[rollei_list] Re: OT: Slide Film and E6
- From: Peter J Nebergall <iusar4s@xxxxxxxx>
- To: rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 21:08:44 -0800
Yes, the great Rock band amps were almost all tube... The best still
are, and not just for sound. Tubes can handle overloads better; they
just heat up. Transistors blow up. Personal experience here.
Peter Nebergall
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 18:46:36 -0800 "Richard Knoppow"
<dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Peter K." <peterk727@xxxxxxxxx>
> To: <rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Saturday, December 22, 2007 3:46 PM
> Subject: [rollei_list] Re: OT: Slide Film and E6
>
>
> Thanks Richard. My error. I did notice Portra BW was
> disco'd. Glad to see
> there are still some films that remain. 2007 has surely been
> the year of
> digital. I hope film sticks around a while longer.
>
> So do I. There is evidently still a pretty large market
> for "conventional" photographic products, just not the
> enormous market there was until digital began to erode it.
> The problem is that the larger companies, like Kodak, Agfa,
> Fuji, and Ilford, have technology which the small, mostly
> formerly eastern european, companies do not have and are not
> likely ever to develop. This makes more difference to film
> than paper but results in both products being behind the
> times and in rather poor quality control.
> Fuji makes good B&W printing paper but sells it only in
> Japan. I don't know why they are not interested in a larger
> market but there may be good business reasons that are not
> obvious.
> There have been other transistions in technology
> historically that are somewhat comparable, for instance the
> supplanting of vacuum tubes by transistors and the
> supplanting of steam locomotives by diesel-electric. In the
> U.S. some vacuum tube manufacturers managed to make the
> transision but others died out and none of the three makers
> of main-line steam locomotives survived.
> Agfa was already in other businesses so it simply dropped
> out of making chemical photographic products. Kodak, I
> think, would have like to do so but its main product line
> was chemical photography. Ilford has managed to hold on
> perhaps because they are a much smaller company and more
> flexible. Fuji is also in many other businesses and it
> appears they have managed to continue to find photographic
> products sufficiently profitable to keep on with them.
> Digital is not going to go away but, one hopes, neither
> will chemical photography.
>
> ---
> Richard Knoppow
> Los Angeles, CA, USA
> dickburk@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> ---
> Rollei List
>
> - Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> - Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
> in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
>
> - Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
> 'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into
> www.freelists.org
>
> - Online, searchable archives are available at
> //www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
>
>
>
---
Rollei List
- Post to rollei_list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with 'subscribe'
in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Unsubscribe at rollei_list-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxx with
'unsubscribe' in the subject field OR by logging into www.freelists.org
- Online, searchable archives are available at
//www.freelists.org/archives/rollei_list
Other related posts:
