about 300 participants.
I don't believe I mentioned THEM.
Umm...
You didn't have to, because whatever level of significance that you are attaching to the 22 positives must also by definition be attached to the 37 negatives from within the same poll.
Thus...
If only 37 people say they are "uninterested at any price", then that's a very impressive number, and any project to resurrect Kodachrome in the marketplace is therefore essentially guaranteed to succeed.
Do you realize that this what you are saying?
Ken
Regardless of how few folks regularly populate APUG, the number 22 is embarrassingly low, especially if we account for the fact that of these 22 members wishing Kodachrome back, the vast majority seems unwilling to commit serious funds to this endeavor. These results contradict strongly the impression I got from the sheer number of threads and postings about the resurrection of Kodachrome.
Looking at Stephen Frizza's thread, he claims that several thousand dollars in hard cash will be necessary to run a minimal K14 processing line for a few rolls of film. Cost per film would only come down with much higher throughput, and this would require a substantially higher investment upfront. With the numbers submitted to this poll, any form of K14 processing line is completely out of the question, and nobody in his right mind would coat another batch of this film regardless of how small the coating machine would be.
And out of the now 23 positive responses, how many will ACTUALLY part with their cash? Maybe this poll should have come with a $100 deposit to go to the first batch?
All of you guys fixated on the absolute number '22' are embarrassing yourselves. You are saying that if Kodachrome were to again become available, only 22 people in the entire world might buy it.
Really?
Ken
Really?
Ken
Well that's with Steve having to set it up from scratch and paying retail for small volumes of chemicals, dyes etc. It might be a different calculus for even a smallish business making, say, semi-annual runs of a few hundred to a couple thousand rolls. Might.
Which goes to confirm Ashley that "money talks, and bullshit walks ".
All of you guys fixated on the absolute number '22' are embarrassing yourselves. You are saying that if Kodachrome were to again become available, only 22 people in the entire world might buy it.
Really?
Ken
Nope... just saying that out of all the APUGers who have read the Kodachrome thread, 22 isn't a very significant response. It has nothing to do with saying 'only 22 people in the entire world might buy it'. The population of the entire world wasn't sampled.
That pretty well sums it up.
Talk is cheap, isn't it.
- Status
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |