Back in June 2018, the Ferrania Folks hoped to be in continuous production by Fall

[Andrew O'Neill]

View attachment 227251

Exactly!!!! Thank you!

 

[Kino]

Just trying to inject some levity...

 

[Harry Callahan]

So, this is what you say:

...
The Kickstarter money Ferrania received was CLEARLY for producing color slide film.
...

...and:

No, again, Ferrania said the money was to be used to produce, package, and ship the first batch of film to backers. Then the LEFTOVER money would be used to purchase the equipment.
...

So let´s have a look at the pie-chart from the kickstarter:

Now as everyone can see 3/4 of the money were intended to save the machines. So saying that the money was "CLEARLY" meant for slide film is misleading. If 3/4 are for saving equipment, the money isn´t "CLEARLY" for producing slide film, but for saving machines for the most part.

Then you say that the "LEFTOVER" of the money was intended to save equipment. 3/4 are not a "leftover" but the main part. This again is a misleading statement of yours, which makes me wonder whether you´re having problems with reading, understanding, ratios or if you´re doing this on purpose - which, how can i say it best, would be...

But... it's pretty damn shady to do that.

But you´re not the first one here to act like that, so i guess i am the one beating a dead horse here... again.

 

[Burninfilm]

Seriously, you can stop with the passive aggressive insults at any time. Totally not necessary.

It's amazing, it's like a being critical about Ferrania around here is sacrilege. Weird.

Everything I've said can pretty much be quoted from Ferrania. They were actually the ones who made the leftover statement... not me. So talk to David Bias about that one. Again, for the fourth time or so, I quote:

The reward levels are priced to allow us to create this batch, ship it to you, and have enough left over to purchase the remaining machinery that is most crucial to our long-term success.

And I have never kept anything from anyone. I pointed to the original sources for everything I mentioned without hesitation, but anyone who has actually read the entire Kickstarter page would have known what I was talking about. I'm not making stuff up. I totally agree that 75% (aka the bulk) of the money was budgeted for saving equipment (not all of which has yet been moved/installed/put to use according to Ferrania). But many members here, and Ferrania itself, continually try to portray the Kickstarter as SOLELY for the equipment. That's not true. It was also for producing/shipping/packaging the film. Yes, that's right... it was meant for BOTH. 25% of $322,000 is what... $80,000??? Not a small chunk of change. And like I said... all clearly stated in the Kickstarter.

I guess I could have been a bit more specific, but I thought it was evident I was clarifying that the money wasn't SOLELY for the equipment. So how about this... Ferrania CLEARLY stated that 25% of the money from the Kickstarter campaign (a minimum of $62,500) was to be used for producing "Ferraniachrome" which they stated with 100% certainty that it WILL be produced.

If simply disagreeing about Ferrania being great and refraining from patting them on the back for a job well done is seen as "shady" around here, then so be it. I do hope they succeed... and I hope they remember their Kickstarter backers as well.

Now let's go back to injecting some levity into this conversation ;-)

 

[Europan]

Yeah, I call it simply contradictory.

 

[railwayman3]

I'm just looking at a flyer from a major UK charity asking for donations for a particular conservation project, which catches the eye by offering a trivial small gift to supporters. There is a note which says that "Rewards limited and subject to availability. In the event of free gifts being unavailable a similar item of equal or higher value will be substituted". The gift they offered was of negligible monetary value, but, by being honest and open, they will, hopefully, avoid disappointing any supporters and retain their goodwill.

Why can't Ferrania act like this ? (Yes, I know they offered a substitute of B&W film at one point, but they definitely discouraged this by inferring at the time that Ferraniachrome was not that far away.) If they want to be some day accepted as a reliable supplier of film, they need to look very seriously at their public image.......it's not just about being able to make film, and being too busy to update communications, they have to be trusted by supporters and potential customers.

Analogue users doesn't "need" Ferrania, there are other established and trusted suppliers of quality products. Ferrania "needs" the customers.

 

[Kino]

I think Ferannia faked the film run on a stage and Kubrick's nephew filmed it...

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

SSSSSSSSSSH!

 

[Harry Callahan]

Seriously, you can stop with the passive aggressive insults at any time. Totally not necessary.

It's amazing, it's like a being critical about Ferrania around here is sacrilege. Weird.

Everything I've said can pretty much be quoted from Ferrania. They were actually the ones who made the leftover statement... not me. So talk to David Bias about that one. Again, for the fourth time or so, I quote:

The reward levels are priced to allow us to create this batch, ship it to you, and have enough left over to purchase the remaining machinery that is most crucial to our long-term success.

And I have never kept anything from anyone. I pointed to the original sources for everything I mentioned without hesitation, but anyone who has actually read the entire Kickstarter page would have known what I was talking about. I'm not making stuff up. I totally agree that 75% (aka the bulk) of the money was budgeted for saving equipment (not all of which has yet been moved/installed/put to use according to Ferrania). But many members here, and Ferrania itself, continually try to portray the Kickstarter as SOLELY for the equipment. That's not true. It was also for producing/shipping/packaging the film. Yes, that's right... it was meant for BOTH. 25% of $322,000 is what... $80,000??? Not a small chunk of change. And like I said... all clearly stated in the Kickstarter.

I guess I could have been a bit more specific, but I thought it was evident I was clarifying that the money wasn't SOLELY for the equipment. So how about this... Ferrania CLEARLY stated that 25% of the money from the Kickstarter campaign (a minimum of $62,500) was to be used for producing "Ferraniachrome" which they stated with 100% certainty that it WILL be produced.

If simply disagreeing about Ferrania being great and refraining from patting them on the back for a job well done is seen as "shady" around here, then so be it. I do hope they succeed... and I hope they remember their Kickstarter backers as well.

Now let's go back to injecting some levity into this conversation ;-)

Well, i´d also like to get back to levity, but as you´re feeling insulted you might want to have an answer to all this:

I don´t know if you have read through this thread entirely (and the previous thread), but there have been several accusing Ferrania of lies, fraud, not using the money as intended and so on. Sometimes it took several days or even weeks to make these aware that not all the money was collected to produce slide film, but for the most part for saving equipment and knowledge.
Still they continued to come back, beliving every questionable message on the interent - for example a local italian newspaper did an article about Ferrania mentioning that Ferrania had something to do with x-ray film. But this article did not clearly say whether Ferrania once did produce x-ray film (they once did), or whether Ferrania still does or again does produce x-ray film - but for all the sceptics it was now evidence that Ferrania was misusing the money from the kickstarter.
This went on for some time and the last to show up here to accuse Ferrania at some point started to post sample pictures being shot on Tri-x, saying stuff like "Uuuuuuuuuh Tri-x is suuuuuuuuuch a nice Film who does need another B&W film" etc. . It nearly seemed like he was getting payed to influence readers of this thread to move away from Ferrania.

Now when you joined in you seemd to be just another one of these, because you regretfully did not make yourself clear, sorry.
Yes, you did cite a lot from the kickstarter-page, but you said stuff like "the money CLEARLY was for slide film" - and such a statement does not show that you know about the 3/4-1/4-thing. If you say "the money" you mean all of the money, so you appeared to be one of those not having understood the campaign, which is why i tried to clarify.
Also you used the term "leftover" and you say that this term is not your own but has been used by Dave Bias. This, regretfully, isn´t true, as Mr. Bias did use the term "have enough left over", which has a completely different meaning in this context.
A "leftover" is a small part/thing/ammount. If you for example built your own garden shed, out of wood, you`ll have to saw rather big laths down to fit - and when you´re done you will have a "leftover", a small ammount of rather small pieces of wood, but the biggest part of the wood you have needed to built the shed will be forming the shed.
So by saying "Then the LEFTOVER money would be used to purchase the equipment." you say that the biggest part of the money was meant for slide film and only a very small part of the money, a fraction was needed for salvation of equipment. This i also tried to correct.

Now you say that you knew all about this, which is nice, but you may see that your previous statements were not expressing your awareness and therefore made you look like another Ferrania-hater.

About the "damn shady":
First it of course isn´t nice to say something like that, so by making such a statement you´re kinda leaving "save ground".
Second it really isn´t nice to read such a comment when you have followed the entire story, read through all this threads and accusations, because when you have you know that the guys at Ferrania and Mr. Bias himself had a real hard time, a lot of work and problems to solve and such a statement does not do justice in any way to what these guys have been doing and are doing for the analog community - especially in a time when most manufacturers do close down factories etc., so such a statement might provoke some sort of reaction.
Third such a statement can be very problematic, as it could be considered "bad for business". That is justiciable and can bring you into very big trouble, as you could be sued big time for that. Now lucky you Ferrania is cool, if they had sued all the haters they would not have to worry about money again, but you may see that you´re crossing some line with such a statement.

Now this ain´t about supressing critizism about Ferrania. For example i have not "taken a stand" when the webshop was critizied for still showing an outdated message, though i didn´t/don`t think it is/was such a problem.
What i was about is that you did not make yourself clear about your statements and you kinda crossed a line by, you know "damn shady".

Now that you have made yourself clear, we can go on discussing your points, which now are:

...
So how about this... Ferrania CLEARLY stated that 25% of the money from the Kickstarter campaign (a minimum of $62,500) was to be used for producing "Ferraniachrome" which they stated with 100% certainty that it WILL be produced.
...

The problem is see here is that the 25% of the money were not exactly for production of slide film, but "just" for converting, packing and shipping. The unconverted slide film is not included here, as can be seen at the pie-chart.
So all the backers had payed for by 25% of their investment was converting, packing and shipping of a slide film, but not for the slide film itself. Basically they have paid for finishing of a product, but not the product itself - this of cousre is going into detail - but by Ferrania offering an exchange, B&W instead of color slide, they were not misusing the money or changing their obligation towards the backers - as the backers have not payed for color slide, but just for the finishing of a film, which sadly could not be produced till now.
Of course all the backers did expect a color slide film, but when being precise they have not payed for that.

That´s frustrating and,as you pointed out, Ferrania did encourage backers to hold on to their color slide film when offering an exchange - but i assume they did so because they did belive that they would be able to produce color slide soon. Just like they did when the Kickstarter was on. But a 100% certainty isn´t given with a Kickstarter and they did not claim there to be one. They said "Upon success, your risk practically vanishes." This is very confident, but not a 100% guarantee. Also they said "We are confident that we are ready for just about anything...", which again isn´t a 100% guarantee, but a phrase for "it´s looking really good right now, can´t think of anything which could come in our way".
And this is where real life comes into play. I mean one of their important workers could have had a heart-attack or a car crash - do you expect them to state this possible problem in their Kickstarter? One could go endlessly about all such things, like what if there is an earthquake (there has been an earthquake in Italy in 2017 it think, regretfully several people died, but fortunately the earthquake was far away from the Ferrania factory), or what if there is a civil war (because the government increased taxes on spaghetti and pizza ), or what about a natural catastrophy like heavy rain for weeks... and so on.
Now i assume a rational backer does know that there isn´t 100% certainty, because there are so so many things to happen like accidents, fatality or just a work accident - which in this case is very likely to happen regretfully, as they now are restoring a building and moving big and heavy machines having all kinds of sharp edges for years .

This means even if they had promised 100% certainty - which they havn`t - every sane backer still would have know that there just cannot be 100% certainty. And, regretfully, "life happened". Unforseeable problems occured, an accidental destruction of a water pipeline happen, i think - and BAM! the nice plan collapsed.

I´m sure nobody is happy with that, except for the competition maybe, but that´s how it happened - but they´re still at it. They didn´t gave up and everything, so i don´t really understand why still some act as if Ferrania cannot be trusted, or that they do "damn shady" things or that they granted 100% certainty - which, even if they did, would not have been a 100% guarantee.
They have shown for years now that they really are committed to the project - and i´m sure they are the first who would like to come to an end regarding the slide film thing.

So, i hope i was able to dispel any misunderstanding, but maybe one last thing: I have not insulted you. I said stuff like "it makes me wonder whether" or "i guess" - which is not an insult. It would be an insult if i said something like "You`re a...!!!", maybe including "damn shady"? I know my passive-agressiveness is reappearing...

So let´s go back to the light side of the force.

 

[MattKing]

I just wish that the title to this thread read instead: "As of spring 2018, Ferrania expects (but doesn't guarantee) continuous production by fall 2018"

 

[Harry Callahan]

I'm just looking at a flyer from a major UK charity asking for donations for a particular conservation project, which catches the eye by offering a trivial small gift to supporters. There is a note which says that "Rewards limited and subject to availability. In the event of free gifts being unavailable a similar item of equal or higher value will be substituted". The gift they offered was of negligible monetary value, but, by being honest and open, they will, hopefully, avoid disappointing any supporters and retain their goodwill.

Why can't Ferrania act like this ? (Yes, I know they offered a substitute of B&W film at one point, but they definitely discouraged this by inferring at the time that Ferraniachrome was not that far away.) If they want to be some day accepted as a reliable supplier of film, they need to look very seriously at their public image.......it's not just about being able to make film, and being too busy to update communications, they have to be trusted by supporters and potential customers.

Analogue users doesn't "need" Ferrania, there are other established and trusted suppliers of quality products. Ferrania "needs" the customers.

I kinda get that, also the update on their website, but i don´t think its such a big problem. Of course it should be a goal to make a professional appearance, but once they are back in production being able to constantly deliver a product, most won´t care about these problems - if they heard about them at all, because a lot future customers did not have heard of Ferrania yet, i think.
I mean think of Foma for example: There have been problems in coating of their films, little holes in the emulsion, but people did buy their products. They knew what to expect, but Foma is pretty cheap and if a film is faulty you can get another one for cheap (respectively you even can get replacement), so you don´t use them for really important stuff, but you know. I have been and still am using Foma products for years now and i´m glad that there is a producer like Foma, offering several films (and paper) in a lot of formats, i mean they even do cine stuff, like 16mm, DS8 and so on.
This means even if the product isn´t professional, think of all the Lomography stuff, there still will be customers as long as the product is constantly available - and at least some of the Lomography stuff isn´t that cheap.

Therefore i think it surely is important to make a professional appearance, better just be professional, but once Ferrania is back, most won´t care about these thing that happened in the past or today, as long as there is a product contantly available. Even quality doesn´t matter that much, price and availability is what matters.
And as they likely will get above "Foma-standarts" i think these non-updated messages will be a thing of the past soon.

 

[faberryman]

Even quality doesn´t matter that much, price and availability is what matters.
And as they likely will get above "Foma-standarts" i think these non-updated messages will be a thing of the past soon.

Not sure why anyone would purchase a consistently defective product.

 

[Harry Callahan]

Not sure why anyone would purchase a consistently defective product.

Have you heard about recent the problems with Foma-cine-films (16mm, DS8 etc.)?
Still little holes, respectively black spots in the emulsion, emulsion peeling off during developement, heavily misperforated film (perforation being off by more than 1mm!) and miscoating resulting in some sort of "drops" on the emulsion...
They are cheap, offer formats others don`t offer (D8, DS8), they do replace you a faulty film without any problem - and you can buy new all the time. All you have to do is to use their films for not too important projects.
Or have you seen the Purple-thingy by Lomography? This stock is "a fault", as its missing some layers needed for correct color-reproduction. And it even does more than a roll of Ektachrome if i recall correct - but there is demand.

 

[faberryman]

All you have to do is to use their films for not too important projects.

I don't have any unimportant projects. My time and effort are the most valuable things I have. Why waste them using defective materials.

 

[btaylor]

I like the flogging a dead horse gif. Unfortunately sums up a lot of this discussion.
I did not get in on the Kickstarter. If I had been aware of it in time I probably would have kicked in $70. It would have been worth it to invest in the Herculean story that this has become, rewards or no rewards. For some reason (like watching a car wreck in slo-mo or the intrigue of restoring a major manufacturing facility with so few resources) I can’t seem to stop reading these Ferrania threads. But what I don’t understand is how upset people get about the roll or three of Ferraniachrome they dropped a few dollars on three years ago. It was a kickstarter, right? So no guarantees of anything. And who among us hasn’t gotten stung for $70 or more on an eBay transaction on some obsolete old film gear. At least there is a great story going on here. I just don’t get the extreme negativity. There is a small team trying to do the nearly impossible to save a part of the analogue world we love— my hat is off to them. And if they ever do get to produce Ferraniachrome I will buy it!

 

[cmacd123]

Seriously, you can stop with the passive aggressive insults at any time. Totally not necessary.
It's amazing, it's like a being critical about Ferrania around here is sacrilege. Weird.
Everything I've said can pretty much be quoted from Ferrania. They were actually the ones who made the leftover statement... not me. So talk to David Bias about that one.

----------------------
no one is being "passive Aggressive"

you keep repeating that you are unhappy that you did not get the rewards you are expecting YET. We understand. you don't need to keep repeating this. life happens. So far the saga has run for quite awhile. most of us tossed in a few bucks to a good cause. I think I sprung for the package with 4 rolls of film as a reward. so far I have gotten a discount on 5 rolls of a B&W film that I was not even expecting.

The hope is that we will EVENTUALLY have the resurrection of a SMALL film manufacturer, run by folks who are fanatic about film. Someone who is willing to consider all sorts of Niche products. if that Does not happen, I have blown the cost of getting 5 rolls of colour film developed. if it DOES happen, we get wonders like ASA 400+ slide film again, 126, 110, 127 film in colur and B&W - 16mm film is single and double perf, (Kodak only wants to make single perf) perhaps regular 8 that is not reperforated from 16mm single perf. Perhaps other surprises. so no we are not being passive aggressive, we are just tired of hearing again and again about how it is so unfair that you did not get a few rolls of film way back in the past.

Don't worry, be happy, shoot some Ektachrome in the meantime.

 

[pentaxuser]

----------------------

if it DOES happen, we get wonders like ASA 400+ slide film again, 126, 110, 127 film in colur and B&W - 16mm film is single and double perf, (Kodak only wants to make single perf) perhaps regular 8 that is not reperforated from 16mm single perf. Perhaps other surprises. /QUOTE]
Is there a reason to believe that Ferrania can deliver all of the above in addition to slide film? Given that Kodak took a long time to resurrect slide film even with Kodak's resources I wonder how Ferrania if and once it has successfully produce its slide film believes it will be able to compete? Has Ferrania in its status reports made any mention of this "Kodak new boy on the block" and what effect this might have on itself?

I ask this as a genuine question and not as the prosecuting counsel who never asks a question except those to which he already knows the answer I was not a backer and have no axe to grind here.

On the separate issue of other possible benefits you mention, how many users are there for 126,110 127 film to justify such production given the cost v the profit? These other benefits seem somewhat unlikely to me but there may be evidence that there is a large enough market to justify the investment. If there is what is that evidence?

Thanks

pentaxuser

 

[Cholentpot]

----------------------
no one is being "passive Aggressive"

you keep repeating that you are unhappy that you did not get the rewards you are expecting YET. We understand. you don't need to keep repeating this. life happens. So far the saga has run for quite awhile. most of us tossed in a few bucks to a good cause. I think I sprung for the package with 4 rolls of film as a reward. so far I have gotten a discount on 5 rolls of a B&W film that I was not even expecting.

The hope is that we will EVENTUALLY have the resurrection of a SMALL film manufacturer, run by folks who are fanatic about film. Someone who is willing to consider all sorts of Niche products. if that Does not happen, I have blown the cost of getting 5 rolls of colour film developed. if it DOES happen, we get wonders like ASA 400+ slide film again, 126, 110, 127 film in colur and B&W - 16mm film is single and double perf, (Kodak only wants to make single perf) perhaps regular 8 that is not reperforated from 16mm single perf. Perhaps other surprises. so no we are not being passive aggressive, we are just tired of hearing again and again about how it is so unfair that you did not get a few rolls of film way back in the past.

Don't worry, be happy, shoot some Ektachrome in the meantime.

Kickstarter is all about the risk anyhow. So you blew 200-300 on a risk. 5 years ago.

Get over it right?

The amount of entitlement that keeps cropping up is astounding.

 

[cmacd123]

On the separate issue of other possible benefits you mention, how many users are there for 126,110 127 film to justify such production given the cost v the profit? These other benefits seem somewhat unlikely to me but there may be evidence that there is a large enough market to justify the investment. If there is what is that evidence?

At the time of the great salvage hunt, Dave Bias indicated that they had saved most of the tooling that would be needed to relaunch small runs of these other sizes. Naturally when they are fully up and running is the earliest that they would be thinking of doing an analysis of the practicality for any of those. 126 was one of the sizes that the old Ferrania company kept producing longer than any one else. As it happens there are a LOT of Cameras that take 127 that were issued by the original Ferrania.

my point is that they are likely the only folks who have much of a shot of bringing back some of these sizes as a "factory Made" product. (ignoring Lomography with their 110)

 

[railwayman3]

At the time of the great salvage hunt, Dave Bias indicated that they had saved most of the tooling that would be needed to relaunch small runs of these other sizes. Naturally when they are fully up and running is the earliest that they would be thinking of doing an analysis of the practicality for any of those. 126 was one of the sizes that the old Ferrania company kept producing longer than any one else. As it happens there are a LOT of Cameras that take 127 that were issued by the original Ferrania.

my point is that they are likely the only folks who have much of a shot of bringing back some of these sizes as a "factory Made" product. (ignoring Lomography with their 110)

Agreed.....but I just wonder if the odd sizes could be produced at a reasonable price, and if there really would be a serious ongoing demand. I guess others are like me, having a couple of old 127 cameras (one, a 127 Yashica, needs repair), and a few 126 point-and-shoot. Yes, it would be fun to try them out again, but I don't think they would ever have regular use compared to my 120 and 35mm kit. If they really mattered to me, I could,even now, reload 126 cartridges (fiddly!) and just manage to buy 127 films (expensive, and perhaps not "Kodak or Ilford quality").
Not criticising Ferrania, just speculating.......

 

[Kino]

I know that a roll of 36 exposure 35mm has the same surface area as a roll of 120, but what about 127?

Is it also equal to 35mm x 36 exp and 120?

 

[Photo Engineer]

You are all forgetting one very important fact.

35mm uses a different support than 120, both of which are different from any sheet film support.

They use (approximately) 5 mil, 4 mil and 7 mil respectively. The coating machine tensioning must be perfect for each of them.

PE

 

[BAC1967]

I know that a roll of 36 exposure 35mm has the same surface area as a roll of 120, but what about 127?

Is it also equal to 35mm x 36 exp and 120?

127 film uses less surface area than both 35mm and 120. You get 12 4x4 images from a roll compared to 12 6x6 with 120.

 

[FILM Ferrania]

Oh geez folks...

I've just caught up on the last couple of pages of arguments and all I can say is this:

The world is not static.

At every step, we have stated the truth of our situation based on all available knowledge.

It's bizarre to me that some of our detractors choose to ignore everything we have published between Nov 2014 and today - and instead hold up the text that was written nearly 5 years ago as some sort of "evidence" that we are the bad guys.

 

[FILM Ferrania]

Status update on 126 and 127 formats:

Our 127 machine has been moved into the room with our 120 finishing machines.

And there it will sit until we have the luxury of investing the time and money necessary to attach the machine to the building services, source (or probably, make) new spools and backing paper of the correct thickness, and (as PE points out) make our own base material specifically for that format.

That said, we do fully intend to make 127 film eventually.

126 is another story as the machines need a lot of work. I believe I have a sales plan to make 126 work - but with a cost easily double that of 127, it's completely back-burnered until such a time as we have nothing else to do.