A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » General Photography » In The Darkroom
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Buy film, not equipment.



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 3rd 04, 08:56 AM
Geoffrey S. Mendelson
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Buy film, not equipment.

I just got the Sept 18th edition of AP (a British magazine) and there was
an interesting guest editorial in it. The author suggested that if you
wanted monochrome films to continue to be produced, you should avoid
spending your money on "illusionary upgrades" and spend it on film.

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, C.T.O. GW&T Ltd., Jerusalem Israel

IL Voice: 972-544-608-069 IL Fax: 972-2-648-1443 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838

  #2  
Old October 3rd 04, 10:02 AM
Magdalena W.
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


Użytkownik "Geoffrey S. Mendelson"
The author suggested that if you
wanted monochrome films to continue to be produced, you should avoid
spending your money on "illusionary upgrades" and spend it on film.

And he was damn right too :-)
I just need a bigger fridge, because mine is stuffed to the limits.
Mainly with Tri-X, Neopan and Astia ;-)

Regards,
Magdalena


  #3  
Old October 3rd 04, 11:00 AM
Tom Phillips
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , "Magdalena W."
wrote:

Użytkownik "Geoffrey S. Mendelson"
The author suggested that if you
wanted monochrome films to continue to be produced, you should avoid
spending your money on "illusionary upgrades" and spend it on film.

And he was damn right too :-)
I just need a bigger fridge, because mine is stuffed to the limits.
Mainly with Tri-X, Neopan and Astia ;-)


I'm in fact considering boycotting Kodak, since their CEOs
are such fricking idiots and have discontinued too many of
my favorite films (Pan-X, KM 25, and now Tech Pan.)

If I have to, I'll use glass plates coated with my own
emulsion. Screw Kodak and I hope they read that...

O.K. rant over :-)

--
Tom Phillips
  #4  
Old October 3rd 04, 01:34 PM
BBarlow690
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The real issue isn't to buy more, it is to use more.

Maybe we should each declare one day a week a Newsgroup Free Day, and go
photograph instead of cruising the 'net? Or make a solemn, kept promise to
ourselves that we will each find a way to make twice as many negatives and
prints next year as this year?

Kodak, et al aren't going to keep materials in production just because we (me
included) moan about them going away. The problem, as stated so well so long
ago, is us.

Excuse me, gotta go make some 8x10 negatives!

Best to all,

Bruce
  #5  
Old October 3rd 04, 02:43 PM
Jytzel
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Tom Phillips wrote in message ...
In article , "Magdalena W."
wrote:

Użytkownik "Geoffrey S. Mendelson"
The author suggested that if you
wanted monochrome films to continue to be produced, you should avoid
spending your money on "illusionary upgrades" and spend it on film.

And he was damn right too :-)
I just need a bigger fridge, because mine is stuffed to the limits.
Mainly with Tri-X, Neopan and Astia ;-)


I'm in fact considering boycotting Kodak, since their CEOs
are such fricking idiots and have discontinued too many of
my favorite films (Pan-X, KM 25, and now Tech Pan.)

If I have to, I'll use glass plates coated with my own
emulsion. Screw Kodak and I hope they read that...

O.K. rant over :-)


And they will discontinue the rest sooner or later. Support Ilford. In
my opinion they have better products and they need you!
  #6  
Old October 3rd 04, 03:33 PM
Gregory Blank
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Least for B&W I agree, I received my 5 boxes of 4x5 and my 5 boxes
of 8x10 Delta 100.

I really like some of Kodaks E6 films, for certain applications.


In article ,
(Jytzel) wrote:

And they will discontinue the rest sooner or later. Support Ilford. In
my opinion they have better products and they need you!


--
LF Website @
http://members.verizon.net/~gregoryblank

"To announce that there must be no criticism of the President,
or that we are to stand by the President, right or wrong,
is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable
to the American public."--Theodore Roosevelt, May 7, 1918
  #7  
Old October 3rd 04, 05:04 PM
Donald Qualls
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Tom Phillips wrote:

In article , "Magdalena W."
wrote:


Użytkownik "Geoffrey S. Mendelson"

The author suggested that if you
wanted monochrome films to continue to be produced, you should avoid
spending your money on "illusionary upgrades" and spend it on film.


And he was damn right too :-)
I just need a bigger fridge, because mine is stuffed to the limits.
Mainly with Tri-X, Neopan and Astia ;-)



I'm in fact considering boycotting Kodak, since their CEOs
are such fricking idiots and have discontinued too many of
my favorite films (Pan-X, KM 25, and now Tech Pan.)


By which you mean, because you can no longer get some films you liked,
you'd like to hasten the demise of all films?

If I have to, I'll use glass plates coated with my own
emulsion. Screw Kodak and I hope they read that...


At least I have cameras suitable for this -- a couple competent,
reliable plate cameras from the 1920s and 1930s, originally made for dry
plates. I don't, however, look forward to trying to make panchromatic
emulsions of reasonable speed and then get them to stick to glass; if it
comes to that it might turn out to be simpler to go all the way back to
Daguerreotypes.

--
I may be a scwewy wabbit, but I'm not going to Alcatwaz!
-- E. J. Fudd, 1954

Donald Qualls, aka The Silent Observer
Lathe Building Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/HomebuiltLathe.htm
Speedway 7x12 Lathe Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/my7x12.htm

Opinions expressed are my own -- take them for what they're worth
and don't expect them to be perfect.
  #8  
Old October 3rd 04, 11:28 PM
Tom Phillips
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , Donald
Qualls wrote:

Tom Phillips wrote:

In article , "Magdalena W."
wrote:


Użytkownik "Geoffrey S. Mendelson"

The author suggested that if you
wanted monochrome films to continue to be produced, you should avoid
spending your money on "illusionary upgrades" and spend it on film.

And he was damn right too :-)
I just need a bigger fridge, because mine is stuffed to the limits.
Mainly with Tri-X, Neopan and Astia ;-)



I'm in fact considering boycotting Kodak, since their CEOs
are such fricking idiots and have discontinued too many of
my favorite films (Pan-X, KM 25, and now Tech Pan.)


By which you mean, because you can no longer get some films you liked,
you'd like to hasten the demise of all films?


No. By which I mean Kodak has shown they could give
a rat's ass for anything. Kodak could do very well
as a company just making and selling film, which is
what they're good at. It may be a smaller company,
but viable. Instead, the morons have always sought
to get into areas that made little profit for the
company. Sure, it's a business, but the dimwits at
Kodak have consistently shown they have zero loyalty
to the film market that has kept the company in
business for over 100 years and even less loyalty to
the photographers who have loyally supported Kodak.

As a photographer, I can't and won't invest my labor
in film products I can't be assured will be there even
2-3 years from now. Tech Pan was one of my favorite films.
It's an **irreplacable** film. It was one of Kodak's best
films ever. Kodak should wise up. It's they who are
killing their own film market.

If I have to, I'll use glass plates coated with my own
emulsion. Screw Kodak and I hope they read that...


At least I have cameras suitable for this -- a couple competent,
reliable plate cameras from the 1920s and 1930s, originally made for dry
plates. I don't, however, look forward to trying to make panchromatic
emulsions of reasonable speed and then get them to stick to glass; if it
comes to that it might turn out to be simpler to go all the way back to
Daguerreotypes.


Well, reasonable may be relative. I shot KM 25 and Tech Pan
at ISO 20 for years...

Hey, if William Henry Jackson could do it successfully
under the most difficult circumstances (in the wilderness
or on the tops of 13,000 foot mountains with no food or
water for plate processing), it can't be that hard today :-)

Besides, I'm sure there will be someone who continues to
make film and dry plates.




--
Tom Phillips
  #9  
Old October 3rd 04, 11:31 PM
Tom Phillips
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

In article , David Nebenzahl
wrote:

On 10/3/2004 3:00 AM Tom Phillips spake thus:

In article , "Magdalena W."
wrote:

Użytkownik "Geoffrey S. Mendelson"

The author suggested that if you wanted monochrome films to continue to
be produced, you should avoid spending your money on "illusionary
upgrades" and spend it on film.

And he was damn right too :-) I just need a bigger fridge, because mine
is stuffed to the limits. Mainly with Tri-X, Neopan and Astia ;-)


I'm in fact considering boycotting Kodak, since their CEOs are such
fricking idiots and have discontinued too many of my favorite films (Pan-X,
KM 25, and now Tech Pan.)


I'm sure such a boycott would be at least as effective as the famous "gas-out"
boycott of recent memory. We all know how great an effect *that* had on gas
prices.


You miss the point. It's not about penalizing Kodak, but rather not
investing *MY* photographic efforts in film products that Kodak will
not support long term.

--
Tom Phillips
  #10  
Old October 4th 04, 03:09 AM
Donald Qualls
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Tom Phillips wrote:


Besides, I'm sure there will be someone who continues to
make film and dry plates.


You haven't shopped for dry plates lately, have you? AFAIK, there's one
company on Earth still making them, a factory in Russia; a British
distributor with a business model similar to J and C Photography in this
country was, last I checked, in negotiation with them to purchase a lot
of plates -- I recall the price was to run around $8 per plate in 9x12
cm size, plus shipping from England, with a minimum order of 100 plates.
Out of my league...

For a lot less than $8 per plate, I can buy Schott 2 mm glass precut to
9x12 cm size, chemically silver it, sensitize it with iodine and bromine
vapor, and have modernized Daguerreotype plates on which to experiment
with developing in modern chemicals instead of mercury vapor. I could
pay back the investment for fuming boxes and other necessary equipment
long before I'd go through that 100 plate minimum order -- and the
images I'd produce would be much more memorable and saleable, if I'm so
inclined, than a glass plate negative or ambrotype equivalent.

--
I may be a scwewy wabbit, but I'm not going to Alcatwaz!
-- E. J. Fudd, 1954

Donald Qualls, aka The Silent Observer
Lathe Building Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/HomebuiltLathe.htm
Speedway 7x12 Lathe Pages http://silent1.home.netcom.com/my7x12.htm

Opinions expressed are my own -- take them for what they're worth
and don't expect them to be perfect.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Focal plane vs. leaf shutters in MF SLRs KM Medium Format Photography Equipment 724 December 7th 04 10:58 AM
darkroom wannabe EC In The Darkroom 59 September 4th 04 01:45 AM
Digital quality (vs 35mm): Any real answers? Toralf 35mm Photo Equipment 274 July 30th 04 12:26 AM
Digital quality (vs 35mm): Any real answers? Toralf Digital Photography 213 July 28th 04 06:30 PM
The first film of the Digital Revolution is here.... Todd Bailey Film & Labs 0 May 27th 04 08:12 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:33 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.