What Films Would You Like To See Kodak Re-Introduce Again? And why?

[Bill Burk]

I was there when they gave us Kodachrome 200. I used it but when you want Kodachrome you don’t want grain. So I only used a few rolls of it.

 

[Augustus Caesar]

That's interesting to hear, and makes sense. If we're allowed to really dream, I'd love to see someone (Kodak, whoever) create a new film that has the deep IR sensitivity that HIE had (out to 900 nm) but with the fine grain and sharpness of Agfa Aviphot Pan 80 or Pan 200. Agfa no longer manufactures aerial film, so it's only a matter of time before the existing old stock of those emulsions is used up confectioning the various Rollei/Adox/Silberra/Catlabs/JCH iterations of those films, at which point IR film will be all but dead (SFX 200 always felt a bit underwhelming to me, and isn't available in sheets). Gotta get Agfa and Kodak talking to each other!

Extending the sensitivity of T-Max 400 with IR sensitizing dyes would be the easiest route. I don't like HIE.

 

[farpointer]

While we are fantasizing about things that will never happen -

I want them to reintroduce Matrix and Pan Matrix, and all the other stuff needed for Dye Transfer printing. I would love to learn that process.

 

[braxus]

Im hoping Kodak sees this post and considers what films were mentioned here. They are about due to re-release another long discontinued film, since E100 was the last time they did that. Oh and maybe TMAX 3200.

 

[mshchem]

You know their 5222 is a pretty good 35mm film. Hard to control contrast, I just can’t seem to hit 0.62 CI reliably.

But I am really enjoying using it over TMY2 which was my previous favorite fast film until I started thinking I wanted different grain.

Yep, I have most of a 400' roll in the freezer. Not bad.

 

[benderscameracorner]

As for Aerochrome, my understanding is that not long after discontinuing it, the machinery in the factory was upgraded and now uses infrared light and sensors as part of the automation, meaning they can't produce infrared sensitive film on the current line without fogging it. I assume that applies to HIE as well. That's according to Robert Shanebrook on an episode of Camerosity, anyway.

That's always been my understanding too. Unsure if whatever IR sensing/imaging that is used for production line monitoring and QA can be set well beyond 1000nm to avoid the 900-950nm limit of HIE/EIR but I'm assuming there's good reasons why it isn't.

The other very real consideration is Aerochrome was never a particularly popular stock in non-technical/scientific use, and was generally seen as very faddish historically. I think much of its recent appeal is due to its rarity and unobtanium status making it unique and stand out. If it were to become freely available, I would suspect everyone would rush to shoot a roll or two, see Instagram become a psychodelia wash for six months, then get bored and move on as the appeal disappears. At the scale Kodak needs to make film at, it's a dubious business case... unless they do a single batch run with all the IR switched off and let the errors just roll through.

(That doesn't solve the environmental/formula aspects either.... I highly doubt the last used formulas are kosher these days, and would need rework).

About the only way I see anything like Aerochrome ever coming back is if someone figures out how to make short-run, small-scale film coating a viable business model. The equipment exists I believe - it's how places like Kodak and Harman prototype and test formulas - but how that could be translated into a shippable product at any price, I have no idea.

But even at say US$200 a roll, it would be a much more palatable option than paying similar amounts for expired, potentially cooked film.

 

[alanrockwood]

Kodak Plus X and Panatomic X. (If one were to include color, then Kodachrome 25.)

 

[Bill Burk]

You know what I would really like is a TMAX 25 family of 35mm 120 and 4x5

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Alaris has other business besides film.

I can;t believe they bought the company if they were going to lose the film distributorship exclusivity. Something more is going on behind the scenes.

 

[gcoates]

I'd like to see Ektar 25 for absurd detail in landscape work.

 

[Disconnekt]

Im hoping Kodak sees this post and considers what films were mentioned here. They are about due to re-release another long discontinued film, since E100 was the last time they did that. Oh and maybe TMAX 3200.

I hope they make Tmax 3200 in 120

 

[Lachlan Young]

That's always been my understanding too. Unsure if whatever IR sensing/imaging that is used for production line monitoring and QA can be set well beyond 1000nm to avoid the 900-950nm limit of HIE/EIR but I'm assuming there's good reasons why it isn't.

The other very real consideration is Aerochrome was never a particularly popular stock in non-technical/scientific use, and was generally seen as very faddish historically. I think much of its recent appeal is due to its rarity and unobtanium status making it unique and stand out. If it were to become freely available, I would suspect everyone would rush to shoot a roll or two, see Instagram become a psychodelia wash for six months, then get bored and move on as the appeal disappears. At the scale Kodak needs to make film at, it's a dubious business case... unless they do a single batch run with all the IR switched off and let the errors just roll through.

(That doesn't solve the environmental/formula aspects either.... I highly doubt the last used formulas are kosher these days, and would need rework).

About the only way I see anything like Aerochrome ever coming back is if someone figures out how to make short-run, small-scale film coating a viable business model. The equipment exists I believe - it's how places like Kodak and Harman prototype and test formulas - but how that could be translated into a shippable product at any price, I have no idea.

But even at say US$200 a roll, it would be a much more palatable option than paying similar amounts for expired, potentially cooked film.

From my understanding, it's not really the sensors in the plant that are the problem, it's the sensitisers/ couplers and their short lifespan, environmental toxicity etc, relative to the actual amount of film that people would buy (and thus finance making newer components). That the main previous markets bought it by the mile in aerial rollfilm formats and it still took a long time to be shifted over to an E-6 compatible formulation says a lot about how much of it was really being used relative to costs.

I'd like to see Ektar 25 for absurd detail in landscape work.

Current Ektar outperforms Ektar 25.

 

[Milpool]

Current Ektar outperforms Ektar 25.

It’s a recurring theme. People seem to just want older films for nostalgia maybe? Otherwise I don’t get it. TMX outperforms Pan-X, has virtually the same characteristic curve (or “tonality”), all this at ISO 100 instead of 32, and yet people still want Pan-X.

 

[Lachlan Young]

It’s a recurring theme. People seem to just want older films for nostalgia maybe? Otherwise I don’t get it. TMX outperforms Pan-X, has virtually the same characteristic curve (or “tonality”), all this at ISO 100 instead of 32, and yet people still want Pan-X.

I think it's a general lack of knowledge/ unwillingness to learn enough basics to understand the nonsense propagated by the various self-proclaimed 'experts' paid by the column inch in the 1990s (and echoed on then new message boards into received (non-)wisdom) to opine negatively and repetitively on Kodak reducing the safety (cynics would call those who need it other things) margin for higher performance. And more recently a similar inability to understand that there are complex relationships between sharpness, usable information capacity and colour saturation/ undercuts.

Mostly it's also people whose film usage and ability is inversely proportional to the loudness and repetitiveness of their opinions about materials they'd inevitably whine about being too expensive and challenging to get good results from for their 3 rolls a year usage.

 

[George Mann]

It’s a recurring theme. People seem to just want older films for nostalgia maybe? Otherwise I don’t get it. TMX outperforms Pan-X, has virtually the same characteristic curve (or “tonality”), all this at ISO 100 instead of 32, and yet people still want Pan-X.

TMX looks distnctly different from Pan-X despite the curves.

 

[djdister]

TMX looks distnctly different from Pan-X despite the curves.

I agree. The characteristic curves may look exactly the same, but there will still be a difference between the two in printing. And, no need to use "the big stopper" in order to use a slow shutter speed or a wide open aperture.

 

[Chuck1]

You know what I would really like is a TMAX 25 family of 35mm 120 and 4x5

That would be cool

 

[Augustus Caesar]

It’s a recurring theme. People seem to just want older films for nostalgia maybe? Otherwise I don’t get it. TMX outperforms Pan-X, has virtually the same characteristic curve (or “tonality”), all this at ISO 100 instead of 32, and yet people still want Pan-X.

I see no need for Panatomic-X at all. It was good in its day, but several other, faster films supersede it. T-Max 100, Delta 100, and Acros II.Not to mention Pan-F +, which is finicky to use.

 

[Craig]

I doubt Panatomic -X will ever come back. It was one for the first films to disappear after T Max was introduced and long before digital was a widely adopted.

If it wasn't selling in the heyday of film, there can't be any economic justification to bring it back now.

 

[Milpool]

TMX looks distnctly different from Pan-X despite the curves.

No.

 

[Augustus Caesar]

No.

Right. No reason to lament the demise of Panatomic-X.

 

[Augustus Caesar]

TMX looks distnctly different from Pan-X despite the curves.

In what way? Color sensitivity?

 

[thinkbrown]

Right. No reason to lament the demise of Panatomic-X.

Other than the name which is a solid 10/10.

 

[Augustus Caesar]

Other than the name which is a solid 10/10.

Orthotomic-Z?

 

[George Mann]

In what way? Color sensitivity?

The way they render contrast to my eyes is the biggest difference I see.