Kodak Bets On FILM ""You come back in 10 years, there will be a film business here"

i've had a film camera always. i think the pro film stock prices are reasonable. it's printing film that is too expensive for me. i print at A&I in LA, and they do a good job with good instruction. but here's the deal:

a fiber 5x7 print is $15
an inkjet 16x20 at costco is $7 (epson wide format printer)

i still shoot film, but shoot more digital because i know i can print more.

(i don't like the noritsu or frontier scans, and it's an added cost for no good reason. drum scans start at $25 per image at my lab.)
 
Tom A said:
Both Kodak and Fuji have stated that they will support film as long as there are cameras for it.
Click to expand...

The problem for me, Tom, is that I find such a statement utterly unbelievable from Kodak due to the quarterly demands of wall street whereas it's really quite easy to believe from Fuji due to a japanese word that I've usually seen romanized as Giri.

Now, if cinema gives us an out, all the better. Hip, hip, hooray!!! But I still expect those rat bast*rds in Rochester to find several more ways to f*ck all of us film shooters all as hard as they possibly can. I have always prefered film & if worst comes while my lungs are still filtering air, I'll find a way to coat (wet or dry) glass plates. In the meantime, Kodak has a long way to go to get any belief back from me.

William
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yeah, you can't trust Kodak! They stopped making film packs a couple of decades ago, so now I gotta shoot sheet film in my Speed Graphic and in order to use my 3 1/4 x 4 1/4 Graflex SLR I have to cut 5x7 film in half and trim it to size IN THE DARK, but I think Ilford still makes that size.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom