Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: UK high street electronics store chain to stop selling 35mm stills cameras

This is topic UK high street electronics store chain to stop selling 35mm stills cameras 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=004189

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 08-08-2005, 03:54 AM:

quote: BBC Online
High Street retailer Dixons, which started by selling 35mm cameras, is to stop stocking the items because of the popularity of digital cameras.

The company has said it will not be stocking any more after the current stock of the film cameras runs out. Marketing director Bryan Magrath said the decision was a "sentimental event".

"35mm cameras were the first products we ever sold and film processing has been a part of our lives for several decades," he added. Mr Magrath said digital cameras were now the rule rather than the exception. "We have decided that the time is now right to take 35mm cameras out of the frame." [I wonder how long it took him to think up that pun?!]

In 1989, sales of 35mm cameras peaked at 2.9 million in the UK, but now Dixons says it is an "increasingly niche" market. Improved quality and lessening prices have seen digital cameras grow in popularity and this year sales will outstrip the 35mm by 15 to 1. However, the firm will continue to sell some 35mm cameras at its airport branches, to cater for professional photographers looking to buy duty-free products.

Dixons is probably the best known chain of photography/home entertainment/computer shops in the town centre, so I guess this move is significant. I've noticed that even its main rival, Jessops, only has a very small range of film cameras in its catalogue, and often none on display in the stores themselves. I hope this doesn't mean that the availability of film and processing is likely to become a lot more problematic.

But on another level, good - I hope they'll be selling their current stock off at a hefty discount! My Minolta SLR developed an electronic fault a couple of years ago and I still haven't got around to replacing it. The only working film camera I now have is a 1930s Leica I inherited from my grandfather. It still takes lovely pictures, but I only have a 50mm lens for it and you can't get any filters to fit it, which is a bit limiting.

Posted by Martin Brooks (Member # 1269) on 08-08-2005, 12:18 PM:

I don't think you're going to see any more 35mm point-and-shoot cameras, but semi-pro and pro 35mm will exist in the market for some time (although I doubt you'll see new models.)

New York's largest photo store, B&H Photo Video, just released the latest edition of its 35mm SLR Photo SourceBook at a whopping 690 pages. While it's true that many lenses and accessories can also be used for digital photography, this catalog is dedicated only to 35mm photography (digital photography gets its own catalog).

Canon still has six 35mm SLRs. Nikon has eight. Konica/Minolta has three. While amateurs will probably soon give up 35mm photography, it will still be around for semi-pros and pros.

Posted by Allison Parsons (Member # 2728) on 08-08-2005, 04:35 PM:

I cannot for the life of me, give up my 35mm camera. Nor do I ever want to. However, I'm the type of girl that will carry around a 35mm and digital, just in case. Sooooo, I'm hoping that one day some company will make a 35mm/digital camera all in one! Just push a button and it will switch to either film or digital. Actually, is there such a thing out on the market now? If so, what company makes it.

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 08-08-2005, 05:18 PM:

Presumably it would be possible to modify most 35mm SLRs so that the back cover could be interchangeable with a replacement one in which a CCD is mounted of roughly the same dimensions as a 35mm frame (so that the same lens could focus on both). The only problems I could see are that (i) most people now would want 35mm for 'proper' photography and digital for point-and-shoot snapshots: and an SLR body plus lens is a little bit unwieldy for pulling out of a pocket or handbag to snap some friends in the pub or the cat in the back yard; and (ii) if you're half way through a film roll and want to change to digital, you'd have to finish and rewind the film first. But I can't see any reason why a combination film/digital stills camera based on a conventional SLR body couldn't work, technically speaking. For a serious photographer, that would also have the advantage of not needing to invest in two sets of lenses.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 08-08-2005, 07:33 PM:

So long as the manufactuer makes their digital and film bodies accept the same lenses...one neednt invest in duplicate lenses.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 08-08-2005, 09:38 PM:

I use both my Kodak DX6490 Digital Camera and my Minolta X-370S 35mm SLR film camera, depending on the situation. It's usually a matter of whether I need the images in digital form right away.

Kodak DX6490 Users Manual

My daughter's wedding photographer MUCH prefers film for wedding photography -- still the best flesh tones and ability to hold highlight detail in all that white lace:

Wedding Photos by Thom Bell

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 08-08-2005, 11:42 PM:

Oops, there goes Kodak's B&W printing paper.

quote:
-- NOTICE -- Discontinuance of KODAK PROFESSIONAL Black & White Photographic Papers

Due to the ongoing transition to digital output technologies in both professional and educational markets, Kodak has announced manufacturing discontinuance of Black & White Photographic Papers. Sales will cease by the end of 2005.

KODAK Black & White Films and Black & White Processing Chemicals will continue to be produced.

The final availability of specific Black & White papers will vary based on type, size, configuration and surface. Please contact your normal supplier of KODAK PROFESSIONAL Products for the latest information.

Posted by Will Kutler (Member # 770) on 08-09-2005, 01:34 AM:

Allison asked about combo 35mm SRL/digital cameras.
Nikon has had the F-4 since 1988. I remember when it was relatively new; the military was one of its first users. The photograper could take a photo, store it on the data back, take it to a computer and instantly wire the photo (s) to the Pentagon). The data back could also imprint pertinant data on the print or between frames. Data back was the MF-23 (for F-4 only).

Cheers

K

Posted by Paul Trimboli (Member # 1509) on 08-09-2005, 04:49 AM:

Leo there already were products out like you are talking about. But not something the user can change. Kodak released a data back for Canon EOS (can't remeber the model) that turned the 35mm film camera into a digital. The data back had to be fitted by a tech and was very expensive, but there are still a few around. One of the other techs the other day at work was repairing a Fuji Finepix which was a 35mm casting with a CCD on the film plane and the outer case was taller to allow the electronics to live under the body, why reinvent the wheel I guess! The problem with all SLR Digitals is the focus, they all suffer from some sort of back focus problems after time. The smallest warp in the casting and the CCD is no longer paralel. In 35mm this is not so much of a problem becuase the lens is not really focusing on one fixed point as the emulsion on the film allows some play. Digital is great in some respects, but the printing technology is not yet matched to the camera quality. Digital is a point and shoot format for me and any photos of importance are on 35mm. Shoot a roll of Fuji slide film and the colour will blow digital away!!

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 08-09-2005, 06:51 AM:

So lets see...Kodak is canning their B&W papers but continuing their films and chemicals. What sense does that make? While I'm partial to Ilford films and paper for B&W work...Ilford isn't exactly in great shape...having declared bankruptcy.

So I can shoot B&W and process it but never be able to show it to someone unless I print it to color papers?

Personally, I would have thought B&W would have been film's last stand. It has great archival properties and provides great detail.

So John...if one purchases the B&W films...how IS one supposed to turn them into a finished product?

If Kodak is not to make B&W papers...is Dektol Developer also to go away?

I just don't get it...as film heads towards a niche market...Kodak seems to be killing it at an accellerated rate rather than trying to support and promote the niche. [Confused]

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-09-2005, 07:33 AM:

I have to agree withg Steve......
It does seem like Kodak is doing more to systematically kill chemical based photography then any other one company. Why is this?

Mark

Posted by Richard Fowler (Member # 893) on 08-09-2005, 08:47 AM:

......because Kodak's, recent downsizing annoucement is probably eliminating employees who handle these products [Frown]

Kodak has an interest in Lucky film of China which is still in the B & W paper business.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 08-09-2005, 09:28 AM:

Kodak's website has an on-line "Investors Center" that gives detailed "Organizational Overviews" of each of the company's many business units:

Kodak Investors Center

quote:
Corporate Profile
Kodak is the leader in helping people take, share, print and view images - for memories, for information, for entertainment.

With worldwide sales of $13.5 billion in 2004, the company is committed to a digitally oriented growth strategy focused on the following businesses: Health Imaging -- supplying the medical and dental industries with traditional and digital imaging-information products and services, as well healthcare IT solutions and services; Graphic Communications - offering on-demand color and black and white printing, wide-format inkjet printing, high-speed, high-volume continuous inkjet printing, as well as document scanning, archiving and multi-vendor IT services; Digital & Film Imaging Systems - providing consumers, professionals and cinematographers with digital and traditional products and services; and Display & Components - which designs and manufactures state-of-the-art organic light-emitting diode displays as well as other specialty materials, and delivers imaging sensors to original equipment manufacturers.

Kodak Entertainment Imaging (Motion Picture and Television markets) is still a strong film-based business, making significant investments for the future of film, hybrid, and digital imaging:

Overview of Entertainment Imaging Business

quote:
EI Strategy Summary
Vision
• Be acknowledged leader in services and film for creation,
management, distribution, display and preservation of
professional multi-media entertainment content
Path Forward
• Continue to generate revenue/earnings through film and services
– Film/hybrid/digital
• Leverage core film business to attain competitive advantage in
industry transition to more digital pipeline
– Build off existing industry relationships, image science, etc.
• Continue to selectively invest in D-Cinema technologies,
services, and partnerships to position for future growth

Posted by Leo Enticknap (Member # 534) on 08-09-2005, 10:20 AM:

Would it not be possible to produce inkjet cartridges with a high silver content in the ink, in order to try and reproduce the look of photochemical b/w paper prints?

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 08-09-2005, 10:44 AM:

quote: Leo Enticknap
Would it not be possible to produce inkjet cartridges with a high silver content in the ink, in order to try and reproduce the look of photochemical b/w paper prints?

Anything is possible. It may not need to be silver.

Kodak has some pretty interesting print display materials in its portfolio of products:

Kodak ENDURA Metallic Paper

quote:
ENDURA Metallic Paper opens a whole new dimension for commercial and portrait output. Its glossy finish and metallic appearance creates images with exceptional visual interest and depth that will appeal to both photographers and display designers seeking a unique look. And it delivers rich, vibrant colors and flattering flesh tones.

Kodak ENDURA Night and Day Display Material

quote:
This true photographic material gives you these kinds of outstanding displays with stopping power...day and night, indoors or outdoors, with or without backlighting. Kodak's Day/Night Display Material can be viewed with both transmitted and reflected illumination. Offer your customers a compelling and unique photographic display that makes their message stand out above the competition.

Kodak Thermal Media

quote:
Thermal media from Kodak Professional, along with KODAK PROFESSIONAL Thermal Printers, delivers the same high-quality photographic prints that you have built your reputation on. Whether you are producing digital portraits in the studio, creating high-quality transparencies for presentations, selling digital photos at an event or making CMYK proofs for your next offset print client, Kodak has a thermal output solution to meet your needs. From 4 x 6” photo prints on the 4720 printer up to 9-1/2 x 14” professional prints on the 8670 PS printer, Kodak offers a media and printer to suit your digital application. If printing professional pictures is your business, Kodak provides layout choices in the printer drivers so you can print standard or custom package prints that are ready to sell.

Kodak PROFESSIONAL Inkjet Photo Paper

quote:
With KODAK PROFESSIONAL Inkjet Photo Paper, you have the freedom to print in your studio, and the quality to back it up. KODAK PROFESSIONAL Inkjet Photo Paper is universally compatible and will work with both pigmented and dye based inkjet printers.

Kodak ULTIMA Picture Paper

quote:
Ultima Picture Paper with KODAK COLORLAST Technology delivers significantly longer print life compared to other leading brands of inkjet photo paper.

Locks in color so the brilliant, vivid photo you see today will stay that way
Shields photos from the key factors that lead to fading – light, air pollution, moisture and heat
Photos last no matter how you display them - in a frame, photo album or on a table at home

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 08-09-2005, 12:24 PM:

I'm still confused...is the plan to shoot on B&W film, then transfer it to a digital medium so it may be manipulated and then output digitally?

Is it time to just throw the enlarger away? Oh wait, I do have a color head for mine (Bessler 23C2) so I guess I can still do color work.

Posted by Paul Mayer (Member # 355) on 08-09-2005, 12:37 PM:

That's what I get out the release--chemical origination with digital presentation of B&W images from now on.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 08-09-2005, 01:10 PM:

There are other "niche" suppliers for silver-image B&W papers. If you really like the Kodak B&W papers, stock up now and refrigerate your supply.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 08-09-2005, 07:33 PM:

Might you have a list of those other suppliers of B&W papers?

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 08-09-2005, 07:37 PM:

I always liked Agfa B&W papers the best but I'm not sure if they are still around and available either.

Steve,

Yes you should get what you can for your enlarger while you can. I am about to unload all of my darkroom equipment including my Jobo processor. I've had a few Lambda prints made recently and they are pretty amazing and not all that expensive to have done. You have to have your negative or transparency scanned on a really high quality scanner though before you can have any made. I can't even get Ilfochromes made locally any longer but the Lambda stuff is comparable in image quality although not as fade resistant. Excellent B&W enlargements can also be made with the Lambda system.
Mark

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 08-09-2005, 07:46 PM:

Well it looks like B&H Photo still stocks Ilford products...films, paper and chemistry. I've always been partial to Ilford for B&W.

Posted by William Hooper (Member # 71) on 08-10-2005, 02:23 AM:

I don't want to appear to be piling onto Kodak, especially as it's the generous John Pytlak's employer, but Kodak seems to be 'transitioning' like it's on crack. So much seems to be based on discontinuous reasoning. B/W materials, except for papers? The notice specifies it's part of a move to digital output technologies, so that means gallery prints are expected to be digitally output?

In the corporate profile, there's a lot of IT & printing stuff that's always been a wide, contentious field; the health industry digital imaging area has been steady & growing for a while, but a lot is still output to film & there's growing competition for the digital-only approaches. As for the EI division, as digital acquisition & projection are worked towards, it becomes an all-hardware proposition.

So with Kodak's EI division's outlook of increased investment in D-Cinema, it becomes like health imaging, & Kodak becomes a manufacturer of Widgets like Panasonic or Sony. All the other IT, systems design, & printing stuff will all be just another company in the frothy selection of different vendors. Broadcast no longer really has any hardware standards since tape bit the dust; & the dynamic of buying widgets & system design & installations has been over the decades driven more by budgetary nepotism (is our company invested in that company?), sheer cheapness, putting up high-class front, etc. Manufacturers have ebbed, & flowed, & mostly it's transmitter manufacturers that have been the most stable.

But Kodak's going after widgets like d-cameras, d-projectors, printers, etc., competing with for example Sony, which not only has a much broader r&d resource, but more diversified product output. D-cinema cameras not so hot these days because Panasonic's making a cheaper one, well Sony's still got TV's. Not a prob for Sony, they're a widget company.

The wording of the press release about dicontinuing b&w papers seems to be another example of the mission hysteria at Kodak. Nikon doesn't say it's transitioning to digital; that indicates upcoming abandonment of current product. Nikon just adds some digital items & discontinues lower-performing film ones.

Kodak actively seems to be distancing itself from & making the products it once supported to be a *greater* chore than neccessary for the consumer to deal with.

An example is the Kodak Gallery site: someone at Kodak must have noticed the photo sites on the internet, had the *very* bright idea of hosting one as a hook to have folks buy prints, etc., then someone suggested that film processing by mail could also be incorporated with it. All bright, modern-use ideas!

Then it looks like marketing got their fingers too deep in it, so that if you want to post a link to an uploaded photo on the Kodak site it's 90 characters long & linewrapped, unlike other photo sites. And people who visit a linked photo? Make sure that first there's a screen demanding to register first, with tiny print on a link to see the photo without registering for the entire Kodak Gallery Experience. Marketing WANTS that extra pump for information, even if surfers don't have time for it, don't like it, & thus other photo sites don't do it.

Film sent in for processing isn't scanned at a resolution sufficient for the display-window poster print sizes that uploaded d-camera files are; CD's are at this lower resolution & there's no selection of what goes on the CD-- it's EVERYTHING on the site for a good sized chunk of change. Want Kodak to mail Uncle Harry a CD of the roll of Bermuda pictures but not the roll of insurance pictures of the busted septic tank? Sorry, can't be done.

Resized images on the site aren't sharpened, so to see if the photo was even in focus you've got to order prints or a CD. Want the full-resolution scans? They can only be downloaded for the $50 annual premium membership. But wait, the D-camera users already have the full-resolution scans, it's basically a $50 annual fee for shooting film!

Basically, on the Kodak Gallery site, film cameras are inferior to digital cameras, & access issues make it a functional non-starter against photo hosting sites like Flickr, etc.

I only go into all this about the chaos of the Kodak Gallery site because it's ASTOUNDING that the company which brought you the Brownie & Super8 movies cannot figure out how every other photo hosting site on the internet is approaching the end user.

I suppose Kodak is trying to look dynamic to investors by reiterating "imaging", but everybody's doing that. It's abandoning its capital of its associations with previous & current products. Look what folks here think of Sony & how much extra consideration *it* gets with a new product.

It's a gruesome analogy, but Kodak right now seems to be a corporation that's hysterically pulling out its own guts.

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 08-10-2005, 07:34 AM:

Ilford is safe for the time being; it's been through a management buy-out. I would imagine that there will probably be a serious pruning of the product range sometime soon though. At the moment they still have a wide range of general purpose black and white films:
Pan F, FP4 and HP5
Delta 100, 400 and 3200
XP2 (chromogenic)
SFX (sort of semi-infrared ish)

plus they also have a medium contrast ortho emulsion, for pictorial use, in sheet form only. I can't imagine that all of these will survive.

They also make a wide range of papers, there will probably be some rationalisation there, as well.

Most of their more interesting chemicals are published formulae, so can be easily made up if dropped as a packaged product. Some have never been available in packaged form anyway, I don't think ID-78 warm tone developer which I like, was.

I don't use as much kodak product as I used to, though I do still use their colour print film. The other products of theirs which I liked, and used to buy, have largely been discontinued, Black and white paper, Panatomic X, Kodachrome 25, Ektar/Royal Gold 25, Kodalith, I've even heard that Technical Pan is either going or likely to go soon. I also used to buy quite a lot of colour paper, Ektacolor 37 and 74 RC in those days, but I gave up colour printing years ago. That really leaves only 100 colour negative film as about the only product that I buy regularly now, plus occasional things like 16mm stock (usually 7245), filters, E6 chemistry etc.

I think the digital and inkjet papers side of Ilford has been split off from the conventional side, but I don't know the details. Ilford haven't made conventional colour film for many years, and when they did it was pretty terrible; I have some pictures of my last (6th) birthday party in 1963 taken on it, and the contemporary Kodak product was much better. I'm not sure about Ilfochrome (Cibachrome) material, but I can't imagine that it's got much of a future now,

I don't know about the rest of the World, but here in the UK Agfa and Fuji have very little of the black and white market. What we have seen in recent years is a growth in the market share taken by the smaller companies, mainly from central and Eastern europe, names such as EFKE, Forte, Maco, Bergger, Fotochemica (sp) etc. Here in the UK Kentmere is a major manufacturer of black and white papers.

Kodak always seem to have been more involved in the commercial and technical products, and the smaller companies in the more 'arty' stuff.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 08-10-2005, 08:47 AM:

The Kodak website has a new on-line interactive "Gallery", that shows how Kodak helps its customers take, keep, protect, and share images. A very moving short film introduces the presentation as you "Take the tour", celebrating Kodak's film heritage and giving examples of the promise of digital imaging.

To access the Gallery presentation, go to the Kodak home page at http://www.kodak.com and click on the "It's a place called Kodak" menu item "Explore it now!" at the bottom of the page.

Images: "Keep me. Protect me. Share me."

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 08-10-2005, 09:11 AM:

I must admit, I'm not familiar with the Ilford's "Delta" line of products. I've always used HP5, FP4 and a roll or two of the Pan-F. In my fridge, one could normally find two bulk-loaders with HP5 and FP4 respectively (this was a while ago). Ilford made the best reusable film catridges too.

I'm surprised to hear you say you still buy E-6 chemistry from Kodak...didn't Kodak kill off their reversal films (Ektachrome)? Who else makes E-6 process films?

As for Cibachrome...I loved it...I've many slide to prints that look quite stunning. But one has to question...if there is not a market of revesal films (slides)...what is the point of reversal prints other than for those that have slides and wish to make prints of them long after the slides were made. I suspect that many/most people will be happy to merely scan their slides in digitally and make prints of them that way or share them electroncially.

Posted by John Pytlak (Member # 331) on 08-10-2005, 09:19 AM:

quote: Steve Guttag
I'm surprised to hear you say you still buy E-6 chemistry from Kodak...didn't Kodak kill off their reversal films (Ektachrome)? Who else makes E-6 process films?

Kodak EKTACHROME films are still very much alive:

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/colorReversalIndex.jhtml

quote:
Capture everything your mind can see

You want a unique look, an image that is unmistakably yours. You can capture it with KODAK PROFESSIONAL EKTACHROME Transparency Films.

Our E-Family includes four transparency films, offering a variety of speeds, color saturation/balances and formats. So no matter what you need, there's something for every situation.

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/ektachromeIndex.jhtml?id=0.1.18.14.9.22.5&lc=en

quote:
The extended family of EKTACHROME Professional film is standard equipment for many photographers who desire a unique look daylight or tungsten illumination.

KODAK EKTACHROME Professional Infrared EIR Film
KODAK EKTACHROME P1600 Professional Film (EPH)
KODAK EKTACHROME 64T Professional Film (EPY)
KODAK EKTACHROME 64 Professional Film (EPR)
KODAK EKTACHROME 400X Professional Film (EPL)
KODAK EKTACHROME 320T Professional Film (EPJ)
KODAK EKTACHROME 200 Professional Film (EPD)
KODAK EKTACHROME 160T Professional Film (EPT)
KODAK EKTACHROME 100 Professional Film (EPN)
KODAK EKTACHROME 100 Plus Professional Film (EPP)

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/chemistry/filmE6main.jhtml?id=0.1.16.14.32.14.3&lc=en

quote:
KODAK PROFESSIONAL Chemicals, Process E-6, are used to process KODAK PROFESSIONAL EKTACHROME and ELITE Chrome Films, as well as other manufacturers' color transparency (chrome) films.

Process E-6 requires each of the following chemicals:

First Developer converts exposed silver halide to metallic silver. This is the most critical step in Process E-6.
First wash stops the action of the first developer, and removes the first developer solution from the film.
In the Reversal Bath , reversal agent is absorbed into the film, preparing the film for the color developer step.
In the Color Developer , the developing agent reacts with silver halide to form metallic silver.
Pre-Bleach prepares the film for the bleach step.
Bleach converts metallic silver back to silver halide.
Fixer converts all of the silver bromide into soluble silver compounds.
Final wash removes chemicals remaining in the film emulsion.
Final Rinse promotes uniform drying.
Process E-6 chemicals are offered in sizes designed for all types of processing operations—from small tank or rotary tube to large professional finishing labs and photofinishing operations. The chemicals are supplied as liquid concentrates for ease of handling and mixing.

Even an E-6 motion picture film:

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/products/reversal/5285.jhtml?id=0.1.4.4.6.4&lc=en

quote:
KODAK EKTACHROME 100D - 5285/7285

Intense saturation + true 100 speed

Now you have a 100-speed color reversal motion picture film designed for daylight. Whether you're shooting ads, music videos, documentaries, television, or features, it delivers intensely saturated color, plus a neutral gray scale and accurate skin tones. All with a sharpness you won't find in any other 100-speed reversal film.

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 08-10-2005, 10:48 AM:

quote: John Pytlak
The Kodak website has a new on-line interactive "Gallery", that shows how Kodak helps its customers take, keep, protect, and share images.

I'll have a look at that when I get home tonight, John.

quote: Steve Guttag
I must admit, I'm not familiar with the Ilford's "Delta" line of products. I've always used HP5, FP4 and a roll or two of the Pan-F. In my fridge, one could normally find two bulk-loaders with HP5 and FP4 respectively (this was a while ago). Ilford made the best reusable film catridges too.

Delta is pretty much Ilford's answer to Kodak's T-Max. It's finer grained, but I fnd the graain looks rather 'mushy' when you blow it up; I prefer the more conventional emulsions for black and white. I'd rather go to a larger format or a slower film to get finer grain.

quote: Steve Guttag
I'm surprised to hear you say you still buy E-6 chemistry from Kodak...didn't Kodak kill off their reversal films (Ektachrome)? Who else makes E-6 process films?

E-6 is still going strong; Kodak and Fuji are the most common films, but there are others, I think Agfa still make some, and Konica.

quote: Steve Guttag
As for Cibachrome...I loved it...I've many slide to prints that look quite stunning. But one has to question...if there is not a market of revesal films (slides)...what is the point of reversal prints other than for those that have slides and wish to make prints of them long after the slides were made. I suspect that many/most people will be happy to merely scan their slides in digitally and make prints of them that way or share them electroncially.

I tried Cibachrome A and P30, I think that was what it was called, soon after they came out. It can look good for some subjects, but I had problems with it. It's very high contrast; I was trying to print pictures of very dark skinned (African rather than Carribean) girls wearing light-coloured dresses. It was very difficult to get a print that didn't look like a black blob sitting on top of a white blob. Short of making a negative mask there didn't seem to be any way to reduce the contrast Not really a suitable subject for that material. The other problem is that I was having to work in a darkroom about 1x1.5 metres, with no ventilation, and the fumes from the bleach were pretty nasty. Cibachrome was rather similar to the Gasparcolor motion picture printing process, which seems to have been mainly used for cartoons and advertisments, in the '30s. Gasparcolor was printed from separations, not colour positives, and I think that, at least in the early days, each layer was coated, exposed and processed separatly, but the principles were similar. Nothing's new [Smile]

.

Slides can be convienient, you can just look at them on a light box, and you can project them. The 'grain' on them looks quite different to that on a negative film, if you scan it and zoom in it's quite obvious which you are looking at. I did try reversal printing papers many years ago, Kodak Ektachrome 14RC and the Fuji equalivilent, but I wasn't very impressed with either of them. Also, the chemicals were problematical, expensive and had a short shelf life, not much good if you only needed a few prints occasionally. These days I think the best option for printing from slides is to make a high quality scan, and have that printed on normal negative paper.

I find that I'm increasingly tending to use slide film these days, because it's now much easier to get prints made than it used to be.

I seldom use anything faster than 100 film; but then I'm using old, 1960s and 70s cameras, with fixed focal length lenses and large maximum apertures. A lot of the more modern camera seem to have zoom lenses which only go to about f4, or even 5.6. The school I was working at in the mid '70s did a lot of gymnastics, for which we used to use Kodacolor 400 film, about the fastest there was then, pushed two stops. It didn't look good; colour film has improved a lot since those days.

Posted by Christian Appelt (Member # 1067) on 08-10-2005, 04:23 PM:

AGFA b&w photographic papers (US):

Agfa b&w papers (United States)

FOMA, ADOX and EFKE classic b&w films and papers:

Classic Black&White

Special b&w films / papers / lab articles (english)

Lumière Shop

It's a sad thing that Kodak stops making b&w paper, but it actually is a niche market. On the other hand, I am surprised how innovative some manufacturers are: Classic emulsion recipes from the 1950s and 1960s are reintroduced with today's stricter standards of production control. Quite fascinating, I think next fall, I will go back to my "analog" home lab and make some new prints from old 6x6 negatives.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 08-10-2005, 05:39 PM:

Wow...this is good to know (about the E-6 process continuing to survive).

As to Cibachrome...what light source did you use? On my enlarger, one has the option of either a condensing lens or a diffusion lens between the light source and the stage (Bessler 23C2). Using the diffusion lens always lowered the contrast and I never had a problem getting a good range of blacks to whites. I have a picture at Walt Disney World on "Main Street" that belongs in an advertisement it is so good (I didn't take it, damn it!...my brother did). I liked it so much, I made a copy for myself and framed it...I wished I'd blown it up to 16x20 (my max) but I just did an 8x10.

As for the chemical smell...did you try to devlop in trays or drum? I always did my color work in drums and could support up to 16x20 (have a drum roller and everything though started out with manual "aggitation". I didn't have any significant odor problems with the chemicals myself.