I already know the price difference. Bulk Kentmere 400, for example, if half the price of Tri-X. I know the prices of Delta 400 and Tmax are similar..
It is still cheaper to roll your own. For example, at B&H 100' of TMax400 is $119.99. That works out to 18 rolls at $6.66 each versus $10.99 for a single roll. Rolling your own Ilford and Foma is even less expensive.
Yes.Is it like Sirius says: just a bunch of Kodak haters spouting off??
Apparently you really don't want to learn. Matt has explained all this in detail many times. There are no "divisions." Eastman Kodak and Kodak Alaris are two completely separate companies. But I guess hatred is emotional rather than rational....the irritating difference between their motion picture division and their still film division...
Yup. Despite the nonsense some at PHOTRIO would have readers believe.There is no reason at all to not shoot digital alongside film. It's all photography...
For color, digital photography is superior to chemical photography. Both dye-based chemical color prints and digital inkjet prints will fade, so there's no advantage there. In terms of initial image capture, given that the end products are equivalent, digital's inherent flexibility gives it the edge. And, before you start raving about how you examine your 8x10 transparencies using a loupe and daylight illumination, in the real world you're probably one, if not the only one, of those who ever do that today. And you won't be able to for very long anyway, since the E6 dyes will fade rapidly from such abuse....digital sucks!
You never miss an opportunity, eh George?
Apparently you really don't want to learn. Matt has explained all this in detail many times. There are no "divisions." Eastman Kodak and Kodak Alaris are two completely separate companies. But I guess hatred is emotional rather than rational.
So.... are YOU switching to digital because of the price increases? If not, why not?
Read everything I've said: I said it doesn't matter whether they are different divisions, different companies, dance partners, or animal breeders - what matters is the cost of the film. If one makes it and the other tries to sell it at such a high price no one buys it, the first won't be making it./QUOTE]
It seems like a good point as it would seem that EK's future is tied to KA's future. I thought Matt King hinted at the sort of relationship between the two that suggests EK has a say in KA pricing but I may be wrong. If I am and KA is autonomous in terms of pricing then it does suggest that had there never been a need to establish a KA then the pricing policy we see might be different. Whether it would benefit the consumer to a greater extent is probably impossible to prove
pentaxuser
Come on, George, nothing you've ever posted about digital photography bears any relationship to "facts."Just the facts!
Try reading what others wrote. The price alone of anything is irrelevant with respect to its continued manufacture. Your assumption that no one will purchase Kodak film as its price continues to escalate simply because you find it too expensive is baseless. The market has spoken and continues to speak. Neither you nor anyone else at PHOTRIO is representative of the film consumer market in 2021.Read everything I've said: I said it doesn't matter whether they are different divisions, different companies, dance partners, or animal breeders - what matters is the cost of the film. If one makes it and the other tries to sell it at such a high price no one buys it, the first won't be making it...
There's nothing rational about projecting a few posters' hate for Kodak film price increases on the market as a whole. It's not clear why you're concerned about my nutrition, but I'm going to skip the sandwich and have a plate of Cellentani olio with grated parmesan soon after posting this reply....You clearly don't know what hate is when you think a rational discussion is hate-spewing. Go eat a sandwich or something...
Prints can be readily made at home from digital files using any number of inkjet printers. No film necessary....I can't put a digital image in a negative holder. I use film to make prints. If I didn't make prints, I would not use film.
As I remind readers from time to time, unless someone has insider information and is likely violating an NDA, it's not a good point at all. Given the roles each company plays in the still film market, and that EK is involved in other things besides still film while what's left of KA doesn't appear to be, just the opposite seems probable.It seems like a good point as it would seem that EK's future is tied to KA's future...
Who knows and who cares? What's absolutely certain is that whatever costs of manufacture drive EK's wholesale film prices to KA, KA sure can't sell for less than those wholesale prices....I thought Matt King hinted at the sort of relationship between the two that suggests EK has a say in KA pricing but I may be wrong...
How many times can the history of EK's bankruptcy / KA's founding be gone over in detail before speculation about a "need" to establish KA ends? Amazing!...I may be wrong. If I am and KA is autonomous in terms of pricing then it does suggest that had there never been a need to establish a KA then the pricing policy we see might be different...
In this fantasy world where there was no "need" to establish KA, what kind of pricing policy could exist that would benefit film consumers? There's no pricing policy for any good or service intended to "benefit consumers." All for-profit corporations are machines designed to earn money, and for no other reason....the pricing policy we see might be different. Whether it would benefit the consumer to a greater extent is probably impossible to prove
Eating a sandwich would keep your mouth and hands occupied.
If you think there is no tipping point where too many users abandon film to make it viable for manufacturers, you are naive.
I think Sal can express himself without assistance. Why pile on just to bash another member? Sandwiches right now should be really good since many of us have leftover turkey.Big words coming from someone who claims that Kodak is purposely gouging the public to force the demise of Ektachrome film, based on what that same person had for breakfast that day. You need to get off your high horse before it throws off its back and flat on you ass.
By the way, other than you, who and where are the vast hordes of former Ektachrome users? Are there names in the same folder that Senator Joe McCarthy had the list of Communists in the US State Department and Army? Do you still check for monsters under your bed in the middle of the night, every night?
I think Sal can express himself without assistance. Why pile on just to bash another member? Sandwiches right now should be really good since many of us have leftover turkey.
No, I've been reading. But your behavior is juvenile and, frankly... rather embarrassing (for you). More insults rather than educated (or even ignorant) replies to the issues. If/when he is believed to be wrong, present a counter-argument!You may have missed posts several days ago when I called him on pulling his claims out of one of his posterior orifices. A conversation that has been going of for at least a week or two.
I think it's more likely that there are too many films. So some will be eliminated leaving the market open to the rest. That's already happening. Then the remainder will then have enough customers to keep film going.Eating a sandwich would keep your mouth and hands occupied.
If you think there is no tipping point where too many users abandon film to make it viable for manufacturers, you are naive.
It only takes one hand to hold and eat a sandwich. Also, my mouth is not needed to key in replies at PHOTRIO.Eating a sandwich would keep your mouth and hands occupied...
In addition to attempting the placement of a sandwich in my mouth, you're also trying to put words there. I never claimed there is no such tipping point. Only that neither you, I nor other PHOTRIO members have any idea what it is. And nothing posted here will enlighten us as to its magnitude. The market will decide. It has ideas of its own concerning what is affordable....If you think there is no tipping point where too many users abandon film to make it viable for manufacturers, you are naive.
Neither my wife nor I are fond of eating turkey, so we made Thursday special another way. Rather than our usual healthy diet, several times each year we splurge. I grilled two small pieces of filet mignon in the back yard. It was delicious....Sandwiches right now should be really good since many of us have leftover turkey.
Come on, George, nothing you've ever posted about digital photography bears any relationship to "facts."
If the Kodak Ltd. Pension fund hadn't paid $600 million to the bankruptcy trustee, and released the super priority claim over the assets they held, there probably wouldn't still be Kodak film production. Building 38 wouldn't have survived the creditors.It seems like a good point as it would seem that EK's future is tied to KA's future. I thought Matt King hinted at the sort of relationship between the two that suggests EK has a say in KA pricing but I may be wrong. If I am and KA is autonomous in terms of pricing then it does suggest that had there never been a need to establish a KA then the pricing policy we see might be different. Whether it would benefit the consumer to a greater extent is probably impossible to prove
pentaxuser
you're also trying to put words there. I never claimed there is no such tipping point
I called him on pulling his claims out of one of his posterior orifices.
Here bulk Tri-X is at 1.7x the price of HP5 and at 1.6x the price of Delta 400.I already know the price difference. Bulk Kentmere 400, for example, if half the price of Tri-X. I know the prices of Delta 400 and Tmax are similar.
I think it's more likely that there are too many films. So some will be eliminated leaving the market open to the rest. That's already happening. Then the remainder will then have enough customers to keep film going.
Here bulk Tri-X is at 1.7x the price of HP5 and at 1.6x the price of Delta 400.
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?