But you probably weren't shooting weddings outdoors at -30*.
Probably somewhere between slim and none. A new production line is a massive expense and regardless of the increase in film sales, it will never be where it was at a level to support the volume necessary to maintain separate 120 and 220 lines.
If you ask Kodak or Ilford I bet they will tell you no-chance-at-all.
None.
Several years ago when Ilford/Harman examined this, and made sales projections, and discussed it here, the cost of replacing or restoring their warn out machine that assembled the film, the leader and the trailer in production quantities at economic speed, the cost then was in the order of 300,000 pounds sterling, and the minimum order quantities for those leaders and trailers meant that they would have to buy and pay for several years of supply ahead of time.
There was no likely scenario that would result in any return on investment in any reasonable period of time.
As best as I can tell, it is the minimum order quantity for the leaders and trailers that precludes Kodak Alaris and Eastman Kodak from doing it as well. Their 220 equipment may also have been decommissioned.
^^^^^220 was primely used for pros, fashion, commercial, wedding, the vast majority has moved to digital platforms. When I stopped shooting commercial freelance work I stopped buying 220, 120 was just the right size for travel.
The answer to that is get rid of the printing. Gasp!!The backing paper for 120 costs Harman/Ilford more to buy than it costs them to make the film.
In addition to the printed start mark - which is necessary - how are you going to deal with the requirement that it is thinner at the edges than in the centre, that it requires fairly demanding dimensional stability and that it is both light tight and resistant to chemically reacting with the emulsion at either end of the film?The answer to that is get rid of the printing. Gasp!!
Yeah, ignoring the utter lack of demand (outside a few PHOTRIO squawkers), we could all look forward to another cheap, low-quality Chinese product that might jam cameras or be subject to light leaks. Walmart, however, would certainly stock it.The Chinese could do it.
I know. You're correct. Seems to more demanding everyday. Back in the day people bought film as needed not for stocking. And of course Kodak, and others had all kinds of people to watch over every aspect of production. I never really liked 220 anyway.In addition to the printed start mark - which is necessary - how are you going to deal with the requirement that it is thinner at the edges than in the centre, that it requires fairly demanding dimensional stability and that it is both light tight and resistant to chemically reacting with the emulsion at either end of the film?
It also has quite demanding properties with respect to absorption of moisture.
And this means what? Of course a Chinese company could make 220 film. We just discussed here and in the last 2 or 3 threads on the subject that there is barely any demand for the product. So you think some Chinese film company will make and stock a product guessing that there will be a demand?The Chinese could do it.
As a matter of fact, they have tried:The Chinese could do it.
But they also use 120, so it makes no sense for a company tho manufacture both.I have a couple of cameras that will use 220 film. What's the chance of Ilford or Kodak making 220 film again?
And this means what? Of course a Chinese company could make 220 film. We just discussed here and in the last 2 or 3 threads on the subject that there is barely any demand for the product. So you think some Chinese film company will make and stock a product guessing that there will be a demand?
You and other PHOTRIO squawkers have been demanding 220 for years since it ceased to exist.How can there be demand for a product that doesn't exist?...
How do you know?...how do you know how much demand there would be?...
Yes emotions too. But I'd like to travel with my Fuji GSW 690. It only gets 8 exposures with 120. With 220, I could double that. Reloading film on location is a pain. It's a minor inconvenience though.* When I say irrational, I don't mean bad, just something that is more based on emotion, nostalgia, etc.
Yashica 24 - although later models included both start marks. You still had to remember though with 120, because the frame counter still went to 24.Are there any cameras that only shoot 220?
There is probably no real difference, because there still is the same amount of backing paper outside the film.Is 220 as light safe as 120? I've occasionally had light leak onto the edges if the 120 roll wasn't as tight as it could be or I changed the roll outside. I would think that 220 is less safe to change rolls in sunlight, am I wrong?
I would think that market is pretty dead since you can't get 220. And 220 is not going to be available from any major manufacturer ever again. Why should they bother? The only way would be for someone to entice them with an expensive and enormous order--any volunteers here? People gripe when the price of film goes up a few cents as it is.Most of that market would dry up if they were priced similarly to the 120 versions.
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?