• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Zorki photo mono


The packaging is definitely its unique selling point. Nothing wrong with that.
 

The danger is to buy the wrong film
The danger is to buy a film - later you find out it is same to xy film - but higher priced.
Example : Agfa Precisa 100 - there the danger is to get the better film (Fuji Provia100/100F) and it is cheaper..
But what about a Lomo E6 called " Retro slide 100" new production from a company in Europe. That is indeed no real info? It might be Provia 100F / Agfa Precisa 100 ? But it might be also original Agfa Precisa 100 (production date 10/2006) new assembling from 8 freezed masterols. It might be Agfa RSX II 200 (ISO 200) rated as ISO 100 exposed 2008 but freezed in bigger amounds (some masterols wich should become 120 films) now from actual assembling Retro 100 Slide 35mm.
And you have to know "Retro" don't stand for color shifts because it stand for possible color shifts (it is unclear from point of manufacturer)....
That is just a theoretical example from behavior of manufacturers of todays films with unclear origin.
And if a manufacturer don't want to see that some people might say :"Better hands off from this emulsion" he has allways the change to state from
1) what company made the emulsion backing.
2)at what date was the backing
3) with wich original film the emulsion is identical
4) is it b-quality, has it possible other failures from production ?

If this is not given as information with a new film you as the costomer may find out the characteristics via testing.
Therefore a nice price in the near of 90cent a roll 135-36 film is OK.
Everything else has a smell of "unfair business"

with regards

PS : No great "Danger" if you buy just one roll! But think about people who need 60 rolls first and find out it may be scratch ......
 
oreston said:
The packaging is definitely its unique selling point. Nothing wrong with that.
Click to expand...
But would you consistently buy a film for its packaging alone? In the full knowledge an identical product can be purchased in a different box for considerably less? I believe in free markets where people are able to sell and buy anything they want at a price the market will accept. I also believe in transparency. Logic suggests buying a roll of each and testing to see if there's a difference. That way you support start ups and fellow film enthusiasts, and allow hard data to inform any future purchases.
 
So it is the time to film manufacturers to design new package - because film produktion is increasing from costs.
The higher pricing from nice package will compensate that.
And the market will accept that method.........?

with regards

PS : If the film is indeed ok - I see no problem with a nice package.
 
Good design costs the same as bad design.
 
Incidentally, does anyone know what happened to the old Orwo film plant? Put Koudelka's watch shot on the box and people would be clambering over one another to buy it.
 
The Orwo Plant has been demolished for the greatest part in the 90s and the terrain turned into a business park.
Interesting to us would be the Orwo museum and Filmotec (new-Orwo), both on that site.
 
Private label film was almost always sold for less than the prime brand stock. In the 80s I bought enough of the colour 100 that I could seek out my preferred supplier, which was generally Konica, no mater if the film was branded Woolco, Canadian Tire, Towers or any other retailer.
 
blockend said:
Incidentally, does anyone know what happened to the old Orwo film plant? Put Koudelka's watch shot on the box and people would be clambering over one another to buy it.
Click to expand...
Orwo has produced chemicals at last. The film production was off first within the 90th. I don't belive if from Orwo is anything left except their name.
with regards
 
Exactly - so I can nothing say against private lable films from the past (70th,80th,90th). Agfa films - for example - were sold - at the top under more than 8
different brand names.
The difference was quite clear.
1) normaly you did know the film from its
identical agfa emulsion.
2) the films were produced exclusive to other brands with same characteristics.
3) the films were "new" because there was no way to take films from "overproduction" - (the demand in films bekäme higher and higher till the erst 2000.) - so everything was very new.
[normaly]
4) the films were cheaper 20% - 50% !!!!!
As far as I know there have never been problems in quality (b -ware).
Because Agfa had very strong restrictions from production to guarantee
highest quality standard with films and with chemicals. Other manufacturers did the same I would guess.
The basis to come to this standard was real mass production.
So Agfa has no problem to waste a complete charge of produced film if they noticed some little failures within production. And Agfas film engineers did their job via controling and testing backed emulsion very strong. Sometimes stronger than the Agfa managers like to see.
Bad films had no chance to that time.
Same was at Kodak.
[nevertheless some films did not have best characteristics from emulsion design.- but the parameters of production were 100,0 % top.]
Today there might have been problems in a way one can't just imagine compared with this mentioned methods from the past.
And it is beginning (just to me/from my point) if a manufacturer who is not able to produce films (because the manufacturer is not known as one of the remaining manufacturers) anounce a so called "new film" and obviously don't want to state from what origin the film is.
............no wonder about higher pricing/ marketing hocus pocus / design.......a real joke in concern of the knolege from production details.

with regards
 
Perhaps they were correct. I trust nowt that has connections to Russia no matter how insignificant or remote.

Talking of ORWO. When it was still being made and processed in East Berlin, I was serving in the British Army in Germany (1977) and we were warned not to use that film because of any accidental or otherwise picture we took of military installations or activities could have been of assistance to them.
 
BMbikerider said:
Talking of ORWO. , I was serving in the British Army in Germany (1977) and we were warned not to use that film because of any accidental or otherwise picture we took of military installations or activities could have been of assistance to them.
Click to expand...

The east German secret Police did apparently have a program of making copies of processing orders that went through the East German processing plants. when the combined German government started opening the Secret Police files they apparently did find a lot of copies of particularly home movies.
 

That does not surprise me in the least.
 
It's said that under the Stasi one third of the population of the DDR was spying on the other two-thirds. A ridiculous, wicked and economically inefficient system consigned to the dustbin of history.
 

I learned about that warning too. I have no proof that such was done. But it makes senses as one could relatively easily select certain films in advance due to the addresses.


I never heard of this and did not find the slightest hint at this.

In all this criticism we must not overlook that the Stasi archives are accessable, but not the corresponding western archives...
 
AgX said:
In all this criticism we must not overlook that the Stasi archives are accessable, but not the corresponding western archives...
Click to expand...
IIRC the Stasi were in the process of destroying their data when the building was taken over. The information was compiled from extant files that evaded the shredder. Transparency was demanded to avoid witch hunts.

One favourite Stasi tactic was to rearrange the furniture in people's apartments while they were out. This lead many to suicide. While I retain affection for the antique qualities of DDR products, the regime that enabled them was inhumane and totalitarian.
 
Last edited:

No, I wouldn't "consistently" do it (if you look at my previous answer you'll see that I would tend to favour buying actual cheaper Foma branded film instead - you did read that, didn't you?) but as a one-off purchase of an attractive limited edition product... maybe.
What is it about online forums that makes people constantly want to jerkoff and score prove-nothing points by ridiculously generalising the specific?
 
oreston said:
What is it about online forums that makes people constantly want to jerkoff and score prove-nothing points by ridiculously generalising the specific?
Click to expand...
The same reason people overreact to perfectly valid points - it isn't a conversation it's a series of statements, some diverging, often with long intervals between posts. Personally I see film as a consumable like washing up liquid or lavatory paper, one decides on a favourite and the packaging becomes invisible. I appreciate not everyone adopts this approach, and some see film as a novelty product or a fashion item, something they're fully entitled to do.

I don't know whether the originator of the "new" film intends there to be a long term relationship with the supplier, or he's testing the water on sales, or having a bit of fun with branding. Apparently it's available in the Photographer's Gallery in London, whatever that tells us. As other people have said, re-branded film was traditionally cheaper than the original, a situation that changed with Lomography and continued with JCH (though there seems to be a question whether that has been available previously). I certainly wouldn't want to see the trend in readily available films, especially budget varieties being re-imagined as bespoke, deluxe or vintage products no matter how delightful the box. Films that are not available in other forms are most welcome, and the market will decide whether they succeed or not.

As I said in the post you objected to, I recommend people try the stuff for themselves.
 
I personaly belive everything you are stating here. But I have the idea it was not exclusive to orwo films.With Ilford you might have had same issues in east berlin labs - may be the results were better........

with regards
 
macfred said:
I bought 5 rolls -knowing it is just Fomapan- as a little attention for photo buddies - I use my Fomapan 100 classic further on ...
Click to expand...
You are right - it is Fomapan

with regards
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register