p.5 #1 · New Harman Phoenix ISO Color negative film
SergeyT wrote:
That is one way to look at it and there is another one...
Why should I overpay for something that is mediocre compared to what I already use and not only unwisely spend my money but also no less importantly, sacrifice on quality of my end results?
"Investment" assumes intention to gain a profit and very often being mis-used. Where do you see a profit in overpaying for a mediocre product?
That approach sounds like a double loss, instead
I am almost certain that production cost of Kodak film is pretty much at the theoretically reachable bottom considering the maturity, scale and quality. The selling price is something else. As it stands right now - the "price for quality" of Gold 200 is hard to beat even comparing to B&W stocks.
There is absolutely no guarantee that if and when the competitor will reach the same level of quality and production cost as Kodak has they will be willing to sacrifice on their profit by selling a really competitive product at a lower price (tip : they are already trying to sell a lower quality product at a higher price). And if they do - I may reconsider my opinion and choices ...Show more →
Phoenix becoming a competitor to Kodak disincentivizes Kodak to continually raise prices, because if they did so their customer base would just jump ship over to Phoenix once they became more expensive than Phoenix. Without a competitor, Kodak can just continually raise prices on consumers because they've put their customers in a position of either shoot Kodak color film or no color film at all. We've already seen this. The end result is consumers, you and I, pay these higher prices to continue shooting with color film and once they raise prices too much as so often happens with a monopoly, customers flee and they may very well shutter film production sooner rather than later as a result. Worthwhile investment to stave off of this, to me, as we make a profit from the money saved from not paying monopoly prices for our film and we also get a color film independent of the Kodak ecosystem that'll be far more insulated from any shocks to the Kodak supply chain or their business decisions.
I also think it's not too far off of being a genuine competitor either, given the leap in quality of just one new iteration from Phoenix I to II. Excited to see where this project goes.
Fuji is probably not letting their trade secrets go anytime soon since they are in other non-photographic chemical sectors but Fotoimpex has made it their MO to hoover up all of the former Agfa assets but also seem to be agnostic to C41. I'm sure the NDA that former staff are under are long expired. So the know-how is out there.
Kodak has had quite a few years to keep improving thanks to motion picture fil development. I do think the implosion of the Hollywood model is a serious threat to Kodak Professional though. The dried up funding and tech take over of entertainment. It's been pretty bleak in this town lately. Can the cash infusions from Nolan and Tarantino productions keep Kodak running forever?
p.5 #3 · New Harman Phoenix ISO Color negative film
tile_86 wrote:
Phoenix becoming a competitor to Kodak disincentivizes Kodak to continually raise prices, because if they did so their customer base would just jump ship over to Phoenix once they became more expensive than Phoenix. Without a competitor, Kodak can just continually raise prices on consumers because they've put their customers in a position of either shoot Kodak color film or no color film at all. We've already seen this. The end result is consumers, you and I, pay these higher prices to continue shooting with color film and once they raise prices too much as so often happens with a monopoly, customers flee and they may very well shutter film production sooner rather than later as a result. Worthwhile investment to stave off of this, to me, as we make a profit from the money saved from not paying monopoly prices for our film and we also get a color film independent of the Kodak ecosystem that'll be far more insulated from any shocks to the Kodak supply chain or their business decisions.
I also think it's not too far off of being a genuine competitor either, given the leap in quality of just one new iteration from Phoenix I to II. Excited to see where this project goes. ...Show more →
Do consumers just “jump ship” because of price? Aren’t they also interested in the quality and availability of the product. Also, Kodak is up against a declining Hollywood as everything moves online. I suspect that film will play a smaller and smaller role and as that happens, the main driving force to produce film dwindles. So, secondary manufacturers might just be vital in order for film to survive. We might not have much choice as to quality, availability and price.
p.5 #5 · New Harman Phoenix ISO Color negative film
tile_86 wrote:
Phoenix becoming a competitor to Kodak disincentivizes Kodak to continually raise prices, because if they did so their customer base would just jump ship over to Phoenix once they became more expensive than Phoenix. Without a competitor, Kodak can just continually raise prices on consumers because they've put their customers in a position of either shoot Kodak color film or no color film at all. We've already seen this. The end result is consumers, you and I, pay these higher prices to continue shooting with color film and once they raise prices too much as so often happens with a monopoly, customers flee and they may very well shutter film production sooner rather than later as a result. Worthwhile investment to stave off of this, to me, as we make a profit from the money saved from not paying monopoly prices for our film and we also get a color film independent of the Kodak ecosystem that'll be far more insulated from any shocks to the Kodak supply chain or their business decisions.
I also think it's not too far off of being a genuine competitor either, given the leap in quality of just one new iteration from Phoenix I to II. Excited to see where this project goes. ...Show more →
"Becoming " is not "IS a competitor".
In order to compete a competitor has to offer a competitive product and not just a product in the same category.
So where does the Phoenix II compete with the Gold ? Quality is way subpar. Price (in 120) is almost 40% higher.
Spending money on a mediocre product that may not have a future means diverting funding from continuing production of a quality product.
Mind you, I am not against a fair competition as it stimulates the progress. I just do not see it being the case that is tried to be presented here.
p.5 #6 · New Harman Phoenix ISO Color negative film
One way to "secure" your future with film - bulk order and keep it in a freezer. Not enough room - buy a Chest Freezer. Frozen film won't go bad for 15-20 years. Will be able to keep shooting the quality stock at current prices for as long as the processing chemicals are available and have enough to cover your electricity bill
p.5 #8 · New Harman Phoenix ISO Color negative film
SergeyT wrote:
One way to "secure" your future with film - bulk order and keep it in a freezer. Not enough room - buy a Chest Freezer. Frozen film won't go bad for 15-20 years. Will be able to keep shooting the quality stock at current prices for as long as the processing chemicals are available and have enough to cover your electricity bill
That's the dream. I don't have the space now. Which stinks because I have about 25 rolls that are getting long in the tooth. I remember my deer hunting uncle in the 80s having that huge basement freezer for his venison. That, but uh, films.
I wish I had packed in some Fuji before they stopped.
Desmolicious wrote:
I’m gonna buy a roll to see wassup.
The Phoenix II stuff I am seeing on IG is looking pretty good. Might pop into Freestyle this weekend and nab some.
p.5 #9 · New Harman Phoenix ISO Color negative film
ottokbre wrote:
That's the dream. I don't have the space now. Which stinks because I have about 25 rolls that are getting long in the tooth. I remember my deer hunting uncle in the 80s having that huge basement freezer for his venison. That, but uh, films.
I wish I had packed in some Fuji before they stopped.
The Phoenix II stuff I am seeing on IG is looking pretty good. Might pop into Freestyle this weekend and nab some.
With the original version - once I exposed it at iso 125 and of course made a proper profile for it, the colours came out ok.
The v2 is meant to be greatly improved so I have high hopes for it.
p.5 #10 · New Harman Phoenix ISO Color negative film
bwcolor wrote:
Do consumers just “jump ship” because of price? Aren’t they also interested in the quality and availability of the product. Also, Kodak is up against a declining Hollywood as everything moves online. I suspect that film will play a smaller and smaller role and as that happens, the main driving force to produce film dwindles. So, secondary manufacturers might just be vital in order for film to survive. We might not have much choice as to quality, availability and price.
They wouldn't immediately do so based on just price; I'd imagine quality is a consideration for quite a few. But, for those who'd be priced out entirely by increases, I figure if they had a cheaper alternative at a lesser quality, they'd opt for that over not being able to take photos. I agree that secondary film manufacturers will be vital to continuing the future of film, and I hope this cements Harman as one of them.
p.5 #11 · New Harman Phoenix ISO Color negative film
SergeyT wrote:
"Becoming " is not "IS a competitor".
In order to compete a competitor has to offer a competitive product and not just a product in the same category.
So where does the Phoenix II compete with the Gold ? Quality is way subpar. Price (in 120) is almost 40% higher.
Spending money on a mediocre product that may not have a future means diverting funding from continuing production of a quality product.
Mind you, I am not against a fair competition as it stimulates the progress. I just do not see it being the case that is tried to be presented here.
My point isn't about whether or not you should buy it in its current state, it's about writing off its future because of where it is now. This isn't a fair competition - it's a new/experimental product versus a product whose flaws were ironed out decades ago. We're talking about it's future as a potential competitor, not if it's a competitor now.
It's like this for almost every new technology/offering. Early EVs had worse build quality, worse range, and as you said about Gold, diverted money from continuing established ICE car production. People saw promise, gave money to allow it to improve, and it paid off. Not even talking about the outright benefits, look at what the competition of newer players has given us in the automotive market.
I mean, per the freezer, why buy Gold in the future if you can just buy it all now? Future Gold has worse value for the money. Same product, more expensive. But if all we do is buy this product because its cheaper now, we get no improvements, no continued production (because demand drops off entirely). I think having a freezer is good as a safe bet, as you said it's very secure, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't continue to look at other offerings.
