HP5 is good, but I like what Tri-X does in Diafine better than HP5. I could use either in normal developers but shoot Tri-X. I shoot FP4+ and Pan F+ and Delta 3200 though.
Who's crazy to use tri-x when there's the excellent and legendary HP5?
Kodak would then have to provide facilities and staff do that function. That costs and that gets passed to you. Somebody needs to do that function and the need to get paid for it.
Grocery stores aren't really buying from the farmers because the farmers can't support that part of the business. And other examples are legion.
Kodak's reorganization has created a bad situation for those of us who love Kodak films.
Eastman Kodak can manufacture film, but cannot distribute it or sell it to any other that Kodak Alaris. There is no incentive for EK to promote or improve their films.
Kodak Alaris is really nothing more than a marketer of films, using film profits to further their future products. I doubt any money is budgetted for future development.
Neither company is willing to take any risks they can't control.
As we discuss the incredibly high price of their bulk films, we have to ask: Is EK no longer unable to manufacture this product efficiently? or does KA not want to place any significant orders? The bottom line is that there is no "Kodak", only two separate companies milking the cash cow until the udder runs dry.
I dread the day when the trademarks are sold off and "Kodak Tri-X Pan" rolls off the Shanghai production lines.
Same thing applies to brand names being sold off. You think, "Ah, they started making so and so again" only to find out it's a piece of junk with so and so's name on it. If they(the Chinese) did market a junk clone to Tri-X with the Tri-X name on it I don't think it would take us very long to figure out what was going on and not buy it anymore. I'll buy Chinese film if it's good stuff at a good price, but I won't buy junk at any price. John W
I've never bought short-dated or expired film when new film is available.
I have been given some.
I do, however, look for deals or specials or favourable prices on the new film I purchase.
C- for imagination (must try harder)
Please be honest:
1-What film do you buy?
2-What price?
3-Do you/Will you buy a 200$ Bulk roll?
B&H is a mom and pop store. Blimie and Herbert Schreiber are the mom and pop who founded and own it.... maybe a mom+pop store wouldn't restock items, but mom and pop photo supply houses seem to be a thing of the past, they don't have enough of a draw to sell what they have...
B&H is a mom and pop store. Blimie and Herbert Schreiber are the mom and pop who founded and own it.
In saying this I might be as guilty of an unsupported generalisation as others who put forward their theories without being able to produce real evidence but I strongly suspect that pricing has less to do with various costs and more to do with what manufacturers and retailers believe the "market will bear".
Of course the retailer cannot sell below what he is charged by the maker or distributor so they have a hand in the matter of pricing and in the case of Kodak bulk film at a much greater price than it rivals compared to its cassettes at a price much nearer to that of its rivals then this can be laid at the door of Kodak.
In the vast bulk of items what the market will bear would seem to be key. There are a limited number of retailers in the U.K. whose prices vary very little but each "does OK" in the market they serve so peace reigns. If one retailer were to pare prices to the bone then he might expect a reaction for the others and they are then in a race to the bottom where each might end up with about the same market share as before but with much less profits. A very risky strategy if you are one of those retailers.
The few high street shops that sell film do so to a very small market of customers who want the film there and then and are willing to pay more for that. The best example of this what-the-market-will-bear behaviour is demonstrated when a supermarket opens in a town and sells film. Suddenly one of two things happen: 1. the small retailer drops his price or 2. decides to get out of the market. He might still make a profit by competing with the supermarket but if film is only a very small part of his business he may judge it not worth his while to continue selling film and divert his resources to selling other things.
Anyone who does not believe that pricing behaviour reflects what the market will bear should have a look at the price they pay for film at public attractions where it becomes close to a "distress purchase"
To a lesser extent I believe all retailers operate on this principle.
pentaxuser
Dear Paul,
I do not intend to sound 'sniffy' but commercial and professional photographic film manufacturing to ISO 9001 as done by KODAK / FUJI / AGFA and Ourselves is actually 'rocket science' ..... with more than 100 years of technical development ( if you will excuse the pun ).
Regards : Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :
If we all went out and shot a roll/sheet of Kodak film for every negative post related to Kodak on APUG, they probably would see a serge in business.
If we all went out and shot a roll/sheet of Kodak film for every negative post related to Kodak on APUG, they probably would see a serge [sic] in business.
I disagree. Kodak Alaris and Eastman Kodak would probably be unable to detect any change in still film sales volume with that miniscule number of additional sheets/rolls exposed. Even if every APUG complainer immediately purchased new stock to replace what they'd shot. It's below measurement error. In the scope of worldwide sales, and especially compared to what the market was before digital, those making negative Kodak posts here are a drop in the ocean. "Hollywood" controls all.you are probably right...
... It's below measurement error.
...
I disagree. Kodak Alaris and Eastman Kodak would probably be unable to detect any change in still film sales volume with that miniscule number of additional sheets/rolls exposed. Even if every APUG complainer immediately purchased new stock to replace what they'd shot. It's below measurement error. In the scope of worldwide sales, and especially compared to what the market was before digital, those making negative Kodak posts here are a drop in the ocean. "Hollywood" controls all.
Kodak film prices will be what the Kodaks decide they'll be for as long as they decide they'll be at all. Period. "APUG activism" will have no impact on Kodak still film prices or availability. Reality sucks, but it's real.
In which case the products offered as "Kodak" will have no relationship to what's made in Bldg. 38 today. They will bear no more resemblence to Kodak film than current "Polaroid" branded stuff does to real Polaroid film of yore. They'll engender none of the enthusiasm that TRI-X, 100TMX and TMY-2 do now. Also, what alternative supplier would have the capability to provide pseudo "Ektar" and/or "Portra?"...If it increases demand for still film, it just might interest Kodak Alaris in seeking alternative supply sources for film...
In which case the products offered as "Kodak" will have no relationship to what's made in Bldg. 38 today. They will bear no more resemblence to Kodak film than current "Polaroid" branded stuff does to real Polaroid film of yore. They'll engender none of the enthusiasm that TRI-X, 100TMX and TMY-2 do now. Also, what alternative supplier would have the capability to provide pseudo "Ektar" and/or "Portra?"
From my perspective, when Bldg. 38 stops coating film, Kodak film will be history.
Kodak Alaris is owned by a bunch of people who are/were believers in film.
They'll engender none of the enthusiasm that TRI-X, 100TMX and TMY-2 do now. Also, what alternative supplier would have the capability to provide pseudo "Ektar" and/or "Portra?
Probably true even if it is within measurement error it may not be within the realm of enough profit to change the way they do anything. As you say, reality...
p.s. thanks to the unknown Mod who brought this thread back into focus. It was an interesting diversion, but
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?