Demise of HSI

["Stan Patz" <skp113@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

To the Group,

I was really surprised at the tepid reaction to Kodak's announcement of the 
demise of 4x5 HSI. If the reaction is so subdued on this list, then there 
may not be that many people using the film.

In any case, here is the letter I wrote to Kodak's Terry McArdle with copies 
to Daniel Carp, CEO and Richard Johnson:

Dear Mr. McArdle:

I cannot tell you how disappointed I am over the announcement that your 
company is discontinuing infrared 4x5 sheetfilm.

I am a commercial photographer and have worked in New York City for the last 
thirty-five years. Normally, I shoot 4x5 E100S or EPY with an occasional 
black and white job on TMX. That's work. When I want to get away, I pack up 
my special field camera outfit - an old Meridian B and Grafmatic holders 
loaded with HSI - and take a walk in the woods. That's play. The ethereal 
look I get from that film cannot be equaled by any other film in the world.

But I have only begun using the film again in the last few years. Over 
thirty years ago as an architectural photographer, I tested HSI to see if I 
could extract dark buildings from foliage and get more dramatic skies. The 
film produced interesting images, but was loaded with blemishes I could not 
eliminate. Over the years, I retested the film and consulted with tech. 
reps., but I could never get clean film.

Only in the last two years have I figured out how to deal with all the 
emulsion voids; I bought a computer. I still cannot make a photographic 
print from flawed HSI negatives, but I get such nice results from my ink-jet 
printer, the problem has receded.

I really feel Kodak has let me down. First by stonewalling (me and) 
everyone, denying there was a manufacturing problem with the film. This led 
to countless hours of wasted time and materials trying to eliminate flaws 
that were built into the film. And second, by discontinuing a film that is 
virtually unique in the marketplace.

The elimination of HSI is a classic example of the "self fulfilling 
prophecy". You make a flawed product, figuring it is good enough for the 
guys in lab coats, then wonder why the film does not gain greater 
acceptance. So you conclude that the film must go. Why improve something no 
one uses?

I have always been a Kodak enthusiast. I collect old Kodak folders and, with 
the exception of Polaroid, use Kodak film and chemistry to the virtual 
exclusion of other manufacturers.  Now that you have dumped HSI, I will 
reevaluate that policy.

Sincerely yours,

Stanley K. Patz

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

*
****
*******
******************************************************
*  To remove yourself from this list, send:          *
*         UNSUBSCRIBE INFRARED                       *
*       to                                           *
*         MAJORDOMO@xxxxx                            *
*----------------------------------------------------*
*   For the IR-FAQ, IR-Gallery and heaps of links:   *
*  http://www.a1.nl/phomepag/markerink/mainpage.htm  *
******************************************************