I, too, am chagrined about the Polaroid news. I have a box of 4x5 Type 53 that I use, admittedly- because of its cost - sparingly. But I love the tones and "uniqueness" of each print. If Polaroid includes this in their cuts, I hope some manufacturer will take on its production. Les Myers > From: "Bob Rosen" <afterswift@xxxxxxxxxxx> > Subject: [pure-silver] Re: Polaroid to stop film manufacture > Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 17:11:32 -0800 > > Sad news but hardly surprising . . . > > > http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7236106.stm > > > -Aaron > -------------------------------------------------------- > Hi Everyone, > > The irony is that Polaroid is about the closest medium we had for > straight > photography. > Sure, there were exotic ways to play around with modifying the image, > using > time and temperatures different from the factory specs, but when the film > was used as directed the images were purely photographic. > > I used the Pack camera film types. I think 109 was a positive/negative > stock > that produced B&W prints and a high quality negative. > > I think Polaroid was among the first outfits to offer 35mm negative > scanners. I don't know why they left the field. Polaroid will now market > digital cameras. However, they'll license their patents to any outfit > that > wants to continue to make original Polaroid film. > > Frankly, I think that the high price of Polaroid film discouraged folks > from > buying it. And Pack film wasn't available at most consumer outlets. I > hope > Polaroid will rise again. > > Bob > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2008 17:08:44 -0800 > From: "Dana H. Myers" <dana.myers@xxxxxxxxx> > Subject: [pure-silver] Re: Polaroid to stop film manufacture > > Aaron Reece wrote: >> Sad news but hardly surprising . . . >> >> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7236106.stm >> >> -Aaron > > It wasn't that many weeks ago that we asked Kodak > if they still made their film in-house (they answered yes). > > Dana > > > ------------------------------ > > From: joe mcguckin <joe@xxxxxxx> > Subject: [pure-silver] Re: Polaroid to stop film manufacture > Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 19:02:52 -0800 > > Dana, > > Actually, I think I asked the question: "Does Polaroid still make its > own film?" > > I wanted to know because after the bankruptcy and the acquisition, the > new owners of polaroid were selling off or > closing every manufacturing division. They were also licensing the > 'Polaroid' trademark to anyone willing to pay. It led to some > strange and comical products with a Polaroid brand: DVD players, > batteries, CF cards - even Polaroid branded 35mm film. > > Perhaps Harmon or Fuji will be interested in picking up the Polaroid > manufacturing lines. Polaroid has a plant in the Netherlands, > maybe that would be a good fit for Harmon? Polaroid is closing 4 or 5 > plants worldwide. Perhaps current and projected demand > would be enough to keep one or two plants operating at profitable > volumes... > > Joe > > > Joe McGuckin > ViaNet Communications > > joe@xxxxxxx > 650-207-0372 cell > 650-213-1302 office > 650-969-2124 fax > > > > On Feb 8, 2008, at 5:08 PM, Dana H. Myers wrote: > >> Aaron Reece wrote: >>> Sad news but hardly surprising . . . >>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7236106.stm >>> -Aaron >> >> It wasn't that many weeks ago that we asked Kodak >> if they still made their film in-house (they answered yes). >> >> Dana >> >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> = >> ====================================================================== >> To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to >> your account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when >> you subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there. > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 19:07:20 -0800 (PST) > From: Charlie Thorsten <charlie_thorsten@xxxxxxxxx> > Subject: [pure-silver] Re: Polaroid to stop film manufacture > > I suppose this means the end of large-format films > such as Type 52 and Type 55 P/N. I guess I'm as > guilty as anyone...I've only used these two films > sparingly. But I loved the results. > > I hope Kodak keeps making Tri-X and TMX100. > > -Charlie > > > --- Aaron Reece <oboeaaron@xxxxxxx> wrote: > >> Sad news but hardly surprising . . . >> >> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7236106.stm >> >> -Aaron > > > > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ > Be a better friend, newshound, and > know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. > http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ > > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Fri, 08 Feb 2008 19:09:45 -0800 > From: "Dana H. Myers" <dana.myers@xxxxxxxxx> > Subject: [pure-silver] Re: Polaroid to stop film manufacture > > Hello joe, > >> Dana, >> >> Actually, I think I asked the question: "Does Polaroid still make its >> own film?" > > Yes, you did, and I made an error in my note - a thinko - my apologies. > It was Polaroid we asked - and they honestly answered that they still > made film in their own factories. Even as they were certainly far into > plans to close those factories :-(. > > Dana > > ------------------------------ > > Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2008 19:34:15 -0800 (PST) > From: Mark Blackwell <mblackwell1958@xxxxxxxxx> > Subject: [pure-silver] Re: D2 filters update > > I may have a go of it, but we will see what happens. Looks like it might > have a heat resistant glass, with the fan cooling, but that won't stop > fading of gels. It will help, but not stop. Now if I could figure out a > way to make the modern filters work. They will cost in all likelyhood as > much as a new enlarger with the more modern head. Picking up one from > someone going digital shouldn't be that hard to do. Considering my time, > it is probably the right thing to do. Its just the cash that's the > problem at the moment. A color head or VC head that will fit the D2 > frame is a possibility, but the ideal situation would be another D2 with > a color head being dumped by someone going digital that had the same > frame so I would have a spare for parts if needed later. > Now I would disagree with you on the contrast filter below the lens not > affecting the image at all. May not be significant, but that gel cost a > quarter or so maybe to make. You don't spend hundreds and maybe > thousands of dollars for a camera lens to put a filter on the front that > cost a quarter. Moving that filter above the negative carrier keeps the > image from being projected through that 25 cent filter. The light is > modified before the image is created so it can't be affected. > > > > "Nicholas O. Lindan" <nolindan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: "Mark Blackwell" > >> No one seems to have them. I have only a couple of choices. > > That was my memory of it. > >> The next option I might try if I anyone has ever taken one of >> these beasts apart, is cutting my own. > > At some time some pictures of a filter replacement job were on > the 'net. I can't find them... > > If the alternative is chuck the head and get a new one you > may as well take a crack at it. Or give it to someone willing > to make a go of it. The things are still worth money when in > good working condition. > >> Still this seems more trouble than its worth > > What's a replacement head cost, what's time worth? > >> when the filters fade again its a do over. > > Probably took 20 years to fade ... worry about it > again in 20 years. Hi-temp filters with a thermal > blocking filter shouldn't have any problem with an > enlarger. > >> makes the filter part of the image, and probably >> would degrade the image quality at least a bit. > > No. It won't. Not in the teeneest bit. Not in the > slightest smidgen. > > If you want to know what _will_ degrade your image it > is the response linearity (lack of) of the VC paper > that's being used with the filter. > > == > Nicholas O. Lindan > Cleveland Engineering Design, LLC > Cleveland, Ohio 44121 > > ============================================================================================================= > To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your > account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you > subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there. > > > > --------------------------------- > Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try > it now. > > > ------------------------------ > > End of pure-silver Digest V5 #31 > ******************************** ============================================================================================================To unsubscribe from this list, go to www.freelists.org and logon to your account (the same e-mail address and password you set-up when you subscribed,) and unsubscribe from there.