Student Specials for Large Format, anyone?

[John Kasaian]

For years Kodak, Ilford and Fuji offered "student" promotions. A couple of rolls of film and a modest assortment of printing papers(I believe Ilford upped the anti and included a VC filter kit) all at an attractive price.

These schemes, judging by how long they've run, must have achieved some success at wooing neophytes to a company's product line..

While in the 70s and 80s at any given time there were probably thousands lured by the 35mm Siren's call (I was!) and a good value for anything photographic, then as now, is difficult to pass up I'm wondering why we haven't seen anythig like this with LF materials.

I think the real beauty of the old "student specials' was the chance to try papers without committing to an entire full size box. Now that enlargers are pretty much regarded as antiques by the digital masses, maybe this isn't as attractive at it once was, though with new sheet films popping up from eastern europe and asia I wonder if manufactureres have considered taking the same tack with LF materials? While I doubt finding a "student special" for my format of choice(8x10), it seems like more and more new 4x5 cameras are being purchased and the rebirth of interest in LF would jive nicely with "student specials" featuring that format.

I remember my dismay when Kodak discontinued packaging sheet film in quantities less than 50 sheet boxes. A 25 sheet5 box was a major investment and took a couple of months to use up. I then switched to Ilford-oid stuff which at least came in 25 sheet boxes and were quite affordable. As time passed and I became more confidant, tackling projects requireing a lot of film, I can easily go through a 50 sheet box in a week(Photo Warehouse 100 sheet boxes even look do-able now) It seems a recurring criticism of Michael and Paula's valiant effort to save AZO that smaller "sample" quantities of the stuff aren't available to those curious. I think it unfair, since they aren't in the same league as giant manufacturers but it does prove the point that consumers are interested---they just often aren't willing to commit a substantial invest just "to see if they'll like it."

While I'm glad to see that Kodak again packages Tri-x 4x5 in 25 sheet boxes, I'm curious why the LF film suppliers in general haven't considered some kind of "student special" to court LF newbies to their products, cultivating brand loyalty as in days of yore?

Any thoughts?

[Moe_4073]

Trial packages (10 sheets or so) of 4x5 or 8x10 film or film+paper would be wonderful, and not just for students. A 10+10+10 package of Efke PL25, PL100 and J&C 400; or a 10+10 of Maco IR820c Precision + Aura; or a 10+10+10 of Delta 100, FP4+ and HP5+ (or Arista equals); or a Kodak AZO+film combo....the list could be endless.

I think it would allow manufacturers a chance to expose more people to their different emulsions (no pun intended) and possibly increase their sales down the road. Packaging and labelling would drive the price up obviously, but I can still wish. J&C, Ilford, Kodak, Freestyle; the ball is in your court. Cheers,

[james mickelson]

Unfortunately, the costs of packaging and shipping may not allow them to do this. The difference in retail volumes between 35mm and LF is substantial. And the inevitable switch to digital in the future for most photography unfortunately obviates that we will scramble for whatever we can get in our preferred format. Do we know if the mainstream manufacturers are investing any capital in hte eastern european film andf paper manufacturing?

[Ralph Barker]

Thoughts? Yes.

I say to heck with the students - most of them are doing digital, anyway. Thus, the old idea of hooking them when they're young and making up for it when they've turned pro doesn't hold (as much) water anymore. I'd much prefer to see discounts for seniors - anyone over 50 for this purpose. We're much more likely to continue buying traditional photographic products - for a short while, anyway. ;-)

[John Cook]

Regardless of the specific form it takes, the core idea here is to get more people using more LF products.

I believe this involves two things. First, the general public, especially its younger members, must learn that LF exists. Many kids have never heard of it.

We old-timers are often unaware of the ignorance of our youngsters. My neighbor has a teenage daughter who can not tell time from an analog clock face. Doesn’t have a clue what the hands mean. She has used a digital watch all her young life. My wife (an RN) and I were married on June 6th, the anniversary of D-day. When she recently told that fact to one of the hospital’s younger surgeons, he asked if that was the day Pearl Harbor was attacked. Don’t assume that people even know enough to purchase LF film instead of digital. When did you last see an ad for Ilford or Ebony on MTV?

Second, they need to become aware of film’s superior beauty over digital. Digital imaging isn’t going away. It is the commercial medium of the future solely because of its many efficiencies. But for sheer excitement it can’t hold a candle to good LF film work.

Personal computer monitors do not convey this beauty. People must actually touch the tip of their nose to a hand-made print. I have had dinner guests brought almost to tears looking at 8x10 prints of simple product shots I was working on for a lighting fixture catalogue. Certainly nothing special to any one of us. Just quick-and-dirty, hard-core nuts-and-bolts photography. But many well-educated and well-traveled people have never actually seen (nor held) an LF photograph.

Perhaps in our golden years we should use the extra free time to be making simple presentations to our public school assemblies and church groups. If the teeny-boppers began diverting 10% of their enormous disposable income to film photography, Kodak could not keep up with the demand for b&w film.

[Gem Singer]

They haven't been called "teeny- boppers" for almost forty years, John. My sons are going on fifty years of age, and they cannot understand why I still make black and white prints. My grandkids say, "oh, it's not in color, fooey!"

[John Cook]

Eugene, this is precisely my point. B&W on your grandkid’s computer screens looks like gray mush. Since b&w lithography is cheaper than 4-color, low-budget advertising materials seen by the general public use low-quality b&w photography to save money. If an advertiser has the budget for good b&w, he will likely opt for cheap 4-color instead.

The vast majority of lay-people have never held a b&w masterwork up close and personal.

Contrary to popular opinion, b&w is not a digital happy-snap with the saturation moused-out to zero. You don’t have to look up Ansel Adams in an art gallery. Get a DVD of “In Harm’s Way” and check out the scenes of the ships underway. The ships are battleship gray, the sea is parkinglot-charcoal, the clouds and spray are white. The whole thing just sings. Color would add nothing.

[Brian Ellis]

In my years of both taking and teaching photography courses I saw a grand total of two students, out of at least two hundred, who had any interest at all in large format. Back then (five to ten years ago) they all used 35mm except for a few brave souls who used medium format. One assignment in one of the courses I took was devoted to large format but the school's equipment was so old and beat up that it was very difficult to use. So even if they started out with some interest in large format they tended to lose it after wrestling with this equipment. When I taught I brought my own large format equipment to class just to show them that all large format equipment wasn't like the school's but that didn't seem to have much effect. I guess this is a long-winded way of saying that the film companies probably don't offer large format "student specials" because so few students are interested.

[John Kasaian]

One of most frequent questions on this and other LF forums goes something like: "Hey, I bought this 4x5, now what kind of film should I feed it?"

Standard answer seems to be to a stick with one kind of film for awhile, and get to appreciate it before starting to experiment with different emulsions---thats my answer any way and I think its a good one, especially for people coming from the digital side of the world. OTOH, those joining our ranks from 35mm or MF. or students whose schools have the moxie to to turn students loose with a view camera are already well aware of Tri-X, FP-4+, and probably the easern european brands as well. Part of the reason for switching to LF is to have control thats unavailable in cameras without all those movements and film is a part of the equation (at least as important as secret formula developers, pre-cambrian contact papers, and esoteric lenses) That a photographer has committed time and money to LF in the first place---I mean someone is buying all those new Ebonys, Phillips, Canhams and Wistas and I doubt that most weren't simply moving up from venerable old warhorses. is a powerful statement. As consumers, I'm guessing that they are interested in having and using the "latest and greatest." Certainly the continued production of great LF lenses by Rodenstock, Schneider, Nikkor et al isn't simply feeding the "pro" market(most of you guys were forced into digital) so there must be some seriously coined neophytes out there driving the LF market for new gear. I think that would be the group I'd be most willing to befriend if I were a marketeer of LF paraphernalia. Inducements to use a manufacturer's agressively marketed products might be worthwhile in that case.

If Kodak hadn't limited sheet film packaging to 50 sheet boxes, I'm sure I would have been using Kodak products all along. The difference in price between high end and ecomony sheet films is seldom more than 25-35 cents per sheet, a relatively small price I'd gladly pay to assure the outcome of a portfolio I value. Kodak in the meantime has lost my exclusive loyalty in several of its product lines(though I'm still a steady customer but usually not of items I buy in high volume.) Like I said, I'm glad to see them offering 25 sheet boxes of 4x5 Tri-x again, but my main concern is that I'd like to see any and all traditional manufacturers of LF consumables to step up to bat to win over the new guys and gals.

Bob Salomon spread the news of a great offer on Linhof cameras for students not that long ago, and Calumet brought out the Cadet with a nice fanfare as well. I wonder what effect the market would have enjoyed had Ilford, Kodak, or Bergger had the foresight to include a sample or discounted offer on film, paper, or chemicals with each of those cameras? Kind of like a sample box of detergent included with every washing machine, or those goody bags of diapers and wipes & formula hospitals send home with every newborn.

[Tim Curry]

Just to play the Devil's Advocate here, I started thinking about the trends in photography and consumerism in general. This question is a double edged sword.

The "normal" consumer (at least here in the U.S. and please forgive my provincial ramblings) has been fed a steady diet of immediate gratification since watching his or her first cartoon in the form of advertising and marketing. Consumer "goods" are typically bought on credit with money which is not made yet (95% of people in the U.S. don't save any money). The idea is to spend fast and get immediate gratification. This trend is multiplied greatly by years of buying without thought, planning, or any real evaluation, hence the advet of the digital camera, a consumer's dream come true.

It seems to me the large format crowd's best sales pitch is to show prints made with larger formats, as Dan just mentioned. Good prints showing fine detail, texture, light and substance stand out from the everyday instant photo lab's tripe and speak for themselves. Show the difference to make the sale. This is my approach. I'm setting up a booth at a local bike meet in October to show some large format prints and will include some 35mm, 6x6 and 4x5 prints just to show the difference in resolution and image quality. Don't know how this will work, but it should be interesting. Large format has a lot to do with planning, plodding and hard work in genearl. In other words, few people are willing to take the time to make a commitment based on planning and evaluation, or this question would not have been asked. Excellent question!

[michael Allen]

I'm a part time student, my college I.D. gets me a 10% discount on "photographic materials" film, paper, chemicals......In my area Calumet and almost all the other photo stores honor this discount. Not to mention a number of other advantages that come with taking a course at a local school.

[John D Gerndt]

John Cook, I watch your posts with interest. I wish I would have had you to teach me when I was a beginner and I'd bet there are still people out there to teach. I believe you are right about people not seeing large format photographs and that the more they can be seen, held and appreciated, the more likely they are to catch on as something worth pursuing. I am asking you to teach, where you can and when you can. I do. I got my brother to move up out of 35mm into medium format. One person at a time, teach.

Maybe we'll have an effect.

Cheers!