Irresponsible conflation of Kodak and Ilford

Yes they are, and that was the point i was replying to
This one:
""And in point of fact, Ilford is part of the documented scene: do you think their gelatin-silver sales are booming and their factories expanding?"
to which the answer is YES
 
That was "thompsonks" posting, it was not in the original article.

Various articles seem to state that Ilford's share of the film pie is around 10 to 15% at least in the UK.
Click to expand...

Yes that's the way forums work, somebody makes a statement (as Thom did), the respondent can press the quote button to answer their post; the reply one is correct in discussing the OP.
The clue is in the box with Quote on it if you see that the respondant is replying to the person named in the box, if there is no box he is replying to the OP–I don't wish to sound condescending as you obviously realised I was responding to Thom and not the OP!

Ilfords share and profits as you point out are increasing. In 2001 for instance their share of the 'film pie' was less than 1%

But please note market share is not always the best metric of how well a company is doing financially, ask Michael Dell about that.
 
Slate article: Saying Goodbye to Kodak.... by David Rosenberg

Slate article: Saying Goodbye to Kodak.... by David Rosenberg

Roger Hicks said:
On Slate magazine, Robert Burley irresponsibly conflates "murder of Kodak by car radio salesman" and "death of film": http://www.slate.com/blogs/behold/2...raphy_at_the_end_of_the.html?wpisrc=obnetwork

Talk about irresponsible [use of] journalism!

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Hi Roger,

Sorry, i didn't see that statement in the piece "murder of Kodak by car radio salesman" Did I miss something, or is in one of the links in the article?

Also regarding "journalism" not sure what you mean. The article is by David Rosenberg about the work of Robert Burley. I don't know who Rosenberg is. Is he a journalist, newsman? or is he just writing an article about Burley's work. If anything should come out of this little article it should be a discussion about film/digital and the whole damn thing.

My 2 cents

Thanks
Sam
 
I did like the photos, but I see why Roger is upset with a photo of an Ilford truck in a story about the death of Kodak.

I even liked that shot, although I am not sure it should have been included.
 
I must also add recent quotes from APUG that nobody wants to report on (as the media only prefers chasing the hearse):

Simon R Galley said:
HARMAN technology limited was founded 8 years ago in Mobberley, England and is robustly profitable.

Simon ILFORD Photo / HARMAN technology Limited :
Click to expand...


ADOX Fotoimpex said:
We have posted the latest news in the Polywarmtone blog.

http://polywarmtone.com/Blog/English.html

Mirko
Click to expand...


ADOX Fotoimpex said:
Dear APUGers,

because stocks on old CHS 100 are running low and we are sold out in first formats, I wanted to let you know that we are about to release a new version of CHS 100.
We are very excited to announce a new film which will be available in all sheetfilm formats just like the old CHS 100.
The emulsion is already being made and coating is sheduled for April/Mai. After that we need to confection the new film which might take longer than expected as it is a new material and we work with it for the first time.

One of the reasons why CHS 100 had to be discontinued in 2012 was the unavailability of the spectral sensitizer (apart from other economic reasons).
We have tried to match CHS 100 II as closely as possible to the old film featuring:

  • a rock solid classic emulsion system which has been out there for decades
  • a sensitization close the one of the old CHS 100
  • a single layer emulsion
  • the same base material including the option of reversal processing
  • an optimized backside coating to fully prevent light piping (improvement)
  • a special anti halation layer between the emulsion and base for enhanced sharpness (improvement)
  • a full set of formats from 35mm to ULF including 120
  • a state of the art cascade coating avoiding all problems associated with older CHS100 productions (improvement)

The new film is manufactured in Germany and thus upgraded to our professional line.
Prices need to be adapted within reason but the film has also many improvements and will have a higher quality then the old CHS 100.
We will also be able to offer an even wider range of formats with lower MOQ´s.

Best regards,

Mirko
Click to expand...


kuparikettu said:
There has been some discussions around the web on these quite surprising news: apparently Ferrania is going to start manufacturing film for still photography and motion picture use 2014.
Wikipedia states:

"The production of film was acquired in 2013 by the new company FILM Ferrania s.r.l. which took over some of Ferrania's manufacturing equipment and buildings. Former Ferrania technicians are involved too. FILM Ferrania inherits the historic brand Ferrania to launch analog products suitable for the actual needs of cine/photo market. Ferrania's film production is going to start again in early 2014."

On flickr, one member stated that he had contacted Ferrania Technologies and asked about this, and according to him, they had confirmed that a new company really is about to start production again:
http://www.flickr.com/groups/ishootfilm/discuss/72157630192838072/#comment72157634454967558

The owner of the domain http://filmferrania.it is the same person who has updated the Wikipedia article. Whether he is the one behind this new company or is just connected somehow remains to be seen.

Anyway, interesting news!
Click to expand...
 
I don't actually understand the "murder of Kodak by car radio salesman" reference? Antonio Perez was from HP.

But agreed the Ilford truck was about an abandoned operation, not the abandonment of the company.
Click to expand...
Google "Fisher" and "Motorola". Carl Kohrt was the alternative choice (not taken) in 2001 or thereabours. Unlike Fisher, then Karp and then Perez (salesmen all), Carl was a Kodak engineer who understood the film business and knew what he was talking about.

Cheers,

R.
 
Last edited:
You threw me on with the car radio notion.

The Motorola of my life was the developer of the concept of the phone "cell" along with AT&T. I did look it up (as per your suggestion) and found Paul V. Galvin, introduced the car radio to the world in 1930. Until recently Motorola was a cutting edge company. They may be again, I would not count Google-Motorola out. Personally I remain saddened by the seeming demise of color reversal film.
Click to expand...
Highlight: ah, sorry. Whatever Motorola's status at the time, Fisher was essentially a salesman who knew nothing about the photo business. Or, it seems, any other.

Cheers,

R.
 
I was referring to your use of the word "they" not the single poster who has not kept up with Ilford -- and added to the Google misinformation/confusion glut.

Yeah as a mod I have kind of figured out how the system works... 😛
Click to expand...

Then you should also be aware the word 'they' can refer to a reference of a singular person's argument, at least in the part of the world I live.

Sorry about the confusion
 
Companies die all the time, they did even in film's heyday. Anyone remember GAF (and the ads featuring Henry Fonda)? They were the first one with a really fast (ASA 500) transparency film. And how about all the camera companies that died long before digital's influence? Topcon, Miranda, Mamiya-Sekor, Praktica, Exacta, Petri to name just a few. Equating the demise of manufacturers with the demise of an industry is inaccurate. I wonder how many of the photographers who predicted the "death of film" a decade ago are themselves now dead. I'm beginning to think we should all hope to live as long as film.
 
I love film myself but I am constantly reminded what the Lakota Sioux told a couple of tourists named Lewis and Clark a long while ago. It was something like this -- "when you find you are riding a dead horse, the prudent thing is to get off."
 
"but to stand in front of one of those film factories and watch it reduced to dust in a matter of seconds was quite another,” Burley wrote via email"

He could have written that in a letter and sent it by post.
 
I read the article and made me feel sad to have missed the era of film photography by being a film miser, trying to shoot as little as possible to make every frame count!

Today, I use film sparingly but try to tell a story from all the possible angles and to register all the faces and expressions. In my manual cameras I load film in the dark and usually get three or four more frames!

Any way, I am hoarding as much film as I can and enjoy every aspect of photography. I might even start developing black and white soon! I do my own film scanning too!

Long live film photography!

By the way I still have two reels of TMax 100 and 400 that when bought new in 1995 were stored in the freezer and the 100's look good!
 
Re: Robert Burley

Re: Robert Burley

A couple of months ago I listened to him being interviewed on a film oriented podcast. I really enjoyed the interview. I was sufficiently motivated to search for some of his images. I thought that his photographs really showed what happened to Kodak. He also made me realize how large their presence was in Rochester.
 
RBruceCR said:
I read the article and made me feel sad to have missed the era of film photography by being a film miser, trying to shoot as little as possible to make every frame count!
Click to expand...
Prior to digital, there really wasn't much of a sense that we were in an 'era'. Photography was about photographic film/paper. Nobody tried to make every frame count, there wasn't any real alternative, so that was just the natural way to shoot.. no trying...

So, is digital still photography with specialized photographic equipment another phase to be phased out with the coming of cellphones, or stills taken from ultra high resolution video? After all, a quality record pressing on great equipment will trump a standard CD, but now we have slipped into an inferior, but more convenient media of MP3. I can't remember the last time that I purchased a CD and my analog equipment is in search of room in my house to set it up again. I can't imaging pulling stills from compressed video, but we have gone through such a degradation in quality with respect to audio.
 
Normally only if there is an indeterminate number -- which would be correct only if you were expecting more to agree with the single poster.

Or if you do not know the sex of the poster and therefore cannot use "his" or "her."
Click to expand...

Yes and for the singular, when referring to past posts, or events, or arguments of someone you've never met. It is a very common use, especially in England to say "they' when referring to a singular persons argument when referencing them and not using their name directly when they are unknown to you–it's considered polite.

In some cases, they is used even when both the number and gender of the subject are known, but the identity of the person is generic, e.g. "If some guy beat me up, I'd leave them."

In English it is know as the generic 'they' as is mostly used when you've not met the person you're referring to, so as to retain formality.
 
To my English ear that sounds like a red herring, I guess it could just be incessant carping..
I guess I'm trying to skate round the issue.
 
bwcolor said:
Prior to digital, there really wasn't much of a sense that we were in an 'era'. Photography was about photographic film/paper. Nobody tried to make every frame count, there wasn't any real alternative, so that was just the natural way to shoot.. no trying...

So, is digital still photography with specialized photographic equipment another phase to be phased out with the coming of cellphones, or stills taken from ultra high resolution video? After all, a quality record pressing on great equipment will trump a standard CD, but now we have slipped into an inferior, but more convenient media of MP3. I can't remember the last time that I purchased a CD and my analog equipment is in search of room in my house to set it up again. I can't imaging pulling stills from compressed video, but we have gone through such a degradation in quality with respect to audio.
Click to expand...

BWColor: I believe that photography film/chemical has endured quite a few revolutions making some equipment more desirable than others and methods and subjects different. For instance the first revolution came from plate to large format negatives, making the pictures more attainable but allowed for documenting and documentarians to start collecting pictures of everything, then it came the jump from 4 X 5 cameras to roll film cameras such as 120 mm and 127 mm, making the illustration of newspapers possible and news more fresh. The appearance of the TLR made photography more practical, National Geographic used them but exclusively for black and white and Leica rangefinders exclusively with Kodachrome. Then we have a jump from 120 to 35 mm making photojournalism, war photography, social documentation, street photography possible, faster film, Kodachrome, luminous lenses made picture making better. Then we have the appearance of the SLR making rangefinders more niche the usage of wide angles and telephoto lenses beyond the rangefinder framelines and today the DSLR is making way to the phone camera and the Instagram society, despite the fact that most National Geographic photographers use DSLR's exclusively and probably use phones as a niche for instant unedited images. So, I believe that photography has changed within the life of chemical photography three or four times. I remember in La Dolce Vita the photographers having to reload their Rolleis TLR with great stride missing shots.

So in my case I try to use film more liberally despite the cost and hassle. In May case when I shoot E-6 process having to mail to the US and wait for the results.
 
Blog's fine -- and it is a web log, or digitally published opinion snippet. Most of the criticism here seems to concern what's been said in quotes, which is wholly the responsibility of the speaker, in this case the person being interviewed. Fully reported, professionally written news stories, on the other hand, are different animal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom