Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2004/02/08

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] The Quality of Kodak
From: Marc James Small <msmall@infionline.net>
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2004 22:48:45 -0500
References: <001201c3ee88$ba2bc720$6401a8c0@CCA4A5EF37E11E>

At 03:53 PM 2/8/04 -0600, Jeffery Smith wrote:
>Back when they were making the Retina? Hmmm. The lenses were good, but
>they were Schneider lenses. I thought as early as 1968 that Ilford was
>better B&W film, and Chinese-made Seagull paper and Ilford paper were
>better than Kodak. And then they really decided to get frugal and put
>less and less silver in their paper, and I couldn't get a true black
>from it. 

The reduction in silver content was dictated by the EPA.  Ilford and AGFA
were both spared a like fate for some years, though even they did not come
close to the high silver content of the old Warsaw Pact stuff such as ORWO
and Forte.

Ilford came under the same guidelines as Kodak when they were bought out by
International Paper.  Have you noticed that their stuff is a little harder
to use now?

Marc

msmall@infionline.net  FAX:  +540/343-7315
Cha robh bąs fir gun ghrąs fir!


- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html

In reply to: Message from "B. D. Colen" <bdcolen@earthlink.net> (RE: [Leica] Re: Digital M - was Leica to Restructure, Cut Staff)