I think gauging use rates on workshops probably gives a skewed view. I know I use ready/quickloads in workshops since I travel and it reduces the film hassles. At home the added cost doesn't justify them so I use grafmatics instead. Far more of my film used comes out of boxes of sheets rather than readyloads.
While it's sad to see our large format film options diminished, only a blind man wouldn't have seen this (or Polaroid's demise) coming. Kodak has gone from being a photography company to being a technology company; expecting them to continue to support silver based photography would be akin to expecting Microsoft to support punch cards.
The good news is that if Kodak follows standard practice, it won't be long before they spin off the film/paper/chemical part of the business as an independent entity. Such an entity, having to rely upon film sales for its livelihood, would have no choice but to be responsive to the market.
Personally, I'm down to using three Kodak products: Dektol, Photo flo, and HC-110. There are suitable substitutes available for all of those, although I'll sure miss HC-110 when it's gone.
Two Kinematic filmholders (10-shot version of a Grafmatic) are way more compact than 20 Readyloads or Quickloads and a QL/RL holder.
It is not so much the compactness nor the weight for me. What I like is having the holder in place, then just changing packets. So there is very little chance for camera movement between shots, and my set-up of camera to subject distance is maintained.
Oh well, I suppose if I ever find a good deal on a Mido holder, that might be a reasonable substitute. At least that way I could do a series of shots before pulling the holder.
No doubt that Readyloads are one of the more expensive products for Kodak. Also, film is still over $2Billion revenues; if Kodak does not replace that revenue with something else, then their market capitalization looks quite bad; something to consider beyond their profits from film products. Kodak does not have any other technology slated to replace that much revenue, at least judging by the growth of those other sectors in which they participate. I am not suggesting that continuing Readyloads changes that, though the less they compete directly with Fujifilm, then the better their remaining products will continue to generate revenues and profits.
Ciao!
Gordon Moat Photography
I really wish Kodak would spin off their film business. I get the feeling like at this point it's nothing but a distraction for them. I think it's pretty likely that there's still good money that could be made with some of these products they're discontinuing, if only they were coming at it differently. I really hope we don't lose TMY in a couple years.
Erich Hoeber
Erich Hoeber Photography
What does a company do when sales volume falls to the point where trained, skilled workers only need to show up one day every couple of weeks to satisfy orders? They HAVE to quit, can't pay people to do nothing....EC
Problem as I see it now is that Fuji Quickloads are twice the price of Kodak's readyloads. So there will not be a big automatic switch to Fuji. Photographers will probably switch to sheet film and darkslides. And Fuji will charge more for their products having a monopoly.
How much of that $2 billion is movie film sales. When that is gone, Kodak is likely done with film. K
Just to put some semblance of reasonableness to this issue, I learned that a while back Kodak outsourced the assembling of their Ready Loads to Polaroid as they had certain obvious skills in this arena.
Onward!
Where are you shopping?Originally Posted by butterfly
The prices i've seen from b&h and the other large stores are only slightly more and the same prices for b+w films.
Movie film is a large part of the availability of still film, i believe. They said that would be gone when digital video came about. Lucky for us it still looks like video and Spielberg won't touch it.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks