PDA

View Full Version : A Pragmatic Kodak Thread



Michael Kadillak
15-Dec-2010, 09:23
Now that everyone has had a chance to voice their opinion relative to the notice of Kodak drawing a line in the sand relative to format and dropping anything larger than 4x5 in their T Grain line of films, I felt it appropriate to toss out some comments relative to where we are as LF and ULF photographers.

I can safely assume that the Kodak decision was driven proactively by a lack of sales volume in the larger formats which quite honestly is understandable given the realities of where we the industry and the economy are at this juncture. Sometimes these financially driven decisions are necessary to insure that the more vibrant components of the company can favorably move on. Yes, we all wish that Kodak could be more accommodating, but I don't feel it necessary to go down that road again because it is moot at this point.

A couple of things I wanted to point out. First, if 8x10 and larger are "challenged" at Kodak then one could easily assume that other manufacturers are seeing some of the same trends in sales as well. In situations like this individual corporate balance sheets drive these economic decisions. Since we know that Kodak is carrying some heavy financial baggage, we do not know where Ilford is on this issue but it is at least a bit concerning to say the least. Will Ilford or other manufacturers be the recipient of additional 8x10 film buyers that are shifting gears to what is available or will some folks dump 8x10 in favor of smaller LF formats? We do not know.

We do know that T Max 400 and 100 is a great film that many people have enjoyed using in 8x10. We also know that when competition in a particular market sector looses a player and/or a product, higher costs are possible for the remaining available product and the risk of loss for the entire format is at least mathematically increased.

In a positive and proactive mindset we also know that Kodak is not discontinuing the manufacture of T Max 400 and 100, so this is not a fatal blow by any stretch of the imagination. Those of us that want to continue to have access to 8x10 T Max 100 and 400 are not willing to just toss in the towel on this one. As a result, we need to be reminded that Keith Canham is continuing to petition Kodak on our behalf that these films can be aggregated on a regular basis as part of his special order arrangement.

In the short term everyone that is interested in maintaining their access to these films should drop Keith a note letting him know your interests and any other particulars that you feel necessary. How much of what film you would be willing to purchase along with any other specific would be greatly appreciated. I am sure that Keith will be in contact with Kodak shortly so we can turn this breakdown into a breakthrough.

I have to much time and money invested into LF/ULF to take this as a foregone conclusion sitting down. Hopefully, many of you feel the same.

Thanks

Daniel Stone
15-Dec-2010, 09:39
Keith Canham's # is here:

480.250.3990 (from the Canham Cameras webpage)

Michael, I can stretch to say 3-4 boxes, depending on # sheets/box. My current budget doesn't have much "stretchability" right now, but I can work it out. However, if there is enough interest to form a group purchase order for this, count me in :)!

-Dan

Sal Santamaura
15-Dec-2010, 09:46
...we need to be reminded that Keith Canham is continuing to petition Kodak on our behalf that these films can be aggregated on a regular basis as part of his special order arrangement...For years I've tried very hard to practice the "if one has nothing nice to say, say nothing" approach regarding Kodak. I even went so far as to promote a whole plate TMY-2 special cutting/finishing through Glazer's, ordering more than I really needed (30 boxes) to make it happen. At this point, I've concluded it's time to face reality and stop holding my tongue.

Here is an excerpt from what I posted in the other thread:


...when we received our special order of whole plate TMY-2 a few years ago, Kodak had put the film in static-charged black plastic bags (that looked like they were closed with a soldering iron) and stuck those bags in unlined, two-part carboard boxes which shed dust all over the bags. It wasn't pretty. I'd advise anyone thinking of placing Kodak special orders to obtain assurance in advance that what they receive will be packaged like Kodak's standard sheet film products or can be returned for a full refund. By the way, you don't need to wait for Canham, just cough up the $15,000 or so to a Kodak dealer and they'll place the order for you. :) ...The permeable packaging in which our whole plate film was delivered was not, in my opinion, suitable for long-term freezer placement.

I suggest that anyone considering special orders heed this advice.

Drew Wiley
15-Dec-2010, 10:07
Now that I've got plenty of 8X10 TMY and TMX is my freezer, it's a wait and see attitude. The inconvenice of this whole mess will no doubt tempt me to shoot 4x5
when that is a realistic substitute for 8X10. I'm also very familiar with the Ilford options, which aren't really a direct substitute at all, but will work if necessary. Maybe
something else will come along in the meantime, from a completely different source.
There's probably plenty of potential market for a limited number of 8x10 films, and maybe thinning out certain suppliers will be a good thing in this respect, so someone else will have a steady incentive to offer it. But unless something does change, I'll
try to join a group order when my own freezer inventory gets down to about 50%.
I don't feel to penalize Kodak for what they are doing right, which is engineering a
high-quality, fast speed sheet film stock. And I hope there will be enough of us
interested to get this cut into 8x10 on at least a bi-annual basis. Since 8X10 is not
a rare or specialty size at all, maybe a particular vendor would be willing to retain
some boxes in their own inventory to tide us over between cuts.

mikebarger
15-Dec-2010, 17:43
I've seen a lot of posts here and on APUG that 8X10 is not a niche market. I've not seen any posts indicating the amount of 8X10 B&W sold over the last five years or so. Are sales up or down over this period?

My gut tells me even 4X5, which I shoot, has turned into a niche product.

How do you make a guess if 8X10 is a niche product, or not, without some sales data? I know we all want it to be a viable product, but the only real data we have is Kodak removing it's flagship film from the 8X10 market.

John Bowen
15-Dec-2010, 17:52
Michael,

Last week, I made my 1st LF film purchase since 2007. It was a fairly large order. Right now, I likely have a decade's worth of LF film in the freezer. I really don't see myself purchasing any more film than I expose each year. If a group order is put together, for TMY in 5x7 or 8x10 and they need someone to purchase a few boxes to make the order go, I'll help.

Greg Blank
15-Dec-2010, 18:48
Nothing against any seller out there, but it boils down to something most people don't understand, that is the way the sales system in this country generally works. I am going to be somewhat vague to keep myself out of really hot water.

You have manufacturers and distributers, and then resellers. No small reseller can truely compete with the bigger dealers because the biggest dealers purchase the juicest sales items not from a distribution chain but from the manufacturer and take preferred status in order fullfillment simply because they have the resources to constantly order. When people praise the big dealers as to how great a big photo reseller is in terms of price what they do not realize is that they have contributed greatly to the demise of the very product they like to use. Why, because the minute sales dip the reseller does not choose to stock the item because they allocate the sales space to the hot selling item. I think you also give up certain levels of control in not supporting small stores and sellers. This past year I bought a $400 roll of Ilford Mural paper....small potatoes but I bought from my local store, and when I had a minor issue they backed me up and any price lower is too low in terms of giving up that relationship. So I understand making a personal recommendation but there are many smaller qualified resellers- if you are willing to purchase at a slightly higher cost. Hell even I can buy and sell from the distributors, as I have a state resale cert....for me its more of a hassle, because I just want to take pictures :)

Big resellers possibly purchase at a price that may equal the distributors pricing, and therefore the middleman can not truely compete under these circumstances as well. The distributer then becomes less willing to order and stock an item if it is deemed to be slow moving or not going to produce a steady income stream. It can still be purchased but the lead time is lengthened further, which helps drive small businesses out of business.











In the short term everyone that is interested in maintaining their access to these films should drop Keith a note letting him know your interests and any other particulars that you feel necessary. How much of what film you would be willing to purchase along with any other specific would be greatly appreciated. I am sure that Keith will be in contact with Kodak shortly so we can turn this breakdown into a breakthrough.

I have to much time and money invested into LF/ULF to take this as a foregone conclusion sitting down. Hopefully, many of you feel the same.

Thanks

Moopheus
15-Dec-2010, 19:40
How do you make a guess if 8X10 is a niche product, or not, without some sales data?

Well, look at it this way: If you all get together and order $15,000 worth of film, Kodak will cut it for you.

Kodak's film & Entertainment group has a revenue of over $2 billion. Most of that is movie film, disposable cameras, photofinishing supplies, and that sort of thing. Heck, you're already getting down on the list a ways before you even get to "professional film," let alone large format.

Admittedly, there's no strict definition, but I think it's fair to say that you're not just a niche, you're a niche within a niche within another niche.

mikebarger
15-Dec-2010, 19:54
Fortunately for me, 4x5 is still safe and available...a major niche!

Jim Shanesy
15-Dec-2010, 20:04
Well, look at it this way: If you all get together and order $15,000 worth of film, Kodak will cut it for you.


Rough estimate off the top of my head, extrapolating from current prices: figure ~$200/50 sheet box. 60 boxes or so. That should be a piece o' cake. I'm good for 4 or 5. Aren't there 14 more LF photographers out there like me who use TMY2?

Jim Cole
15-Dec-2010, 20:11
Yes, if the TMY-2 will be available in 8x10 at somewhere close to the price of $4 a sheet, I'll be good for a couple of boxes. I'm waiting to see if I got 60 sheets on an order thru a vendor that's supposed to be coming from directly from the distribution center. I'll find out in a week or two. Either way, I would be willing to cough up another $400 for a couple of 50 sheet boxes.

Daniel Stone
15-Dec-2010, 20:12
count me in for at least 2-3 50sht boxes Jim :)

-Dan

Jan Pedersen
15-Dec-2010, 20:52
I'm good for 4 or 5. Aren't there 14 more LF photographers out there like me who use TMY2?

I do use TMY but with the purchase last week i am pretty well stocked.
If it is a matter of a couple of boxes (50 Sheets) i will of course step in.

Michael Kadillak
15-Dec-2010, 21:11
I do use TMY but with the purchase last week i am pretty well stocked.
If it is a matter of a couple of boxes (50 Sheets) i will of course step in.

No disrespect to those that have expectations of 50 sheet boxes, but that is not going to happen unless we are willing to take a hit with the price of the film. IMHO it is already a premium product and I do not want to take the hit in the costs department as I assume you do not as well. While it is inconvenient, I will continue to empty the 10 sheet packets and put them in my old 50 sheet boxes. It is what it is and I feel it is about film not boxes. At least the boxes are the right size.

I covered this earlier but from Kodak's perspective it is about the boxes. Kodak earlier ordered a boat load of 10 sheet boxes that were made to their specs to get the price down and that is what they are going to use until they are all gone.

It would be a shame to lose this battle not on the product itself, but how many sheets are delivered in a single packet.

Jan Pedersen
15-Dec-2010, 21:17
Box sizes are unimportant so let me say 100 sheets or so instead of two boxes.

Daniel Stone
15-Dec-2010, 21:31
keep me tuned up for 50-100sheets as of right now, maybe more after the holidays, and getting some things sold. This is as long as the price is the same as when the 8x10 product # for TMY2 was discontinued.

wish I could do more, but thats my limit right now

-Dan

Michael Kadillak
15-Dec-2010, 21:36
Box sizes are unimportant so let me say 100 sheets or so instead of two boxes.

Thanks Jan.

I learned my lesson about sheet film boxes.

The Efke/Adox boxes are absolutely worthless relative to their light tightness unless you use the black plastic liners that come with them. The Kodak boxes are better, but still not really light tight by themselves.

I have gotten to the point where I bring ALL of my LF and ULF holders back into my darkroom exposed. At these film prices it is simply not worth the risk of unintended fogging.

Paul Bujak
16-Dec-2010, 06:30
I'll go in for 100 sheets.

-Paul

John Bowen
16-Dec-2010, 06:48
As I stated earlier, I just purchsed LF film for the 1st time since 2007. Not because I stopped shooting LF film, but because I had sooo much on hand I didn't need to purchase any.

Let me say those 10 sheet boxes were a godsend. When the 8x10 film arrived, my 1st response was, "where the hell am I going to put this stuff. My film freezers are full." Well, I found those little 10 sheet boxes fit in all sorts of nooks and crannies that were too small for 50 sheet 8x10 boxes. I actually found room for 45 of those little boxes. Since the order was greater than 45 boxes, I also found that I could repackage them to put 20 sheets in a box and now have room for more film in my freezers.

On another note, Canham has revised their 5x7 offer. The film will be shipped in 25 sheet boxes and priced at $75/box. Canham also is offering a 10% off coupon if you order directly through Canham vs one of their dealers. If I read it correctly, checks and coupons must be postmarked by January 21, to take advantage of this. I see a couple hundred sheets of 5x7 TMY in my future.

With 5x7 film priced at $3/sheet (or $2.70 with coupon), 8x10 film will likely be priced at $6/sheet. Hopefully, we can still get ~ $5/sheet pricing.

Happy Holidays,

rdenney
16-Dec-2010, 07:46
Of course it's a niche market.

I suspect Kodak's problem is that their business model (and therefore production lines and equipment) is built around volume. Without the volume, they either have to retool for lower production volumes or discontinue the product. This, of course, applies to emulsions in general, not so much formats, because the film is coated in large sheets and then cut down.

In any niche market, some players drop out, leaving more for the other players even in a declining market. As the market declines, players drop out until those prepared to operate as a specialty business remain--with prices consistent with that model, of course. It's an expensive hobby.

At all steps, though, a manufacturer has to be able to sell a product for a price larger than their costs. If the market will not bear such a price, the manufacturer cannot sustain production.

Kodak may well continue to supply special orders of certain niche emulsions, because they can work in batches. They may continue to stock sizes of niche emulsions that turn over fast enough to keep them from having to eat a large portion of their production in unused inventory. Special orders solves that problem for them, too.

And maybe it is about the boxes, but I bet not so much. People would buy sheet film in envelopes, like enlarging paper, if that's what was available, especially if Kodak could put them in reusable, light-tight plastic bags the way Ilford does.

Arnold Jacobs, revered tuba player of the Chicago Symphony from the 40's to the late 80's, played a York tuba that has become legendary. But in the decade after he bought, both he and the instrument were not legendary, and nobody else wanted it. York only made two of them as prototypes. York, which was a volume manufacturer of band instruments, eventually failed, as most companies do. But copies of those original Yorks are now made by several manufacturers around the world. They are hand-made in small batches and expensive--$25,000-$30,000 is typical for an instrument Jacobs bought in 1931 for $175. As products that were sustained by a mass market lose that market, the dedicated few can sustain smaller production models at higher prices.

So, yes, we might have to get used to buying film not in yellow boxes, but I suspect large-format photography will muddle through somehow.

Rick "thinking large-format photography is working its way down to the dedicated few" Denney

Moopheus
16-Dec-2010, 08:36
Aren't there 14 more LF photographers out there like me who use TMY2?

There probably are, but the point was that if you get 100 such orders, you might tick over one digit from a 5 to a 6 on one line of Kodak's annual report. Now that might be enough to keep the product around a while longer, but it isn't going to keep Kodak in the film business, when revenue is shrinking 25 percent a year.

Bruce Barlow
16-Dec-2010, 12:30
Arnold Jacobs, revered tuba player of the Chicago Symphony from the 40's to the late 80's, played a York tuba that has become legendary. But in the decade after he bought, both he and the instrument were not legendary, and nobody else wanted it. York only made two of them as prototypes. York, which was a volume manufacturer of band instruments, eventually failed, as most companies do. But copies of those original Yorks are now made by several manufacturers around the world. They are hand-made in small batches and expensive--$25,000-$30,000 is typical for an instrument Jacobs bought in 1931 for $175. As products that were sustained by a mass market lose that market, the dedicated few can sustain smaller production models at higher prices.


Rick "thinking large-format photography is working its way down to the dedicated few" Denney

Just as a point of interest, Arnold Jacobs, I know for a fact, had only one lung, the other having been removed. That said, he coached musicians and sports stars in breathing and lung capacity, and had greater lung capacity than any of them. A remarkable guy, in addition to a fabulous tuba player.

John Bowen
16-Dec-2010, 13:07
For what it's worth......

I was just looking at the film that arrived this week. TMY Emulsion #112 has an expiration date of 10/2012. Emulsion #113 has an expiration date of 02/2013.

I assume an Emulsion # = 1 master roll. If that's true then Kodak is currently manufacturing 1 master roll of TMY sheet film every 4 months. I have no idea how much the yield of a master roll is, but 3 master rolls/year of TMY in sheet film doesn't sound like a whole lot of global demand for this film.

Perhaps others can expand or further explain this observation.

John Bowen
16-Dec-2010, 17:51
To add to my above post, I see where Fred Newman just sold a box of 8x10 TMY on Ebay. It was emulsion #111 and expired 06/2012.

rdenney
16-Dec-2010, 19:59
Just as a point of interest, Arnold Jacobs, I know for a fact, had only one lung, the other having been removed.

Bruce, that is a common, but fortunately (for Jake's sake) untrue urban myth. He did have reduced lung function in his later years--he estimated 2 liters (versus 5 in his prime)--from old age and some emphysema from having smoked in his younger years. And he indeed learned how to manage that reduced function amazingly, especially considering the large size of the tuba he played. (I have a copy of that instrument made by Holton and am in my 50's--old enough to know how hard it is to deliver what it takes.)

He did indeed spend his life learning about physiology, and was a world-class pedagog who was known for helping players of all wind instruments who had gotten into bad physical habits make the necessary corrections. A large percentage of orchestral tuba players studied with him, including most of the teachers with whom I studied.

But when he died in 1998, he still had both of his lungs.

Rick "who heard him in person but only knew him second-hand" Denney

Drew Wiley
16-Dec-2010, 20:04
Those master rolls used to be huge. Don't know anymore. It's not a neglible quantity
however. Remember, sheet film is made on a completely different base than 35mm
and roll film, so that probably indicates decent 4x5 sales. The University students
around here use quite a bit of 4X5 TMY and TMX.

Jay DeFehr
16-Dec-2010, 21:48
TMY-2 is, in my opinion, the best film ever made. Certainly the best film I've ever used, and for that reason I'm willing to pay 2X as much for it as I will for an EU film like Foma, but no more. I am not a pro and don't make a nickel from my photography, so there's no practical reason for me to spend a lot more money on film than I have to. Especially in 8x10, any good film is good enough for me, and I consider Foma a good film. So, when my current stock of TMY is gone, I will replace it with Foma, or whatever else is available at the most reasonable price, or maybe I'll sell my Deardorff while it's still worth something and buy a good DSLR.

sanking
16-Dec-2010, 21:58
TMY-2 is a an excellent film.

But for the best B&W film ever I will go with Fuji Acros 100. In terms of sharpness and grain it is similar to Tmax-100 (which is slightly better than TMY-2), but the great advantage of Acros is its very low reciprocity failure. TMY-2 is good in this respect, as is Tmax-100, but neither comes close to Acros.

In low light conditions it has been my experience that exposure times with Acros 100, for the same density on film, are equal to or less than for TMY-2. I value this quality of Acros highly since I tend to work a lot in low light just after sun set.

Sandy

Michael Kadillak
16-Dec-2010, 22:27
TMY-2 is a an excellent film.

But for the best B&W film ever I will go with Fuji Acros 100. In terms of sharpness and grain it is similar to Tmax-100 (which is slightly better than TMY-2), but the great advantage of Acros is its very low reciprocity failure. TMY-2 is good in this respect, as is Tmax-100, but neither comes close to Acros.

In low light conditions it has been my experience that exposure times with Acros 100, for the same density on film, are equal to or less than for TMY-2. I value this quality of Acros highly since I tend to work a lot in low light just after sun set.

Sandy

Correct me if I am wrong in this assertion Sandy, but I do not remember Across ever being offered in any format larger than 4x5? Another issue I have is the lack of interest of Fuji to concern themselves with the North American market for any of their photographic products. It seems that they have already left the market years earlier and just have not formally made it public.

Richard K.
16-Dec-2010, 22:37
Correct me if I am wrong in this assertion Sandy, but I do not remember Across ever being offered in any format larger than 4x5? Another issue I have is the lack of interest of Fuji to concern themselves with the North American market for any of their photographic products. It seems that they have already left the market years earlier and just have not formally made it public.

I bought some 11x14 (and cut to 7x11) recently. In Japan, half-plate and 8x10 seems to be readily available. Would love to get this in WP!

Daniel Stone
16-Dec-2010, 22:51
does Acros have the same problem with the magenta dye like TMX and TMY do? I'm using my last box of Efke 100, with plans to move to FP4+(better Q.C. and its roughly the same price as the PL100 anyhow).

since I am developing by inspection, will this behave like the TMX/TMY, and not allow me to be able to "see" the highlights with the green safelight. An IR headset is too expensive for me right now, and its no problem using the green light.

Acros costs more per sheet(20sheet box) anyhow than TMY-2, look here(13,260¥=~$157USD)

http://www.japanexposures.com/shop/product_info.php?cPath=27&products_id=30

-Dan

Jay DeFehr
16-Dec-2010, 23:37
Sandy,

I rarely get into reciprocity territory, but Acros is my favorite slow film. I tend to need as much speed as I can get with reasonably short exposures, so TMY-2 suits me better than Acros under most conditions. I do love Acros in 35mm with Halcyon, and It would be great for 8x10 with my Verito in direct sunlight, but for me, TMY-2 is much more versatile.

Two23
17-Dec-2010, 07:19
I don't see what the problem is. Couldn't the 8x10 shooters just tape two 4x5 sheets together and call it 8x10? Where's the problem solving skills around here? :D


Kent in sD

Jay DeFehr
17-Dec-2010, 09:26
I don't see what the problem is. Couldn't the 8x10 shooters just tape two 4x5 sheets together and call it 8x10? Where's the problem solving skills around here? :D


Kent in sD

They could, but it would in fact, be only 1/2 of an 8x10!:D It seems we all suffer problem solving skills of one kind or another.

Michael Cienfuegos
17-Dec-2010, 09:57
I don't see what the problem is. Couldn't the 8x10 shooters just tape two 4x5 sheets together and call it 8x10? Where's the problem solving skills around here? :D


Kent in sD


They could, but it would in fact, be only 1/2 of an 8x10!:D It seems we all suffer problem solving skills of one kind or another.

Hmm… someone didn't do too well in geometry! :confused:

Drew Wiley
17-Dec-2010, 10:31
Daniel - FP4 has an even more stubborn magenta dye than TMax; at least it is harder
to wash out. ACROS is very hard to get in 8x10, and at least the sheets I have are
on a relatively thin flexible base which requires me to use adhesive film holders; but I
wish someone would seriously import a batch or it - a lot more versatile for a film this
speed than FP4. Given Jay's idea above, maybe we could just scotch tape together
four by five sheets of all the above and get the ultimate 8x10 film!