Kodak Alaris and Lomography Partner Up

[HHPhoto]

I don't see this, i think nearly all of the students I have taught have graduated to other forms of photography after the initial Lomo 'hook'.

That is good to hear, of course.
But my experience ist just different, that is why I mentioned it.

Cheers, Jan

 

[alienmeatsack]

Jan - I agree. I have quite a few of their products and I've not purchased any film from them in ages because they never have it in stock! What's worse is, they've reeeally been pushing their Film Subscription service a lot lately, but have very few films in stock to send out.

A lot of people were angry when they introduced the new lenses for the digital cameras. My feed and shoutbox there was filled with hateful protests and I saw lots of people posting "antidigital" posters and such to their galleries.

I don't have a problem with the digital products, they've had Holga and Diana lens items for Canon and Nikon for ages and no one cared or through a fit then. It's just that the film side needs the love. And many of the film people are strictly film, or at least are strictly film on the Lomo site. I only have a small handful of digital shots on there and they are OF film cameras themselves.

I do hope this new Kodak alliance means happy times for film photographers and Lomographers, but I am thinking it's more of a way for the new Kodak to get noticed and for Lomography to cry out a little and beat their chests.

I know the cost of their gear has come into question. Some of it is very overpriced and very cheap, some of it IMHO is a good deal. But, there's no denying that it has brought film photography into the hands of many who had never used it before or might never have.

I wonder if Ilford is going to say something about their commitment to film to get in on the uproar too?

 

[iamzip]

Lomo obviously know how to make money, something that has been sorely missing at Kodak for some time. People are reading too much into this, it's not like Lomo has purchased Alaris - they are partnering. Car companies do it all the time, and yes, some prestige brands are partnered with lower priced brands.

 

[Photo_Smith]

Well if you just take a look around, possibly go to the filmwasters site where a bunch of plastic camera enthusiasts promote film.
http://www.filmwasters.com/forum/

Take a look you might be surprised, and although I understand the angst caused by the tongue in cheek advertising and Lomo™ marketing I'm happy with the news of this tie up.

 

[Ansel]

Great move from Kodak. They make some of the best film available. Good to see them getting more involved.

 

[tunalegs]

It depends on the country. In the US they may be the cheapest, here in Germany with the excellent film infrastructure (much better than in the USA) all the drugstore chains and the specialised online distributors offer more attractive alternatives (most from Fuji; e.g. C200 and 200 and 400 housebrand film for almost free, 88 cent (!!) a roll).

Cheers, Jan

Suppose though you want 100 ASA, and you like Kodak? 🙂

Speaking of U.S. shops, few carry Foma products but if they stock Lomography stuff they will have or can get them easily under the Lomography name and the price is attractive compared to Fuji or Kodak. I know that one could order Foma in bulk offline for less, but direct access and local support for film is good.

 

[Rangefinderfreak]

In Europe, one must be stupid to buy Kodak...

 

[Lauffray]

Is HP5 any cheaper in Europe ? where does Ilford manufacture anyway ?

 

[Ansel]

In Europe, one must be stupid to buy Kodak...

Not sure what problem you have. I am based in Europe and use Kodak Tri-X 98% of the time. Bloody marvellous film! And its cheaper than Hp5+

I do love Ilford films and chemicals and papers though!

 

[Pioneer]

Kodak already supplied Lomography with a lot of film, so this is not surprising, indeed I think it is a most welcome step forward. Say what you want, but Lomography film is sometimes the cheapest way to buy film - per exposure a three pack of Lomography 100 ASA c-41 film is cheaper than a four pack of Fuji Superia at W-mart, and this film is made by Kodak. I can get behind that even if I dislike Lomography's cameras and marketing tactics.

I don't see those prices here. Lomo wants 8.90 for a 3-pack of 35mm c-41. I get a 4-pack of Fuji 200 for 6.95. Right now it is the cheapest I can buy color film for. And the Fuji stuff from Walmart doesn't expire until 2016. I buy a couple 4 packs everytime I go to the store. 🙂

 

[Photo_Smith]

In Europe, one must be stupid to buy Kodak...

Possibly I'm just stupid, but I like Ektar at less than £20 for 5 120 rolls. Kodak B&W is cheaper than Ilford, although I shoot both.

I like to use film of different types and brands, I shoot Kodak as it's mainly cheaper if that makes me stupid then call me happy and stupid.

 

[tunalegs]

I don't see those prices here. Lomo wants 8.90 for a 3-pack of 35mm c-41. I get a 4-pack of Fuji 200 for 6.95. Right now it is the cheapest I can buy color film for. And the Fuji stuff from Walmart doesn't expire until 2016. I buy a couple 4 packs everytime I go to the store. 🙂

Your walmart is cheaper than mine. 🙁 I wonder why though?

Here the cost difference is only a few cents, but lomography is a three pack of 36 exp. rolls so it's cheaper per exp. than the four pack of 24 exp. rolls at walmart.

Edit: also the three pack is sold for $7.90 at my local shop, expiration date 2015. So I've got no reason to complain.

 

[Scrambler]

I have similar feelings about this to what I'd probably have if BMW decided to do something similar with Hyundai or Daewoo.

Or maybe Leica with Panasonic ... oh hang on!

I think you are forgetting that Holden have already done this with Daewoo. And no-one cared.

 

[Keith]

I think you are forgetting that Holden have already done this with Daewoo. And no-one cared.

Holden owners are unusual! 😀

 

[BlackXList]

I don't mind what Lomography do, much of it's not for me, but that's fine,

I don't mind their aesthetic, I admire their branding, and commitment to film, and new cameras, etc.

I've already posted in this thread that I admire the people at Alaris for having the sense to go to them, I don't think it'll cause a decline in the quality of the film, or anything silly like that.

Their huge markup on products does bother me though.

I'm on their uk shop now.

A roll of Portra 160 is £9.90
Mathers have it for £5.49

That's the "mark up" some of us were talking about.

I don't want the most accessible way to get Kodak products to be subject to that kind of mark up, because people won't bother using them.

The lomo crowd don't need the benefits of Portra, at 10quid a roll it's going to be a "special occasions" film, and it's not sustainable like that.

Partner up with Lomo, by all means, but Alaris absolutely NEED to have a robust distribution system in place outside of Lomography as well, otherwise they will lose money.

I don't want them to lose money, and I don't want the product to be subject to a huge additional mark up.