Photography > Film Labs > Re: really no p...

Latest [ Topics | Posts ]

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or diapositve) (by 2006) ?

by ellis@[EMAIL PROTECTED] () Nov 28, 2006 at 06:35 AM

In article <ZaQah.8502$gJ1.6389@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, jeremy <jeremy@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:

>That they will have to withdraw from manufacturing film is a virtual 
>certainty.  But that does not mean that  other, smaller companies cannot 
>prosper with film.

Fuji still appears to be supporting film. In fact they just brought
back Velvia 50 (presumably due to demand).

87 Posts in Topic:

really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or dia

kodak@[EMAIL PROTECTED]

2006-11-07 06:36:50

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

ellis@[EMAIL PROTECTED]

2006-11-07 21:03:34

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Derek Gee" <

2006-11-08 02:52:08

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

scenic_man <zcukpkn02@

2006-11-08 03:11:53

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Derek Gee" <

2006-11-10 03:36:22

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

david Windsor <Davou00

2006-11-15 16:02:16

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"babelfish" <

2006-11-16 01:51:42

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Thomas T. Veldhouse

2006-11-16 13:42:14

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

ellis@[EMAIL PROTECTED]

2006-11-16 22:13:04

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"babelfish" <

2006-11-19 06:23:20

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"dooey" <doo

2006-11-19 11:53:15

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"babelfish" <

2006-11-19 19:45:52

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"jeremy" <je

2006-11-19 21:53:59

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

philip@[EMAIL PROTECTED]

2006-11-20 00:48:51

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

ellis@[EMAIL PROTECTED]

2006-11-20 04:34:20

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"babelfish" <

2006-11-21 02:27:44

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

philip@[EMAIL PROTECTED]

2006-11-21 10:57:46

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"babelfish" <

2006-11-21 13:16:13

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

philip@[EMAIL PROTECTED]

2006-11-21 16:35:45

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"jeremy" <je

2006-11-21 17:37:51

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Thomas T. Veldhouse

2006-11-21 18:26:08

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"jeremy" <je

2006-11-21 21:45:59

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Thomas T. Veldhouse

2006-11-22 02:13:49

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Greg \"_\"

2006-11-21 21:05:29

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Thomas T. Veldhouse

2006-11-22 02:14:18

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"babelfish" <

2006-11-22 11:06:32

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

philip@[EMAIL PROTECTED]

2006-11-22 15:04:55

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"babelfish" <

2006-11-24 21:58:36

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"jeremy" <je

2006-11-22 15:14:37

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"babelfish" <

2006-11-24 21:22:41

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Thomas T. Veldhouse

2006-11-21 15:22:06

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"babelfish" <

2006-11-22 10:38:48

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Thomas T. Veldhouse

2006-11-22 13:26:44

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"babelfish" <

2006-11-24 21:14:25

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Thomas T. Veldhouse

2006-11-27 13:46:36

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"babelfish" <

2006-11-24 21:20:22

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"babelfish" <

2006-11-08 05:03:10

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"jeremy" <je

2006-11-08 13:42:15

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

David Starr <davestarr

2006-11-08 15:49:25

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

Michael Weinstein <not

2006-11-19 03:42:07

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

Keith Tapscott. <Keith

2006-11-26 13:49:01

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"babelfish" <

2006-11-26 17:26:14

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

ellis@[EMAIL PROTECTED]

2006-11-27 06:28:15

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Thomas T. Veldhouse

2006-11-27 13:42:09

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

David Starr <davestarr

2006-11-27 17:36:32

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

ellis@[EMAIL PROTECTED]

2006-11-28 00:41:07

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Greg \"_\"

2006-11-27 20:03:11

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"babelfish" <

2006-11-28 02:24:55

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

ellis@[EMAIL PROTECTED]

2006-11-28 03:15:53

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"jeremy" <je

2006-11-28 05:55:05

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

ellis@[EMAIL PROTECTED]

2006-11-28 06:35:46

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"jeremy" <je

2006-11-28 06:59:40

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

philip@[EMAIL PROTECTED]

2006-11-28 09:35:46

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Greg \"_\"

2006-11-28 19:24:11

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"babelfish" <

2006-11-30 02:02:58

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Derek Gee" <

2006-11-30 03:54:31

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Thomas T. Veldhouse

2006-11-28 13:41:08

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Greg \"_\"

2006-11-28 19:27:06

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

ellis@[EMAIL PROTECTED]

2006-11-29 01:04:33

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Greg \"_\"

2006-11-28 20:40:44

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

ellis@[EMAIL PROTECTED]

2006-11-29 05:51:10

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Greg \"_\"

2006-11-29 18:48:23

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

ellis@[EMAIL PROTECTED]

2006-11-30 07:49:19

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

philip@[EMAIL PROTECTED]

2006-11-30 09:15:28

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"babelfish" <

2006-11-30 13:06:43

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Thomas T. Veldhouse

2006-11-29 13:28:44

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Greg \"_\"

2006-11-29 18:44:08

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"babelfish" <

2006-11-30 02:13:32

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Greg \"_\"

2006-11-30 00:43:55

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

ellis@[EMAIL PROTECTED]

2006-11-30 07:50:23

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"babelfish" <

2006-11-30 13:02:18

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Thomas T. Veldhouse

2006-11-30 13:37:24

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"jeremy" <je

2006-11-30 14:57:41

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Greg \"_\"

2006-11-30 18:31:05

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Thomas T. Veldhouse

2006-12-01 18:51:47

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Greg \"_\"

2006-12-01 15:19:36

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Thomas T. Veldhouse

2006-12-04 14:41:07

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Greg \"_\"

2006-11-27 18:44:33

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

rodsmith@[EMAIL PROTECTED

2006-12-04 19:08:08

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Thomas T. Veldhouse

2006-12-04 20:25:53

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

ellis@[EMAIL PROTECTED]

2006-12-05 03:09:59

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Greg \"_\"

2006-12-05 00:01:47

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

ellis@[EMAIL PROTECTED]

2006-12-05 07:02:08

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

"Greg \"_\"

2006-12-05 19:27:56

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

ellis@[EMAIL PROTECTED]

2006-12-06 07:48:09

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

John Horner <jthorner@

2006-12-16 07:56:25

Re: really no purpose anymore for traditional films (negative or

Jim

2007-02-02 08:01:26

Post A Reply:

About - Advertising - Contact - Frequently Asked Questions - Privacy Policy - Terms of Use - Signup
tan12V112 Fri Jul 4 22:52:22 CDT 2008.