Forget the bakelite Rondinax, the Lab Box is coming

Skiff said:
Exactly.
It is a good project.
And the product is not replacing, but just supplementing the standard JOBO, Paterson and AP tanks. Horses for courses.
I wish them the best.
Click to expand...


That's the way I look at it and if it brings in some new B&W film users in to the fold, it will be a good thing for all of us.
 
Looks like this will probably break through €400,000 today (with 29 days to go).
In other words, pretty soon a half-million dollars for this project! :angel:
 
Godfrey said:
Nothing in what I said implied that there was no film being produced today. Sure is, but it's a tiny amount compared to what was being produced even a decade ago.
Click to expand...

This sort of discussion never ends well, but I'm fascinated by some forum members' apparent need to rain on other peoples' parade.

I find it frankly amazing that this seemingly modest Kickstarter project is soon gonna break through a half-million dollars: it seems an inconceivably large amount for a daylight developing tool. Ten years ago there may well have been a lot more film being used - I have no idea. At that time, I wasn't even aware (or cared) whether film was still being made. For me the excitement of this project is just yet another sign that film has found its growing niche.

As I said, there's always - and I mean really always - at least one person who'll jump into any film-related thread and dampen the atmosphere. It might be a specific question asking for help with a particular button in Vuescan, and some forum member will be there to say that 'if you're converting your film to a digital format you should be shooting digital from the start', or it can be good news like this thread, or bad news saying a film type is being discontinued... It really doesn't matter - there's a wet blanket for every type of film-related thread.

Anyways, the Lab-Box project stands at around $425,000 (€401,000+) after four days. To me - a relative film newbie, with friends who've made the jump - that's just simply great news.
 
mani said:
This sort of discussion never ends well, but I'm fascinated by some forum members' apparent need to rain on other peoples' parade.

I find it frankly amazing that this seemingly modest Kickstarter project is soon gonna break through a half-million dollars: it seems an inconceivably large amount for a daylight developing tool. Ten years ago there may well have been a lot more film being used - I have no idea. At that time, I wasn't even aware (or cared) whether film was still being made. For me the excitement of this project is just yet another sign that film has found its growing niche.

As I said, there's always - and I mean really always - at least one person who'll jump into any film-related thread and dampen the atmosphere. It might be a specific question asking for help with a particular button in Vuescan, and some forum member will be there to say that 'if you're converting your film to a digital format you should be shooting digital from the start', or it can be good news like this thread, or bad news saying a film type is being discontinued... It really doesn't matter - there's a wet blanket for every type of film-related thread.

Anyways, the Lab-Box project stands at around $425,000 (€401,000+) after four days. To me - a relative film newbie, with friends who've made the jump - that's just simply great news.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure he wasn't raining on anyone else's parade here, just stating an objective fact. I doubt there was any implied dampening of film enthusiasm here since he had already taken the time and effort to detail his film processing technique with a Rondinax earlier in this same thread.

Anyway, it is encouraging to see the success of this project.
 
Larry Cloetta said:
Pretty sure he wasn't raining on anyone else's parade here, just stating an objective fact.
Click to expand...

Yep - my point is simply this: it's not always necessary to jump into a thread and state those 'objective' facts.

Sometimes a person can see a thread like this, and think to themselves "Well not as much film is being used now as ten years ago - but hey, maybe I don't need to jump into just this particular thread and state that objective fact. Hmmm - I'm gonna let it go, and find another thread I can contribute to in some meaningful way."

That's how I see it anyway. And naturally this was FAR from being a bad example of what I mean. It's just Monday morning, the Kickstarter just keeps growing and growing, and I felt I'd had enough of RFF's unnecessary negativity.
 
mani said:
Yep - my point is simply this: it's not always necessary to jump into a thread and state those 'objective' facts.
Click to expand...

You have me confused. If you read the contents in their entirety - the same poster also states that he currently uses a Rondinax, has contributed to the start up fund and posted his formula on how he currently uses his Rondinax to process film. In short, he supports the Light Box project.
 
This side conversation is damn funny. :)

Yes, it is extremely encouraging to see the success of the Lab Box on Kickstarter! Yay! Now get a sense of humor and enjoy the day!

G
 
mani said:
Yep - my point is simply this: it's not always necessary to jump into a thread and state those 'objective' facts.
.
Click to expand...

Why are there scare quotes around the word "objective"? To differentiate from the other kind?
Seems a bit odd, decrying the placement of objective facts into a discussion. To me.
Or 'objective' facts. Perhaps those are the worse ones.
 
Larry Cloetta said:
Why are there scare quotes around the word "objective"? To differentiate from the other kind?
Seems a bit odd, decrying the placement of objective facts into a discussion. To me.
Or 'objective' facts. Perhaps those are the worse ones.
Click to expand...

(bolded) LOL!!! ;)

G
 
Quite remarkable figures as quoted:€400,592 pledged of €70,000 goal
3,049 backers 29 days to go.

When completed Ferrania Kickstarter had:5,582 backers pledged $322,420 to help bring this project to life.
Note Dollars and Euros so not directly equivalent: Euro equivalent 303,525
 
Godfrey said:
This side conversation is damn funny. :)

Yes, it is extremely encouraging to see the success of the Lab Box on Kickstarter! Yay! Now get a sense of humor and enjoy the day!

G
Click to expand...

Hahahaha the 'get a sense of humor' internet reply went out of fashion from overuse about ten years ago.

In any case, the Kickstarter is at almost $447,000 after 5 days. I'd say definitely gonna go through half a million dollars before the deadline. Totally unbelievable.

To answer another 'side conversation' - I put 'objective' in inverted commas because these supposedly 'objective' facts don't tell the whole story. Let's suppose this Kickstarter had happened ten years ago - when a lot more film was being sold compared to the "tiny amount" now - how successful would the project have been then? How many Lab-Boxes would've sold even five years ago, when there was so much (frankly enthusiastic) chatter about film finally dying with the Kodak bankruptcy.

Anyway, yeah - the RFF negativity train rumbles onwards as usual. Just been reading in another thread that the reason Contax T2 and T3 prices are going sky-high is because they can't be repaired anymore and are in their "death throes" LOL. If nothing else, the grumpy old men of RFF can always find a grey cloud for every silver lining...
 
ChrisLivsey said:
Quite remarkable figures as quoted:€400,592 pledged of €70,000 goal
3,049 backers 29 days to go.

When completed Ferrania Kickstarter had:5,582 backers pledged $322,420 to help bring this project to life.
Note Dollars and Euros so not directly equivalent: Euro equivalent 303,525
Click to expand...

It looks like the Lab Box will surpass the 500,000€ mark.

The Film Ferrania Kickstarter was in autumn 2014, so about two years ago.
The success of the Lab Box Kickstarter is another clear indicator that the film revival is getting stronger.

Cheers, Jan
 
I am delighted with the success of this Lab Box... and as a newly minted developer, can see how it might increase confidence among folks that they could in fact manage to do this whole "film thing". Whenever mine comes, however, I expect to have the whole down pat so that I'm just not impressed it will have the utility I'd want without the optional motor winder... as continuous rotation uses an amount of chemicals that are consistent with my Paterson tank, but the default approach uses twice the liquid. Convenience always has a price! Maybe Lab Box-II will solve that?

Maybe Film Ferrania's kickstarter was a piker by comparison 'cause they didn't go for 100 Euro chunks? Maybe the greater success simply follows as a result of Film Ferrania's success... and the same way it went with juice/tea companies: Timing plays a factor and the 2nd mover benefits to a greater degree.
 
Em... i'll pass, i had the original agfa dev tank that work the same that i eventually sold again (I assumed that tank was the inspiration of this one), due to the design the rotating nob is always bellow the liquid line and eventually the seal will leak (or maybe mine was worn out in some way?), and of course my biggest problem was that it give me surge line, weird, maybe is because the rotating thing that cause it.

right now I'm using the peterson tank with inversion and that seems to gives me the most consistent result.

Actually come to think of it, has anyone tried stand develop on this tank before? was curious would saying in different orientation actually would benefit from bromide drag?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom