This is topic Ilford (film manufacturer) goes bust in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=003513

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 08-25-2004, 06:50 AM:
 
The British film stock manufacturer Ilford went into administration yesterday, and is now up for sale. It was previously the world's largest remaining manufacturer of 35mm black-and-white film for still photography, with an approximate 60% market share. Link to story. The receivers are blaming the growth of digital still photography for declining sales.

I don't think they've sold motion picture film stock for a long time now, but even so I guess this is writing on the wall as far as the stills market goes. Coincidentally (or not, maybe), I heard today that Hendersons, the specialist b/w motion picture lab in London which specialised in archival duplication, is also now in receivership. I can't say that I'm hugely surprised, as it is well known that they've been in financial trouble for some years now. But it's a worrying development, nonetheless.
 

---

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 08-25-2004, 07:18 AM:
 
It would not seem that that folks who love B&W film would be going digital but then I don't know. Was some portion of B&W film sales going to news photography? Digital has had a large impact there; less so art photography I would think.
 

---

Posted by Cory Isemann (Member # 2517) on 08-25-2004, 07:52 AM:
 
That's a damn shame. They made some really good photo paper too, in addition to 35mm camera film.
 

---

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 08-25-2004, 07:57 AM:
 

quote: Leo Enticknap

---

I don't think they've sold motion picture film stock for a long time now

---

quote: BBC story I cited above

---

Ilford has a 60% share of global black and white film sales. But sales have fallen by an average of 11% over the last three years.

---

Although it doesn't make this clear, I guess this means that Ilford have maintained their 60% share, but that the overall value of the market for b/w 35mm stills film has declined, hence the drop in sales. If so, Steve's explanation - that this can be accounted for by news photography going digital - seems the most likely one to me. If 60% of whatever the remaining market share is does not bring in enough money to operate a profitable film manufacturing business, then I guess that's the end of Ilford.
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 08-25-2004, 11:40 AM:
 
I remember reading something that said that B&W film sales had actually gone _up_ over the last few years. Maybe I am mis-remembering, however.

I have a hard time believing that Ilford's film manufacturing operation couldn't be made profitable under good management. This isn't new technology and the R&D costs have likely been paid many times over already. There is also no electronic capture and output system that compares with conventional B&W printing processes (yet).

Is "administration" the same thing as what we call "bankruptcy" in the US?
 

---

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 08-25-2004, 12:02 PM:
 
When I take over I will be making limited runs of nitrate-base MP print stock. Boy, I hope I don't need a 3-story tall solvent casting wheel.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 08-25-2004, 02:35 PM:
 

quote: Scott Norwood

---

Is "administration" the same thing as what we call "bankruptcy" in the US?

---

quote: Link to definition

---

An administration order is a court order placing a company that is, or is likely to become, insolvent under the control of an administrator following a petition by the company, its directors or a creditor. The purpose of the order is to preserve the company's business and assets to allow a reorganisation or ensure the most advantageous realisation of its assets whilst protecting it from action by its creditors.

---

quote: Definition of 'bankrupt' as above

---

Someone against whom a bankruptcy order has been made and who has not been discharged from bankruptcy.

---

• sell all or part of the business as a going concern;
• liquidate (i.e. wind up the business, sell off its assets and distribute the proceeds to creditors and shareholders, in that order), or
• restructure it to the point where it can begin trading again.

A company for which an administration order is in force is protected by law from creditors making legal attempts to recover their debts. I believe this is similar to Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the US; the main difference is that a company in administration cannot trade. I don't think there is any provision in UK law for a company to continue trading while legally protected from its creditors, but I could be wrong about that. AFAIK, in our system, either a business is solvent and can legally trade, or it isn't and it can't.
 

---

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 08-25-2004, 02:40 PM:
 
Kodak just introduced two NEW B&W motion picture camera films:

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products/bw/index.jhtml?id=0.1.4.4.8&lc=en

And still has a popular line of B&W still films:

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/blackWhiteIndex.jhtml?id=0.1.18.14.21&lc=en

Sorry, no more nitrate is available. But Kodak put one of the old casting wheels on display at an entrance to Kodak Park.
 

---

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 08-25-2004, 02:42 PM:
 
So that's why Ilford has bitten the dust!
 

---

Posted by Jeff Stricker (Member # 224) on 08-25-2004, 05:09 PM:
 
Ouch! I've used many hundres of feet of FP4 over the years. It was good stuff and cost effective in bulk.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-25-2004, 05:24 PM:
 
John P.
What are the two new films? I didn't see anything new listed on your links? Double X and Plus X have been around for many decades.....?

Mark
 

---

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 08-25-2004, 08:09 PM:
 
I must admit, when I was shooting a large quantity of B&W 35mm...it was ILFORD all the way baby. HP5 spanked Tri-X (which I've always detested...talk about your grains). FP4 likewise spanked Plus-X though Plus-X wasn't the disaster Tri-X was. I did very little fine-grain slow film so I don't have an opinion of Kodak versus Ilford in the Pan-F and the like. Note most of my work predates T-Max stuff by Kodak

I could get HP5 to do amazing stuff. I generally shot with a yellow filter and used Ilford multispeed paper...I could get my shot to look any way I wanted and they burned/doged better than Kodak's offerings. I found you could push HP5 really well and predictably.

If you bought your ILFORD by the roll, you'd find that the cartridges were reusable since the end-caps snapped on...Kodak's were crimped on.

Ilford pearl was a much more pleasing RC paper to Kodak's "N" finish and I didn't like anyone's RC gloss finish (I think Kodak's was "F"). Ilford's Gallerie paper was simply the most rich looking B&W paper I've ever seen (had loads of good ol Silver in it).

I used Kodak's B&W Chemistry almost exclusively.

In a related group, did all of my slide-print papers with Cibachrome. That is about all of the color I did with Ilford/Ciba-Geigy.

The rest of the color work was primarly with Kodak films and papers.

For E-6 chemistry, I found myself using Unicolor (Ektachrome slide reversal film).

For C-41, Kodak and Bessler had good chemistry.

Boy all this thinking about darkroom work and photography makes me want to go mix up a batch of Chemistry...now where did I put that D-76?

Steve
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-25-2004, 09:20 PM:
 
"In a related group, did all of my slide-print papers with Cibachrome. That is about all of the color I did with Ilford/Ciba-Geigy."

I couldn't agree more and to this day have all my large formnat "chromes" printed on Ilfochrome at a local lab here in SLC. They have a printer there that has 30 years experience with just this stuff! Ilfochrome(Cibachrome) sure beats the pants off anything Kodak ever came up with for reversal chrome printing.... in fact its hard to believe Kodak never came up with something to counter Ilfochrome..... perhaps patent protected or something.

I'd be willing to bet that with Kodaks grain structure revision that Plus-X amnd Tri-X will beat the pants off the Ilford stuff.

Mark @ CLACO
 

---

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 08-25-2004, 09:27 PM:
 

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen

---

What are the two new films? I didn't see anything new listed on your links? Double X and Plus X have been around for many decades.....?

---

quote:

---

We're committed to black-and-white film - improvements to our family of reversal films prove it. New KODAK TRI-X Reversal Film 7266 offers finer grain and increased sharpness, and includes EASTMAN KEYKODE Numbers for easy cross-reference of shots in minutes, not hours. Reduced static support allows for a cleaner image throughout the filmmaking process. And because our new films don’t require processing in a bleach containing heavy metals, they’re easier on the environment. Our improved films provide the rich blacks and excellent contrast you've come to expect from KODAK Black-and-White Reversal Films.

---

quote:

---

KODAK PLUS-X Reversal Film 7265 (16 mm) is a medium-speed, panchromatic black-and-white film suitable for general exterior photography. It has a high degree of sharpness, good contrast, and tonal gradation. It can also be used in interior photography with ample artificial illumination.

---

quote: Steve Kraus

---

When I take over I will be making limited runs of nitrate-base MP print stock.

---

quote: John Pytlak

---

The two B&W reversal films have been significantly improved.

---

What about 35mm?
 

---

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 08-26-2004, 02:03 PM:
 
The B&W negative films were improved several years ago.
 

---

Posted by Tim Reed (Member # 137) on 08-26-2004, 02:11 PM:
 
Oh, sorry, John. If I'd clicked your first link, I would've seen that.

 

---

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 08-26-2004, 02:35 PM:
 
I did experiment wth Cibachrome A when iit first came out, but II had two problems with it. Firstly, it was very contrasty, and secondly, the fumes were evil when processing in dishes, in a very small, unventilated, darkroom.

A few years ago II had a lab print a couple of 5x4 shots for me, and they look really something.

I was never very impressed with any of the other reversal printing processes, these days I tend to scan the sliide, and have an RA4 print made. I no longer do any colour printing myself.

The idea wasn't new when Cibachrome was introduced, There was a motion pictrue process which was based on the same idea. It was called Gasparcolor, and was used for a while in the '30s. It was printed from separations, rather than colour positives, and I don't know if any features ever used it, but several animated shorts and advertisments did.
 

---

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 08-26-2004, 02:36 PM:
 
I did experiment wth Cibachrome A when iit first came out, but II had two problems with it. Firstly, it was very contrasty, and secondly, the fumes were evil when processing in dishes, in a very small, unventilated, darkroom.

A few years ago I had a lab print a couple of 5x4 shots for me, and they look really something.

I was never very impressed with any of the other reversal printing processes, these days I tend to scan the sliide, and have an RA4 print made. I no longer do any colour printing myself.

The idea wasn't new when Cibachrome was introduced, There was a motion pictrue process which was based on the same idea. It was called Gasparcolor, and was used for a while in the '30s. It was printed from separations, rather than colour positives, and I don't know if any features ever used it, but several animated shorts and advertisments did.
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-26-2004, 04:28 PM:
 
I couldn't imagine processing Ciba or Ilford in anything but a drum system, you're dealing with sulfuric acid and the fumes from it. Remember the big neutralization tablet you got in the kits..... Right afrer moving to Utah I bought a Jobo Drum processing system that does up to 16X20's that I still have although not set up today. It does wonders with Ilfochrome and allows very tight temperature control making accurate processing very easy and safe. Never did any film processing in the Jobo as many have used it for, only prints.

Mark
 

---

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 08-26-2004, 04:43 PM:
 
I've never done any home processing besides regular B&W with D-76 (Kodak chemistry). Is it really worth the trouble to do color at home? I don't have a real darkroom and the tight temperature tolerances have sort of scared me off from even bothering with E-6 and such.

I've been really happy with the "new" Tri-X and its tighter grain. That's what I've been using most lately in 35mm (and TXP in 4x5), along with the odd mix of E6 and C41 films. I really should shoot Kodachrome more often (I used to use lots of it), though same-day E6 processing is rather seductive.

I don't do prints at home (no space for an enlarger, etc.), and Ilford paper seems to be preferred by most of the local labs. Hopefully that will continue to remain available so that I can have existing prints matched as closely as possible when having them re-printed.
 

---

Posted by Steve Kraus (Member # 476) on 08-26-2004, 07:57 PM:
 
Does Ilford work with all the dyes being present and selectivly bleaching them? Has this ever been done with motion picture stock?
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-26-2004, 08:25 PM:
 
"Does Ilford work with all the dyes being present and selectivly bleaching them?"

Yes, thats what the sulphuric acid does thats in the bleach step. I believe the dyes used are Azo type dyes. They are basically permanent after processing. All of my older home done Ciba prints that I made over 20 years ago look just like they did when I made them. BTW: Ilfochrome paper is gray in color is you look at a sheet conforming the presence of the three color dyes. If you tear a sheet(hard to do but possible) you can actually see the three color layers at a ripped part of the paper.

I found this stuff on the web....... its a much better description that I can pull off so here it is:

"ILFOCHROME (also known as CIBACHROME) was developed by the Ciba-Geigy Corporation of Switzerland in the 1960s. It is a positive-to-positive color printing process which takes an original positive *transparency and creates an original positive print image while retaining a first generation sharpness without the need for an *internegative. Other processes such as negative printing processes, "Type R" processes offered by Kodak, Fuji and others, are often referred to as chromogenic processes. These processes use color dyes that are in the chemistry. These color dyes then interact with the developer to form a color image on the paper. With the Ilfochrome Classic the dyes are built into the paper and are bleached out selectively in processing. These dyes are called AZO dyes and are known for their vivid color, stability, and longevity.

Ilfochrome Classic prints are renown for their archival qualities, rich colors, and sharpness. This sharpness is due to the fact that the dyes are in the paper, not in the chemistry, and the dyes in the emulsion act as an anti-light scattering layer. Because of this, the projected image does not spread out as it penetrates and exposes the emulsion.
Unlike chromogenic processes, which create greater quantities of toxic dyes, this process is also more environmentally friendly as it does not waste chemistry. The fixer is conventional and processed after use for silver removal while the developer used for the Ilfochrome process is similar to that used in black and white processes. In the bleach step any sulfuric acid used is neutralized with sodium bicarbonate before disposal and contains no toxic substances after it has been treated.

The most common of the two printing surfaces use in Ilfochrome Classic is the glossy. This surface contains no paper but is made entirely of plastic with a polyester backing. This is also the paper that is used in all archival tests. The second type of paper, called Pearl, has more of a matte surface. It is made of a resin-coated paper material, and though it still has the same emulsion and characteristics of the glossy paper, the Pearl is not considered archival. Therefore, archival in this case has nothing to do with fade-resistance as the same emulsions are use by both types of paper. What it means, in extremely rare cases, is a possibility that the emulsion can separate from the backing. With this in mind, most professional photographers will prefer to print using the glossy paper.

It is important to note that this process is different from the Ilfochrome Rapid method. Ilfochrome Rapid is a faster process and has very different printing characteristics. Therefore, when a lab does your developing be sure to specify which process you want. If you're not sure or you are having difficulty finding answers ask what chemistry they use in the processor. P3, P3X, P30, and P30P are the only chemicals that can be used with the Classic material. If you are told its P4 then the lab is using the Rapid material. If you are considering the purchase of a photographic work of art be sure to look carefully at the print and ask the photographer about what processes were used."
Link: http://artisticforum.com/ArtFacts-WhatisIlfochrome.html



Mark
 

---

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 08-26-2004, 08:31 PM:
 
http://www.lightroom.com/lr_pages/ilfo_info.html

quote:

---

What is Ilfochrome Classic (and why isn't it called Cibachrome anymore?) Cibachrome (we'll get to the name change in a moment) was developed by the Ciba-Geigy Corporation of Switzerland in the 1960s. It is a color print material for printing directly from color transparency film, without the need of an internegative...

...The dyes used are called AZO dyes and they are known for their exceptional stability and color purity. Ilfochrome Classic prints are known for both their archival qualities and their rich, saturated colors. When you compare them to other prints, they are also noticeably sharper and this is directly due to the dyes being in the paper, not in the chemistry. By incorporating the AZO dyes in the emulsion, they act as an anti-light scattering layer, keeping the projected image from spreading out as it penetrates and exposes the emulsion.

---

quote:

---

The Kodachrome name was revived, and on April 15, 1935, Kodachrome motion picture film went on sale. Shortly after that, Eastman Kodak introduced Kodachrome film for color slides. The process by which this film was developed was -- and still is -- maddeningly complex, but as with everything else at Kodak, the amateur did not have to worry about that, since developing was handled by the company. Vivid color photography for everyday use had become a reality.

---

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen

---

Kodak paper for printing from color negs is light blue/cyan in color. I would guess thats a color mask but for what reasons I don't know.

---

quote:

---

Aw come on, the stop bath is much better stuff and has a better kick!

---

Stop bath is usually just glorified vinegar! (dilute acetic acid).
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-28-2004, 03:28 PM:
 
That is true but most developers barely smell in comparison to a bottle of Kodak Indicator Stop Bath concentrate !

Mark
 

---

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 09-02-2004, 08:32 PM:
 
I just read this in the net and thought I'd pot it. Things don't sound as bad as we thought they were !!

Mark

ILFORD IMAGING USA INC
OPEN FOR BUSINESS
AS ILFORD RESTRUCTURES BUSINESS WORLDWIDE
Paramus, NJ (August 25, 2004)-- The accounting firm Grant Thornton announced
Monday the
appointment of partners Mark Byers, Malcolm Shierson and Les Ross as joint
administrators of our UK
parent company Ilford Imaging Limited and joint administrative receivers of our
UK affiliate Ilford
Imaging UK Limited.
The announcement pertains to those two UK companies alone. The Swiss business,
including the
ILFORD production facility in Marly, is solvent and continues to conduct
business as usual.
Similarly, Ilford Imaging USA Inc continues to do business as normal.
"The US entity is operating in a business-as-usual fashion, and is continuing
to accept and deliver
on its orders as we evaluate how the changes at the UK companies might affect
us", said Ward
Phillips, President of ILFORD Imaging USA Inc.
"We are taking every action and precaution to maintain ongoing operations with
our customers. At
the same time, behind the scenes, we will be working with our related companies
in the ILFORD
group to improve its performance and strengthen the outlook for the future",
Phillips further stated.
The ILFORD group was founded in 1879 in the UK, and more recently it has
developed into the
world’s leading supplier of dyes for inkjet photo printers and is the second
largest manufacturer of
inkjet photo paper.
###
 

---

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 09-03-2004, 11:26 AM:
 

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen

---

...the second
largest manufacturer of
inkjet photo paper.

---

Guess who's first.

http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQuerier.jhtml?pq-path=2/3/9/36&pq-locale=en_US

quote:

---

Introducing Ultima Picture Paper with new KODAK COLORLAST Technology for colors that stay vivid and vibrant for more than 100 years -- no other inkjet paper lasts longer.*

Whether you want photos to treasure for a lifetime or prints to share on a whim, Kodak has a quality inkjet paper for every purpose.

---