sepiareverb
genius and moron
Faster enough for northern VT. I could shoot ISO 80 all day all year, 25 gets tough during the winter here.
I don’t know about speed with Ortho. I came to Ortho films when there was only 25 speed ones available in rolls. The Ilford Ortho is ISO 80, but only in sheets.
Skiff
Well-known
Hm, do we really need just another repackaging of the Agfa Aviphot Pan films?
Certainly not. These films are on the worldwide market repacked by Maco Photo under their Rollei film brand.
Available for many years. At very fair prices.
Do we really need another Ortho film?
We already have Ilford Ortho and Rollei Ortho 25 (which is an emulsion made by FilmoTec in Germany).
The market for Ortho films is tiny, it is a niche in a niche in a niche.
Already two suppliers in a tiny market.
If now another one enters the market, that could be dangerous for the established two.
Is the Ortho film market big enough to feed another, a third manufacturer?
I don't think so. Too much manufacturers in a too small market are counterproductive.
And we also already have two orthopanchromatic films on the market: Fuj Acros 100 and Adox CMS 20 II.
Do we generally need another BW film manufacturer?
The BW film market is a small niche market.
But in this small market we already have
- Harman technology / Ilford Photo
- Kodak
- Fujifilm
- Foma
- Agfa (Belgium)
- Adox
- FilmoTec
- InovisCoat (is producing the Bergger Panchro)
- Film Ferrania
- Lucky
- Tasma
- Shanghai
Honestly, that are probably already too much players on the field. No real need for another one.
Certainly not. These films are on the worldwide market repacked by Maco Photo under their Rollei film brand.
Available for many years. At very fair prices.
Do we really need another Ortho film?
We already have Ilford Ortho and Rollei Ortho 25 (which is an emulsion made by FilmoTec in Germany).
The market for Ortho films is tiny, it is a niche in a niche in a niche.
Already two suppliers in a tiny market.
If now another one enters the market, that could be dangerous for the established two.
Is the Ortho film market big enough to feed another, a third manufacturer?
I don't think so. Too much manufacturers in a too small market are counterproductive.
And we also already have two orthopanchromatic films on the market: Fuj Acros 100 and Adox CMS 20 II.
Do we generally need another BW film manufacturer?
The BW film market is a small niche market.
But in this small market we already have
- Harman technology / Ilford Photo
- Kodak
- Fujifilm
- Foma
- Agfa (Belgium)
- Adox
- FilmoTec
- InovisCoat (is producing the Bergger Panchro)
- Film Ferrania
- Lucky
- Tasma
- Shanghai
Honestly, that are probably already too much players on the field. No real need for another one.
aizan
Veteran
arguing for more options in fast film, arguing against more options in ortho films. nobody said humans were always logical. 
Pioneer
Veteran
WARNING - Extreme Sarcasm Alert -
In a word...Yes!
What genius do all of you think you possess that makes you the final arbiter of who should or should not be selling film?
Maybe the next one out of the gate will do a better job at a better price. Maybe they won't. I have no idea until they try and truthfully, neither do you or anyone else.
I am absolutely flabbergasted at this attitude of not needing more films. There are tons of emulsions that have been discontinued in the last 20 years that I would love to see come back again.
I wish Silberra all the success in the world and I sincerely hope they are successful. Maybe they will come up with a good replacement for Efke 25. Once they pull that off there are a few other emulsions I would like to see them start coating.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
Thanks Dan. With the apparent lack of interest in film from Fuji and the seeming lack of ability from Kodak these smaller companies are likely the future, with Ilford and Filmotec as the big ones.
After reading all the mud slinging at Kodak over the backing paper problems I thought that an ambitious new player in the game would be better received.
*edit: I’m not bashing Fuji with this post. I really do find it hard to believe that they have much reason to continue to produce film if the bottom line is not big enough, and it seems to be not big enough for them. They are consolidating again into fewer offerings this year. Not just in package sizes, several emulsions are going away in certain sizes or entirely. Reality of the market seems to be that a big company without the capacity to work on a small scale is likely not going to be around for much longer.
MikeMGB
Well-known
I backed this company on Indiegogo, as far as I am concerned the more manufacturers there are out there the better.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
Was thinking I might back them again.
Lux Optima
Established
They are not only selling (or repacking) films, but paper and chemistry as well. Hope they will thrive. And you're right: The more competition the better.
lxmike
M2 fan.
In my fifties now, in the 1970's on going into any camera shop, such as Bonsers, (Newcastle), you were met by at least one wall of film, happy days, for me the time to worry is when we have no film
brbo
Well-known
The question whether we can have YET ANOTHER film repackager has already been answered.
Agfa-Gevaert obviously thinks that is perfectly OK for them to sell their film to anyone who wants to market them under any name they want. So...
I really wonder about the motivation of some people here that think the users of film would be better off with tons of film rotting away in the warehouses. Besides, any film producer (that is deemed worthy of being called film producer) is free to do a better job at marketing their own stuff.
Agfa-Gevaert obviously thinks that is perfectly OK for them to sell their film to anyone who wants to market them under any name they want. So...
I really wonder about the motivation of some people here that think the users of film would be better off with tons of film rotting away in the warehouses. Besides, any film producer (that is deemed worthy of being called film producer) is free to do a better job at marketing their own stuff.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
And Fuji did it, Kodak did it, FOMA still does it.
Skiff
Well-known
Your sarcasm aside, your comment clearly demonstrates your lack of knowledge in economics, and your lack of knowledge of the current film market.
The situation in the BW film market is that we have lots of different manufacturers with huge over-capacities .
And an already very brutal competition which leads to too low margins and too low profitability in this industry.
In such a situation with huge over-capacities and too much players every new players will worsen this problematic situation.
The bitter truth is for example, that because of this murderous competition Ilford and Maco are trying to kick Adox out of the market by brutal, unethical methods: They are blackmailing important material suppliers and forced them to stop shipping to Adox (a friend of mine has lost his job because of that).
And one of the reasons why so much films had to be discontinued is that there have been too much films in a too small market.
Too brutal competition, too much cannibalization effects.
That is the bitter truth.
And neither the market for aerial-/surveillance films (the Agfa stuff), nor the Ortho film market is growing. The first is even declining.
So another supplier will even worsen the situation.
Skiff
Well-known
???
Filmotec is one of the smallest BW film manufacturers! Less than 20 people are working there.
They don't have an own coating machine! They only can do emulsions by themselves. Curently coating of their films is done by Ilford.
And Ilford knows and misuses its market power. They have forbidden Filmotec to cooperate with some other companies.
Skiff
Well-known
arguing for more options in fast film, arguing against more options in ortho films. nobody said humans were always logical.
I have never argued for more options in fast film.
Because I know why the demand for fast films above ISO 400 has declined so strongly:
Most photographers are using digital now when they need very high sensivities.
And even if your are an enthusiastic film user you today need very high speeds much less than 15-20 years ago. Because of the much better faster lenses, which gives you 1-2 stops more real speed and flexibility.
And because of the lenses with image stabilisation / vibration reduction technology, which give you an 2-5 stop speed advantage.
And beacause of the outstanding modern fill-in flash technology, which offers you very natural looking and perfect exposed shots with flash: If there is not enough light, just create the light. Problem solved.
In former times I used ISO 1600 and 3200 films. Today - in the same situations - I don't need these films anymore: Instead I am using ISO 400 films (and enjoy their better quality compared to the higher speed films) and my improved f1.4 lenses, and / or modern fill-in flash technology.
Skiff
Well-known
That's wrong:
No film is "rotting in a warehouse".
Agfa is selling its films to their aerial and surveillance customers. And to Maco / Rollei-Film.
And Silberra has clearly said, that they don't have bought the Agfa film at Agfa, but at a customer of Agfa.
brbo
Well-known
One has to wonder about your reading comprehension abilities. I never said such a thing.
You do understand that Agfa film is Agfa film, no matter how many hands it switches?
Freakscene
Obscure member
I have backed Silberra. A nice EI 200 film with really good tonality and flexibility in different developers would be great for me.
Realism - Fuji won't manufacture it again, and these small companies, even if they had access to the formula, probably couldn't replicate it. You need Fuji's size and R&D capacity to manufacture these sorts of products. Everyone overlooks, forgets, or fails to understand that photographic film is one of the most evolved and technically challenging to manufacture consumer products ever put to market.
HP5+ in speed enhancing developers looks a lot like Neopan 1600. The native ISO of HP5+ in DD-X is about 640, about the same as Neopan 1600s native ISO, and HP5+ pushes to 3200 fine in DD-X, or TMax or TMax-RS. You can open the shadows a lot in dilute Xtol, it pushes reasonably well in stock or replenished Xtol, and it looks very broody and dark in Rodinal, although it loses a lot of speed, but so did Neopan 1600. The tonality is very similar. You can get it too, and that saves time spend fussing or complaining.
Neopan 1600 in TMax 1+4
Marty
Realism - Fuji won't manufacture it again, and these small companies, even if they had access to the formula, probably couldn't replicate it. You need Fuji's size and R&D capacity to manufacture these sorts of products. Everyone overlooks, forgets, or fails to understand that photographic film is one of the most evolved and technically challenging to manufacture consumer products ever put to market.
HP5+ in speed enhancing developers looks a lot like Neopan 1600. The native ISO of HP5+ in DD-X is about 640, about the same as Neopan 1600s native ISO, and HP5+ pushes to 3200 fine in DD-X, or TMax or TMax-RS. You can open the shadows a lot in dilute Xtol, it pushes reasonably well in stock or replenished Xtol, and it looks very broody and dark in Rodinal, although it loses a lot of speed, but so did Neopan 1600. The tonality is very similar. You can get it too, and that saves time spend fussing or complaining.
Neopan 1600 in TMax 1+4
Marty
Pioneer
Veteran
Thanks for your concern Skiff. Interestingly I did quite well in economics. Perhaps it was my professor who misled me.
Brutal competition is a fact of life in all business. I am sorry your friend has been adversely effected and I wish him/her luck. But the answer, though it seems tempting, is not to stop the entry of new players. I hope Adox is able to survive because they have a couple of films that I am very fond of and use regularly.
And just to clear up a few misconceptions...Efke 25 was discontinued for reasons other than lack of market. Likewise, several Kodak and Fuji films have discontinued because the market size wasn't large enough to make them happy. That is quite a bit different from there being no market at all.
Oft times smaller, leaner operations are able to make money where large companies with greatly oversized capacity cannot. I think Ilford is a pretty good example of this principle.
There are always different perspectives. Mine just happens to be different than yours.
sepiareverb
genius and moron
Larry Cloetta
Veteran
I'd have to agree with the sentiments in the linked articles, though some people obviously don't. Nothing in the future is "inevitable", including the demise of the film community. Things are only inevitable in hindsight. Anything which fosters confidence feeds on itself; more people making film is not a bad thing. The bad thing for the film community is the promulgation of the notion that any attempt to make more film is a bad thing, based on the false premise that "economics " says so. There is no static "pie" which needs to be divided among the players, so that if there are more players, every player gets a smaller piece.
Anyway, this Polyanna signed on for some orthochromatic film.