Ed Sukach said:...one undeniable truth, and formulated "Sukach's First Law of Management": "The companies that compensate their employees the most are invariably the most successful."
bjorke said:Okay, explain Ken Lay. Or Iacocca. Or Eisner. Or Cheney.
Be careful that you don't reverse the relationships between cause and effect.
Ed Sukach said:"The companies that compensate their employees the most are invariably the most successful."
Tom Smith said:Thanks TPP -
You're right of course. i don't know who Les is, and I'm not likely to be swayed by someone who tries to hold an aura of authority and says "I told you so" when Ilford is vulnerable and heading down and out (ish). I haven't been on this forum long, but if someone says opportunistically says "I told you so", by gum that has to be one of the most irritating and unhelpful statements. They've clearly been repeating themselves ad nauseam. And don't say I didn't tell you so ;*)
We all have valuable experience to learn from: my problem is that the way Ilford and film-based photography is being pushed out by commercial factors, I'm not going to get 30 years out of using film based emulsion let alone 3.
Digital photography and its future dresscoats will be here for a longer time - this thread is about Ilford's traditional material - not about digital as an alternative. That's what I mean about hijacking a thread - it's so easy to insert *digital* as an option when Ilford is in receivership.
What I like(d) about this thread (in all my immaturity - yep - I'm not socially adept am I) is that I can vent my neuroses about Ilford products and learn about Ilford unofficially.
Sorry if I offended anyone - clearly I need to brush up on my social skills. Time to go back to working in the darkroom (all alone now ;>)
FrankB said:Tom, I have to say that I think you're way off base here. Les is one of the most unassuming people I know. Any "aura of authority" you may perceive is passed to him by choice by those who know of his experience and expertise rather than paraded by him. In particular, suggesting that Les find a different forum to express his views is (in my opinion), completely out of order.
Les, as Tony has stated, has very close ties with a lot of the Ilford staff. The redundancies at Ilford so far have affected a number of his friends, which puts it very much closer to home for him than most of the rest of us. I don't agree with all of his points, but I will listen with respect to any views he cares to put forward.
This is a free forum where everyone (including both yourself and Les) has the right to express their views. We do, however, try to keep it civil. That is one of the key differences between APUG and most of the other forums on the 'net.
As Mr Callow says, the ignore feature is provided for your convenience should you disagree particularly strongly with a member's views.
Regards,
Frank
Les McLean said:For example, I have a friend called Pradip Malde who produces the most exquisite platinum prints who did a body of work called Prayer and Despair but when I took a friend who was a wonderful photographer in his own right to see the show he thought it was rubbish, I loved it.
bjorke said:Okay, explain Ken Lay. Or Iacocca. Or Eisner. Or Cheney.
Be careful that you don't reverse the relationships between cause and effect.
John Cook said:One purpose of this thread seems to be to speculate about the future of Ilford. Based upon simple laws of capitalism, that should be obvious.
Law One: No consumer is willing to pay one cent more for a product than he has to.
Law Two: All investors, including simple everyday folks with tiny bank savings accounts, will always put their money where it earns the highest rate of return.
Law Three: Entrepreneurs, in order to satisfy both groups, must keep their overhead as low as possible.
Law Four: Politicians get elected with a majority of the votes. Since there are more workers than business owners, successful politicians tend to gravitate toward labors point of view.
donbga said:I'm not sure if 'Prayer and Despair' is Pradip's latest body of work but if it is the stuff that he showed here in Atlanta last October it is pure crap IMO. I wasn't alone in my reaction, most everyone I spoke to that viewed the work during his artist talk was disappointed, bored and confused with his work. I don't even think he prints palladium prints any longer and has switched entirely to Piezography (which really doesn't bother me).
His work from several years ago was very good, much of it abstract, but his latest stuff seems to demand that the viewer read a lengthy and convoluted artiist statement to even get a clue as to what his visual intent might be.
Don Bryant
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?