Hi all,
I recently heard that Kodak will cease to make the Readyload film holders? Is this correct?
fred
Printable View
Hi all,
I recently heard that Kodak will cease to make the Readyload film holders? Is this correct?
fred
Hi Fred,
Yes. They are also discontinuing all Readyload packets.
The good news is that Fuji Quickloads are still in production and will fit in the Readyload holder. I use Fuji in my Kodak holder all the time so its not a total loss.
The reason Kodak is discontinuing Readyloads, is that they outsourced the special assembly and packaging to Polaroid, and Polaroid closed all their film manufacturing facilities, hence Kodak could not have the special packs made. Kodak must have made the decision that to start-up in-house production was not going to be profitable.
Would there be some kind of legal wrangling if Kodak redesigned `Readyloads` to fit the Fuji Quickload holder?Quote:
Originally Posted by Gene McCluney
I believe that the patents for both quickloads and readyloads have expired now. If so Kodak could make actual quickload packets. So could Ilford. We all could. I don't see why Kodak would do this though because they already have a readyload holder that works with their packets.Quote:
Originally Posted by Keith Tapscott.
If they won't make the effort to move the existing machines from the Polaroid plant over to some of their empty space in Rochester, I seriously doubt that they'll expend any R&D on redesigning the packet.
It's just sad that they expended the R&D to create a packet system that works well, they designed, tested, and implemented the machines and processes to put the film into readyload format, they've done all the marketing stuff (designing the boxes, logos, brand building, etc.). They don't need to spend any more R&D at all -- just move the machines and implement the existing process. And they would rather drop it all than make the effort. Sad that is.
I'm going to miss readyloads.
So, as the market consolidates, we are left with one manufacturer for Instant Film, and Quickload film products. Fortunately, that manufacturer, Fuji seems committed to film.
The evidence shows that Kodak is committed to film. Kodak is still performing R&D for both B&W and color films. Remember, the new 400Tmax was introduced just a few months ago, March/April of 2008 IIRC. New Portra films last year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gene McCluney
The last Fuji film introduced IIRC was Velvia 100 which caused a public outcry so big that they found a way to reintroduce Velvia 50 largely unchanged. That was a few years ago, yes? I don't know when they last updated Acros.
Ilford on the other hand seems to be completely out of the R&D picture. They haven't updated an existing film or introduced a new one in what, decades? Yet they always seem to wear the mantel of "committed to film." Hmmm... I don't understand what that is supposed to mean.
If any company is committed to film it's Kodak. What they aren't committed to, is packaging. I'm baffled by the readyload thing, but they aren't dropping a film line, just a package. As things go, not so bad. But I will miss the readyloads.
Bruce,Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce Watson
I seem to recall reading somewhere that the remake of Tri-x a few years back, and the T-max afterwards had to do with pacifying the EPA and making changes in production techniques. Which apparently worked in Kodak's favor as they re-worked the line and made it much more efficient at the same time.
Whenever I have called Kodak with an issue, emulsion, filter combos for light sources etc. they have always solved the issue quickly and correctly. For that alone I will stand by Kodak film to the end. Of course, Tri-x is my favorite film anyway...
Now if only Kodak would buy the rights to the Type 55 formula and start making that film again! I would hang George's picture on the wall in my darkroom forever!
Ilford has reintroduced some previously discontinued products in film, and has introduced some new products in photo papers. (Ilford Warmtone)
Such as?Quote:
Ilford has reintroduced some previously discontinued products in film,
This paper has been out for a long time - prior to their reorganization.Quote:
and has introduced some new products in photo papers. (Ilford Warmtone)
Now if they would introduce some of there ol Galerie papers that would be exciting news.
Don Bryant
Quote:
Originally Posted by D. Bryant
Well ,they brought back SFX 200 film.
And that is all I can think of, if the Cooltone and Warmtone papers were from before the reorganization.
They are also engineering and making the current Bergger papers and films.
It may be that their films are already so great that they can't be improved. :pQuote:
Ilford on the other hand seems to be completely out of the R&D picture. They haven't updated an existing film or introduced a new one in what, decades? Yet they always seem to wear the mantel of "committed to film." Hmmm... I don't understand what that is supposed to mean.
Anyway, by "committed to film" I understand not only regular improvements, but also stability, I mean the (relative, at least) certainty that the products you use and love today will be available tomorrow. Kodak improve some films while killing others, and it's anyone's guess which film will be killed next. Will it be another Ektachrome? Will it be the Tri-X? Nobody knows, it's a lottery.
Ilford may not improve their products so often, if at all, but at least they keep them alive. I'd rather have an available, albeit unimproved (whatever that means, since their products seem great to me as they are) film or paper, than a state of the art discontinued one. :)
I'll admit that their remaining products are gorgeous, though. I just love the Tri-X and the E100VS. And if they discontinue the HC-110 I'll probably kill myself. :)
I believe that Ilford are also manufacturing some papers under licence for some companies such as Berrger and Adox although I am not sure which. I read some where on `apug`IIRC that there is an FB paper which uses the Multigrade IV paper base, but is coated with the Multigrade Warmtone emulsion and another which is coated with the Cooltone emulsion. Personally, I would like Ilford to add those papers to their own range of products.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gene McCluney
Now back to the topic of "Readyloads", there must be an alternative manufacturer who can continue with the production of the Kodak Readyload film holders.
Well, they bought the whole company back from the dead, mortgaging their houses and borrowing to the hilt and gambling their families' futures: that sounds pretty committed to me!
Remember, Harman/Ilford is a fraction the size of Kodak or Fujifilm except in the specific areas of b&w film where they are similar and b&w paper where they dominate (and were market leader worldwide even when Kodak was making b&w paper). Kodak & Fuji have the much larger and still highly lucrative colour film and paper markets pretty much to themselves.
Ilford looked at buying the Polaroid equipment etc but could not come to terms with Polaroid's owners.
They just overhauled the Tri-x line, so they must plan on keeping it for the foreseeable future.Quote:
Originally Posted by VladSoare
The good thing about HC is, unopened, it lasts forever! If they cut it from the line, just buy a few cases and there will be no need to jump over any bridges. :)
I was not aware of either of those points Bob, thank you. That is commitment indeed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobf
I guess Polaroid wanted the sky and the moon for something they don't care enough to continue with.
I didn't mean that to come across as an eulogy ;) ! It's just that after Ilford went into administration the board stuck together and bought the UK based b&w side of the company with a combination of their own and VC money (and the fact that any other bidder would have found themselves suddenly minus a board...). If it fails there are no big financial parachutes of the kind you can bet that Kodak board members have written into their contracts.
Of course Harman/Ilford are in business to make money, it's not a charity, so any deal they make, such as with Polaroid, has to make financial sense. Maybe Polaroid wanted only a reasonable sum, IDK, but whatever it was, it was rejected... Shame: Delta 100 in Ilfoloads would have been neat!
Cheers, Bob.
Unfortunately acros quickload is twice the price of tmax 100 readyload and that is even before they are left with the total monopoly of the ready/quickload system.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gene McCluney
Digital is looking attractive....