kodak films

[sgelb]

I love to use kodak. but it seems they are signalling they will stop making film soon(5 years?). smaller batches and higher prices seem to be a sign, seems like some MBA inside kodak wants to kill it altogether.

also they keep killing emulsions, TP, EPR, EPP are all no more production. I bet you EPR will become very valuable in the future, once it becomes scarce, people will pay a premium for it, just like Tech pan which now goes for 3-4x its original price. E6 seems to have a life of 40-100 years if stored properly. I MUCH prefer it to velvia, I think the color rendition is much better IMHO.

[Frank Bagbey]

Giving up photofinishing signals Kodak's intentions. The only Kodak film left on my shelves is going into the bargain box first thing Monday morning. %#&@ Kodak!!!!

[Gordon Moat]

Market capitalization for Kodak depends upon revenues, of which film is still a huge part. There is also the factor that film is the highest profit product that Kodak produces, measured on a percentage basis. Kodak risks a great deal financially giving up entirely on film production, equivalent to shedding over 20% of revenues, and there best profit ratio product. If they did, there stock price would evaporate quickly.

Unless Kodak can come up with another product line to generate over $1B annual sales, then they need to stick with film. Ask yourself what product that they do not currently produce could possibly generate that revenue, and could enjoy a high profit ratio.

Another factor is Fujifilm, who would greatly like to see Kodak leave the film market entirely. Like Kodak, Fujifilm enjoys a high profit from film production, despite that it is a small part of their overall business.

http://www.reuters.com/finance/stocks/overview?symbol=4901.T

I am certainly glad neither of you is running Kodak or Fujifilm. It is not possible to simply dump an entire product line without consequences. Figures from PhotoKina and other industry sources indicate nearly $3B annual film revenues, and most of that goes to Kodak. Do you seriously think companies are going to dump profitable and mature products that generate that much revenue?

Ciao!

Gordon Moat Photography (http://www.gordonmoat.com)

[aphexafx]

I do not believe Fujifilm is interested in seeing Kodak leave the film market. Kodak IS film to many people. If Kodak leaves film, there will be fanfare the general public, along with many early professionals, will assume that film is over and the market for film with crash. Fujifilm will not benefit from this scenario, professionals non-withstanding. My opinion.

[Kent10D]

What is it with all these prophesies of doom lately?

Kodak has phased out some emulsion types, but they've also introduced a few new ones very recently and are clearly committed to keeping film manufacturing going at some level. These doom-and-gloom Chicken Little declarations based on nothing but hearsay and paranoid speculation do nothing to help the cause.

If you're worried about it, go out and buy/shoot LOTS of film! Please!

[Gordon Moat]

http://www.fujifilmholdings.com/en/investors/performance_and_finance/sales_trends_by_products/index.html

Just thought I would add this in, since Fujifilm just reported earnings. Colour film sales overall in 2008 works out to around $851 Million dollars. If you consider that Fujifilm sell far less colour film than Kodak, you can probably guess at Kodak sales. Does anyone seriously think a company would leave that much cash sitting on the table?

[Gary L. Quay]

I'm sure this has been said before, but buying Kodak's film will keep it in the market.

[Eric Leppanen]

http://www.fujifilmholdings.com/en/investors/performance_and_finance/sales_trends_by_products/index.html

Just thought I would add this in, since Fujifilm just reported earnings. Colour film sales overall in 2008 works out to around $851 Million dollars. If you consider that Fujifilm sell far less colour film than Kodak, you can probably guess at Kodak sales. Does anyone seriously think a company would leave that much cash sitting on the table?True, although Fuji's year-to-year film sales from 2005 to 2008 have declined in a virtually linear fashion, and if present trends continue Fuji's film sales will reach zero within four years. Of course most of us expect this decline to slow or stabilize well short of that (part of the 2008 decline was doubtless caused by a souring world economy rather than a declining film market share).

At Kodak, motion picture film is a significant part of their film business. This is still significant resistance within major Hollywood productions and elsewhere to digital motion picture capture, but the process of converting commercial movie theaters to digital projection has already begun, and eventually projection duplicate film demand will take a big hit. So we clearly are going to be living in an environment of declining film demand for the foreseeable future. This is not gloom-and-doom, just being realistic. But I agree that color film is a very high profit margin business and all the current players will stay in the market until the bitter end. And Kodak's recent behavior (introducing a number of new or revised emulsions over the last several years) plus their amortization assumptions on some of their production equipment (if I understand this correctly) indicates that they expect film to remain in production for at least another ten years.

[Bruce Watson]

I love to use kodak. But it seems they are signaling they will stop making film soon(5 years?). Smaller batches and higher prices seem to be a sign; seems like some MBA inside kodak wants to kill it altogether.

The only thing random speculation like this does is damage film. All film.

If Kodak wanted to get out of film they would. Nothing is stopping them. But they are doing just the opposite. They are continuing R&D, and they are introducing new films. The new Portra films. TMY-2, etc. An MBA wouldn't do this unless they thought they would make their money back in film sales. Clearly Kodak is NOT leaving the film business!

When was the last time Fuji introduced a new film -- and I don't count reintroducing the old Velvia 50. How old is Acros?

And Ilford -- what's their commitment to advancing the state of the art? HP5+?

So stop this crap about Kodak leaving the film biz already.

[Gene McCluney]

also they keep killing emulsions, TP, EPR, EPP are all no more production.

Where do you find the info that EPP is no longer in production? I use this all the time in 4x5 for my studio product photos. Last I ordered was a month ago, though. If EPP is discontinued, I will have to switch to Fuji. Maybe EPP was discontinued in roll and 35mm?..but not 4x5. 4x5 EPP is practically an industry standard transparency film.

[John Kasaian]

Unfounded rumors will kill off photography. Kodak still makes great (very great) products. IMHO whatever is in the future is pure speculation.

If one wants to be a doomsday enthusiast, buy freezers full of Kodak materials to last you through the long haul---that would make the bean counters in Rochester happy! :)

[Emmanuel BIGLER]

Kodak... Kodak... wait a minute : reminds me of a company making film and cameras in the fifties of the last century ? Like Lumière and Guilleminot in France ?
Something like....
http://www.super8.nl/howfilmismade.htm

[CG]

Can we kill off these rumor mongering threads and ban them in future? These are such a waste of time. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the doom threads are started by people with a stake in hurting film based photography.

[CG]

I just sent a note to the moderators asking them to ban such stuff in future. Some fact checking would be good before people say the sky is falling.

[D. Bryant]

The only Kodak film left on my shelves is going into the bargain box first thing Monday morning. %#&@ Kodak!!!!

How stupid is that? If you like film support it. Jeez Frank one has to wonder about your posts.

I agree let's ban these stupid posts.

Don Bryant

[Robert A. Zeichner]

Kodak... Kodak... wait a minute : reminds me of a company making film and cameras in the fifties of the last century ? Like Lumière and Guilleminot in France ?
Something like....
http://www.super8.nl/howfilmismade.htm

It's interesting how the power of a well-made instructional movie can even transcend a language barrier.

[Marko]

Giving up photofinishing signals Kodak's intentions. The only Kodak film left on my shelves is going into the bargain box first thing Monday morning. %#&@ Kodak!!!!

But wait, think about all those "big time-big money" wedding, food, and portrait photogs who have given up digitial and gone back to film!

What are they going to do now, eh Frank?

:rolleyes:

[Andrew O'Neill]

Loved watching that old film. Thanks for posting it. I'd love to see how it's all done these days.

[sgelb]

Sorry Just a speculation. when you limit production and raise prices you are making it harder not easier for people to use film. whether this is intentional or not, it hurts consumers. thats just plain economics.

nice vid, always need an excuse to brush up on my dutch.

[CG]

...when you limit production and raise prices you are making it harder not easier for people to use film. ...

You are right on that, but there's where Kodak is in a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. They continue to invest in order to improve BW emulsions, and that can't be done for free. The whole Tgrain film thing is a comparatively recent initiative, and many photographers are very glad Kodak invested in those. However Kodak does want to get paid back for all that cost.

My beef has been well thrashed out in other threads - the decision to offer some films in only ten sheet boxes. I wish they only did 50 or 100 sheet boxes if they were only to offer a single quantity.

[Brian Ellis]

I just sent a note to the moderators asking them to ban such stuff in future. Some fact checking would be good before people say the sky is falling.

I don't see any rumors in the original post. The OP says he's worried that Kodak will get out of the film business (a fear that may or may not be justified but either way it certainly isn't a rumor) and he says he bases that concern on the trend to smaller quantities and higher prices (facts).

He goes on to say that some emulsions have recently been discontinued.
I don't know if he's right or not but he isn't saying he's heard that they'll be discontinued in the future, he's saying they've been discontinued. That's a statement of fact and can be easily checked for accuracy but right or wrong, it isn't presented as a rumor, it's presented as a statement of fact.

[Ben Syverson]

Wow

[Kent10D]

I don't see any rumors in the original post.

I sure do.

• "... but it seems they are signalling they will stop making film soon (5 years?)."

• "... seems like some MBA inside kodak wants to kill it altogether."

Looks like speculation and rumor to me. The OP even came back and stated that he was just speculating.

[SamReeves]

Anyone want to petition the great yellow father for the return of large format Kodachrome? :p

[Drew Wiley]

The ten-sheet box thing reminds me of when someone decided to make 14oz tapered
cans for salmon instead of 16oz. It didn't fool anyone, but probably made a bonus for
some marketing baboon who didn't even know how to tie his own shoes, who was probably the nephew of some big shot in the salmon canning industry. What seems to
be often misunderstood on this forum is that Kodak and Fuji are really big companies
with inherent tensions between marketing, warehousing, mgt, etc. I deal with these
kinds of companies all the time. Someone might have saved Kodak a little money by
suggesting how to use only one type of packaging option for 8x10 film, and it's entirely possible that the individuals involved have never even used view cameras.
Could have been someone from a background in a potato chip factory. These days
even the CEO could have come from the potato chip business. Hundred year old
companies are going out of business right and left, and its really futile to speculate
about what will happen next unless you have actual inside information.

[Bruce Watson]

Anyone want to petition the great yellow father for the return of large format Kodachrome? :p

Not me. Since I've got 160Portra, why would I want to go back to Kodachrome? The "good old days" weren't that good from a film standpoint IMHO. The latest Kodak films are way better than what we had just a decade ago.

[sanking]

Lyrics from Paul Simons's Kodachrome.

Kodachrome
You give us those nice bright colors
You give us the greens of summers
Makes you think all the world's a sunny day, oh yeah!
I got a Nikon camera
I love to take a photograph
So Mama, don't take my Kodachrome away

To not miss Kodachrome is to ignore the American dream.
I say bring Kodachrome back, and dump the 160 Portra. Jeez, who will ever make a song based on Portra? What does Portra give us, anyway, except that funky orange base?

Sandy King



Not me. Since I've got 160Portra, why would I want to go back to Kodachrome? The "good old days" weren't that good from a film standpoint IMHO. The latest Kodak films are way better than what we had just a decade ago.

[Kent10D]

Jeez, who will ever make a song based on Portra? What does Portra give us, anyway, except that funky orange base?

Let's see ... how 'bout ...

"Portra
Showing colors like you oughta
There's nothing like a pretty face
Shot on that funky orange base"

Now all we need is a melody. :D

[Robert A. Zeichner]

Lyrics from Paul Simons's Kodachrome.

Kodachrome
You give us those nice bright colors
You give us the greens of summers
Makes you think all the world's a sunny day, oh yeah!
I got a Nikon camera
I love to take a photograph
So Mama, don't take my Kodachrome away

To not miss Kodachrome is to ignore the American dream.
I say bring Kodachrome back, and dump the 160 Portra. Jeez, who will ever make a song based on Portra? What does Portra give us, anyway, except that funky orange base?

Sandy King

I would have to agree. The first time I saw an 8x10 Kodachrome I was blown away. Unfortunately the K-14 process is so "not green" it's not likely we'll see anything but 35mm and some small movie formats able to be processed and for how long is uncertain. Still, I hang on to a frozen brick of 120 Kodachome 64 just in case!

[Gene McCluney]

I still want to know (for sure) if Kodak EPP in sheet film sizes is discontinued? It doesn't say that on Kodak web site. I hate rumors.

[Marko]

I'll repeat what I said several days ago in response to a rumour about Adobe in another thread:

The information on their (Kodak's, Adobe's, XXYZX's) website should provide the best answer. If it isn't there, it's not true.

Computers may be ruining film, but at least they make it easy and fast to check the facts about it. :D

[sgelb]

Im sorry. I heard that Ektachrome 64 was already discontinued(sniffle sniffle) and I also heard they were going to phase EPP out soon too. they have E100G right thats their "improved" emulsion. (WTF)

I shot some 1989 VPS 8x10 the other day and the negs look really spectacular, even the 5 I loaded backwards(d'oh!) have an image on them. I havent had a chance to scan them yet as my scanner is on the fritz and at the doctor.

[sgelb]

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/colorReversalIndex.jhtml?pq-path=13319/1229

ektachrome 64 is gone. This makes me so sad.

I bet you EPP is next to go. look how they are designing the site. its all about the 4 films in the center.

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/eFamily/eFamily.jhtml?pq-path=13363

look here. its not even in the E- family!!!!! (wtf is this anyways?)

[Bruce Watson]

To not miss Kodachrome is to ignore the American dream.

A personal attack? What brought that on?

I shot lots of Kodachrome back in the 1970s. I don't miss it even a tiny bit. Current negative films are better in every way but one -- but if you're jonesin' for that instant gratification on the light table, have at it. At least I won't attack you for your predilections.

[Brian Ellis]

I sure do.

• "... but it seems they are signalling they will stop making film soon (5 years?)."

• "... seems like some MBA inside kodak wants to kill it altogether."

Looks like speculation and rumor to me. The OP even came back and stated that he was just speculating.

I didn't say there was no speculation, I said I didn't see any rumors.

[CG]

I don't see any rumors in the original post.....The OP says:
...also they keep killing emulsions, TP, EPR, EPP are all no more... EPP is still on Kodak's site:www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/catalog/kodakEktachrome100PlusProfessionalFilmEPP.jhtml?pq-path=13319/1229/13392 So, EPP is still being made, still for sale. So, I do see rumor / error / doomsaying etc. It's a pain in the neck to read this kind of stuff, when the OP could have checked it out before sounding off.

C

[sanking]

Bruce,

You took my comments as a personal attack? Please tell me you are joking.

Sandy King




A personal attack? What brought that on?

I shot lots of Kodachrome back in the 1970s. I don't miss it even a tiny bit. Current negative films are better in every way but one -- but if you're jonesin' for that instant gratification on the light table, have at it. At least I won't attack you for your predilections.

[Marko]

But at least my film costs me $8 vs $40k.

Wow, I've never seen a roll of film with 200,000 shots on it. Or perhaps 300,000 or whatever the number of actuations projected for those backs...

But let's say that the high-end digital back indeed costs $40,000 (it doesn't quite, it's a few K less) and that it indeed has a projected life cycle of only 200,000 actuations (it's more but better to be conservative), simple math tells us that:

a) $40,000 / 200,000 = $0.2 - the price of high end digital back per shot.

b) $8.00 / 36 = $0.22 - the price of 35mm film, again per shot assuming that the price covers developing costs too.

Even if we disagree that those backs are far superior to 35mm (not to mention 120) film in both quality and convenience, a digital back still allows the instant preview and the ability to influence a host of factors in post processing that would require intervention on the spot with film, such as color temperature, filtering, contrast, even minor exposure corrections.

So what it really comes down to is the sheer volume. If you are a pro who shoots less than 50,000 shots annually over the course of, say, four years, you are definitely not a good candidate for one of those backs. Unless you are a wealthy amateur, of course. :)

All the rest is fluff, really, a way for those that belong to neither of these two categories to comfort themselves for the fact.

On the more serious note, I don't think the price of those backs will come down too much over the next few years. Even half of the current price is still somewhere in the $16K - $20K range. What I do think will happen is two things:

- They will keep improving technology behind them, and with it keep increasing the quality and, to a lesser extent, the resolution.

- They will mostly become a rental item or a time share or something along those lines for the majority of photographers who will need them but don't have the volume to justify the outright purchase.

This is, of course, just one of many speculative opinions. It is equally if not more likely that the future will bring something entirely different. The time will show. Until then, I have all intentions of enjoying what I have available and no intention to worry about things I have no influence over.

[Brian Ellis]

The OP says: EPP is still on Kodak's site:www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/catalog/kodakEktachrome100PlusProfessionalFilmEPP.jhtml?pq-path=13319/1229/13392 So, EPP is still being made, still for sale. So, I do see rumor / error / doomsaying etc. It's a pain in the neck to read this kind of stuff, when the OP could have checked it out before sounding off.

C

I didn't say there was no error and I didn't say there was no doomsaying. I said there were no rumors. If you find reading this kind of stuff to be a pain in the neck there's a fairly obvious solution.

[CG]

I didn't say there was no error and I didn't say there was no doomsaying. I said there were no rumors. If you find reading this kind of stuff to be a pain in the neck there's a fairly obvious solution.

Perhaps I didn't use language with sufficient precision. You're right, he didn't repeat a rumor, but by not checking a fact he does present the chance of starting unfounded rumors about the purported demise of such and such. It all contributes to a trend of doomsaying the future of film. And why should all of us have to go fact checking for the OP? It's just like the endless chain letters and "virus warnings" that circulate around the internet that just waste people's time. I try to ask friends who pass them along to check their sources before they email everyone they know.

On your suggestion that I not read inaccurate postings, I'm sure that's a good idea if you or someone else will delete them or fact check them first and mark them as error prone for my benefit. I can't see any reason you or anyone else will want to be bothered to do that for my benefit, so I suspect that in future, when I see a post entitled "Kodak films" or something similar, I'll probably read it, and then discover whatever error may or may not lie within. And by that point, your suggestion will have become moot.