Kodak Alaris official statement: Film future

[35mmdelux]

Kodak's single biggest mistake was the elimination of KODACHROME-

 

[Ranchu]

Kodak's single biggest mistake was the elimination of KODACHROME-

I think their biggest mistake was their bullsh!t business model with all those proprietary film format cameras, then PhotoCD, then the patent harassment stuff. I'm glad the film is out of their hands and into the pensioner's.

 

[Chris101]

I think their biggest mistake was their bullsh!t business model with all those proprietary film format cameras, then PhotoCD, then the patent harassment stuff. I'm glad the film is out of their hands and into the pensioner's.

Yeah, I hundred percent agree. Every story I read about Kodak for the last dozen years or so has made me scream! And I was the biggest EKC fanboy - I bought everything they sold.

I'm looking forward to some better (from my point of view) management. If the matter is indeed more in our hands now, so I bought half a dozen rolls of trix last weekend, and I'll develop it in Kodak chemistry. When I run out of that stuff, I'll buy more. Let's see if Alaris holds up their end of the bargain.

 

[Photo_Smith]

Kodak's single biggest mistake was the elimination of KODACHROME-

Yes if they'd killed it in 1990 instead of keeping it alive long after it became a flea on the back of a flea, less money would have been wasted.

They made some massive mistakes keeping KK 30 years after people stopped using it is only a little one compared to:
Ripping off Polaroid and having to pay royally
The Disk camera
Advantix
Not being the first to have production digital cameras
Strongarming the minilabs and losing industry trust.
Going from the biggest digital camera seller (2005) to deleting their whole line (2011)
etc,
etc

 

[Prest_400]

Yes if they'd killed it in 1990 instead of keeping it alive long after it became a flea on the back of a flea, less money would have been wasted.

They made some massive mistakes keeping KK 30 years after people stopped using it is only a little one compared to:
Ripping off Polaroid and having to pay royally
The Disk camera
Advantix
Not being the first to have production digital cameras
Strongarming the minilabs and losing industry trust.
Going from the biggest digital camera seller (2005) to deleting their whole line (2011)
etc,
etc

Agreed.
The non-release of Kodachrome 400 must have been the beginning of the downward slope. IIRC Kodachrome's last R&D efforts integrated into the film were in the late 80s.
With emulsion improvements and incorporating scannability (cyan dye that interferes with ICE); and they didn't ruin the processing (many complains in 80-90s Qualex) it might have died because of the process, but it wouldn't have been so pronounced.

In the digital area, they made great sensors... All gone (I think spinned off or the workers established a new company with the EK remains).

Well, goes down to having a decent digital presence and stabilizing the film market. If the manufacturers concentrated into the digitalization matters of film instead of creating a new stupid format (APS) they would have been slightly better.

There's a video of Perez in a Spanish conference and he explains how he managed the company in the transition, well, how he drived the train before wrecking it.
He did mention about 10+ film factories, which he had to closure. And stuff about how he found inkjet printing the way to go.

 

[gsgary]

A few friend of mine are preying for the return of EBX not a big slide shooter myself but they keep giving me rolls of Agfa Precisa, one has given me projector and screen so maybe i should shoot more

 

[HHPhoto]

A few friend of mine are preying for the return of EBX not a big slide shooter myself but they keep giving me rolls of Agfa Precisa, one has given me projector and screen so maybe i should shoot more

You should indeed: With slide projection (with a good projection lens) you get by far the best picture quality at big enlargements.
Unsurpassed brillance and detail rendition. It is impossible to get such a great quality with digital projectors (their resolution is extremely low, and their color rendition is worse compared to slide projection; furthermore they are extremely expensive)
or with prints from color negative film.

But back to the topic, the Kodak Alaris statement:
Do we really see a change here?
Well, now the Kodak Pension Plan is the owner of the 'Personalised Imaging Business', which is responsible for photo film.
But:
The management is still the same!!
The management of the Personalised Imaging Business has not changed!
The same people who were responsible for the downturn of Kodak photo film in the last years are still responsible now at Kodak Alaris.
The same people who are responsible for the production stops of all the beloved films,Plus-X, T-Max 3200, BW 400 CN 120, Ultramax 800, and especially the whole Ektachrome line, Kodak's best films.
And the same people who for years now are refusing to do marketing for film.

Can we expect a significantly better performance from the same people, who made all these mistakes in the past?

And another important aspect:
Kodak Alaris is mainly a digital company, their main focus is on digital products like the photo print stations in the drugstore chains. They say this quite clearly in their statement.
Photo film is only a minor part of their business.

So, to be realistic, we should not expect too much from Kodak Alaris.
It is definitely not the real new beginning we all have hoped for.

Cheers, Jan

 

[gsgary]

You should indeed: With slide projection (with a good projection lens) you get by far the best picture quality at big enlargements.
Unsurpassed brillance and detail rendition. It is impossible to get such a great quality with digital projectors (their resolution is extremely low, and their color rendition is worse compared to slide projection; furthermore they are extremely expensive)
or with prints from color negative film.

But back to the topic, the Kodak Alaris statement:
Do we really see a change here?
Well, now the Kodak Pension Plan is the owner of the 'Personalised Imaging Business', which is responsible for photo film.
But:
The management is still the same!!
The management of the Personalised Imaging Business has not changed!
The same people who were responsible for the downturn of Kodak photo film in the last years are still responsible now at Kodak Alaris.
The same people who are responsible for the production stops of all the beloved films,Plus-X, T-Max 3200, BW 400 CN 120, Ultramax 800, and especially the whole Ektachrome line, Kodak's best films.
And the same people who for years now are refusing to do marketing for film.

Can we expect a significantly better performance from the same people, who made all these mistakes in the past?

And another important aspect:
Kodak Alaris is mainly a digital company, their main focus is on digital products like the photo print stations in the drugstore chains. They say this quite clearly in their statement.
Photo film is only a minor part of their business.

So, to be realistic, we should not expect too much from Kodak Alaris.
It is definitely not the real new beginning we all have hoped for.

Cheers, Jan

Just had some film delivered today from Germany that can be shot as negatives or slides (Orwo UN54) so some will be sent off for E6 developement

 

[Roger Hicks]

Kodak's single biggest mistake was the elimination of KODACHROME-

Not really. People stopped buying it. Does this give you a clue as to why they stopped making it? See also Photosmith's comment.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Just had some film delivered today from Germany that can be shot as negatives or slides (Orwo UN54) so some will be sent off for E6 developement

You may have misunderstood what you have. From my reading this is a black and white film, so E6 will probably strip the emulsion off the film. Yes it can be reversal processed -- but not in E6.

Cheers,

R.

 

[gsgary]

You may have misunderstood what you have. From my reading this is a black and white film, so E6 will probably strip the emulsion off the film. Yes it can be reversal processed -- but not in E6.

Cheers,

R.

Cheers i will have to look in to that, but 99% will be developed in Rodinal

 

[sanmich]

They made some massive mistakes keeping KK 30 years after people stopped using it

Problem is, they made a massive mistake long before by pushing people out of Kodachrome, trying to force them to use only kodak processing facilitites through mailing (in Europe till last days at Lausanne). Of course E4/E6 killed them instantly when it became available...

 

[seakayaker1]

Thanks for posting, may they produce Porta for many years to come, a wonderful film.

I have been using Ilford for B&W and Porta for color.

 

[Photo_Smith]

They didn't try to force them really the mailers were good, and you could always go down to Deer Park Rd in London and get 2hr processing.
Kodak by 1990 were trying to make Labs buy KK minilabs which was never going to work.
But by 1980 just about every major city had E6 lab offering 1hr, you could buy 1l home processing kits and multi format E6 when 135 was all that was available (they brought out 120 KK 64 for four years in the early 1990's)

Then in 1989 came Velvia and quickloads...
KK was dead from that point.

 

[HHPhoto]

Just had some film delivered today from Germany that can be shot as negatives or slides (Orwo UN54) so some will be sent off for E6 developement

Orwo UN 54 can be developed as BW slide, but that is not possible in the E6 process.
UN 54 can be developed as BW slide in the
- Kodak D-94A process http://www.wittner-kinotechnik.de/katalog/04_filmm/filmentw.php
- Orwo 4185 process
- Scala process www.photostudio13.de
- Wehner process www.schwarz-weiss-dia.de

Photostudio 13, Wittner Cinetec and Klaus Wehner are doing international business. Therefore no problems sending them films from other countries.
BW slides are awesome!
Go for it!

Cheers, Jan

 

[HHPhoto]

Then in 1989 came Velvia and quickloads...
KK was dead from that point.

Well, yes.
And:
E6 films surpassed Kodachrome in quality already in the beginning 90ies.
And then with every improved new E6 emulsion the advance / quality lug for E6 films compared to Kodachrome got bigger and bigger.
Much better colours (more natural, more precise with films like Provia, Sensia, Astia ,Elitechrome, E100G etc;
and more saturated colours with films like Velvia and E100VS, EliteChrome Extra Colour).
And E6 films surpassed Kodachrome significantly in fineness of grain, resolution and sharpness (lots of scientific tests proved that over the years).

The better quality and better lab infrastructure of E6 have been the reasons for the decreasing sales of Kodachrome.
Honestly, Kodak had made lots of mistakes.
But the production stop of Kodachrome was unavoidable. Kodachrome was not competitive anymore.
But they are to blame for their completely stupid marketing campaign against E6, which they started at Photokina 2008.
If you do marketing against your own products, of course you don't have to wonder about decreasing sales.
Their whole E6 policy was a catastrophe.
They intentionally damaged a unique part of the photo culture.

Cheers, Jan

 

[StoneNYC]

Well, yes. And: E6 films surpassed Kodachrome in quality already in the beginning 90ies. And then with every improved new E6 emulsion the advance / quality lug for E6 films compared to Kodachrome got bigger and bigger. Much better colours (more natural, more precise with films like Provia, Sensia, Astia ,Elitechrome, E100G etc; and more saturated colours with films like Velvia and E100VS, EliteChrome Extra Colour). And E6 films surpassed Kodachrome significantly in fineness of grain, resolution and sharpness (lots of scientific tests proved that over the years). The better quality and better lab infrastructure of E6 have been the reasons for the decreasing sales of Kodachrome. Honestly, Kodak had made lots of mistakes. But the production stop of Kodachrome was unavoidable. Kodachrome was not competitive anymore. But they are to blame for their completely stupid marketing campaign against E6, which they started at Photokina 2008. If you do marketing against your own products, of course you don't have to wonder about decreasing sales. Their whole E6 policy was a catastrophe. They intentionally damaged a unique part of the photo culture. Cheers, Jan

Can you please educate me on what the kill E-6 campaign was about?

~Stone | Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

 

[HHPhoto]

Can you please educate me on what the kill E-6 campaign was about?

~Stone | Sent from my iPhone using Forum Runner

No problem:
They've run advertizing campaigns in which they have recommended that photographers should stop using reversal film, and should use Kodak negative film instead.
That just happened recently again this year at the biggest European nature photography meeting in Germany (Naturfototage Fürstenfeldbruck).

So these complete idiots from Kodak used their small marketing budget not for marketing of film in general, but for destroying one film type hoping to get a bit better sales for the other film type.
And then they have said the customers are guilty for the situation of the reversal film market.
How false-faced is that?
What a stupid behaviour.
A film manufacturer who is intentionally destroying a part of his own market with stupid and counterproductive marketing.

Reversal film delivers the best detail rendition: The finest grain, best sharpness and highest resolution.
Lots of scientific film tests have proved that over the years.
E.g. look here:
http://www.aphog.de/?p=364

For big enlargements slide projection delivers by far the best picture quality at the lowest costs of all photographic mediums.
Neither negative film, nor digital can compete in that area of 40x - 150x enlargements.
The brillance and detail rendition of slide projection is absolutely unsurpassed.

With slide projection 35mm film gives much much better picture quality at a tiny fraction of the costs compared to digital medium format and the most expensive 4k projectors.
The resolution of digital medium format is reduced to the extremely low resolution of the digital projector (1 - 8 MP; and this only at horizontal format, at vertical format the resolution is even about 40% less; a significant design flaw of digital projection).
With 35mm slide projection you have
- 12 MP resolution at very low contrast objects of 1;6:1 with films like Provia 100F, AgfaPhoto CT Precisa, E100G etc.
- 22 MP resolution at very low contrast objects of 1;6:1 with films like Velvia 50, Velvia 100 and 100F
- 50 MP resolution at medium contrast objects of 4:1 with films like Provia 100F, AgfaPhoto CT Precisa, E100G etc.
- 55 MP resolution at medium contrast objects of 4:1 with Velvia 100, Velvia 100F
- and with higher contrast objects of 32:1 and more you get resolution values in the 63 MP (Provia 100F etc.) to 100 MP (Velvia 100 and 100F).

For the results look at the link above. Optic manufacturer Zeiss and several other test labs with excellent reputation published the test results.
We in our photographer group did also several comparison tests of slide projection with excellent projection lenses compared to the latest digital projectors.
The digital projection sucks: Worse colors compared to slide projection and extremely low resolution compared to slide projection.
And extremely high costs with digital projection: 7000€ for the digital projector, 400€ for a new Leica slide projector.

With slides and slide projection we have a field in which film is unsurpassed and superior to digital imaging.
Kodak could have told that to their customers and could have strengthened their slide film sales.

Instead these idiots made marketing against their best colour films and destroyed a unique part of the photo culture.

Cheers, Jan

 

[Roger Hicks]

No problem:
They've run advertizing campaigns in which they have recommended that photographers should stop using reversal film, and should use Kodak negative film instead. . . . What a stupid behaviour.
A film manufacturer who is intentionally destroying a part of his own market with stupid and counterproductive marketing. . . .
Kodak could have told that to their customers and could have strengthened their slide film sales. . .

Dear Jan,

Er... Sort of.

No-one denies the advantages of slide film. BUT, I'd suggest that Kodak were merely preparing people for the inevitable. Even if slide film sales doubled tomorrow -- and I don't think any advertising campaign or anything else is going to make that happen -- it would still be a tiny, tiny market: Kodak decided to stop making the stuff a year ago. I'd say that the argument is, "Quit while you have the illusion of choice." And (understandably) because they're Kodak they're trying to flog the films they make, which is hardly idiotic.

It's also true that Ektar 100 is an extraordinarily fine film that can be used in surprisingly many situations as a replacement for slide -- see http://www.shutterbug.com/content/kodak’s-ektar-100-35mm-roll-film-new-color-negative-film-kodak

Cheers,

R.

 

[Murchu]

Great. Kodak's film and analogue division still in the hands of people who have no belief in it, but on the plus side they don't have the same millstone of debt around their neck as the old company had.