35mm Color Film Availability Problems

[pentaxuser]

Hmmm ... A worldwide pandemic with its terrible supply, distribution and pricing issues with all kinds of things, now a serious war going on with energy supply implications ..... But what the heck ... Ain't it just a lot easier just to blame it all on Kodak? Yeah, the Mgt there made a lot of really big mistakes in the past. But crying over spilled milk won't help a bit now. Gotta be glad they're still trying, and making darn good film at the same time.

Isn't the question to which we have to address and by which we can judge Kodak is doing as follows: What has Kodak done or not done that is within its control irrespective of worldwide pandemic, wars etc which affects all its fellow film makers

If there are reasonable grounds for not blaming Kodak or any of the other film makers then fine but in many case we do not have the evidence to exonerate Kodak which is what the supporters want to do on almost a blanket basis

We can all "rationalise" and forgive Kodak for various problems but this only is justified if there is clear evidence that the facts demonstrate that the problem is clearly outside of its control

In many cases all we know is not in fact what we know but what each of us "feels". Kodak was a U.S. giant but is not that any longer. This may be difficult to come to terms with but we need to look at Kodak's behaviour and examine it to see if it stands up to scrutiny in the existing world. Otherwise we are in danger of sounding like Archie Bunker when he sings "Those were the days "

Reminiscing is not an ideal way to analyse the world as it exists now if we want to decide how Kodak or any other film company reacts to what is a vastly different world

pentaxuser

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Isn't the question to which we have to address and by which we can judge Kodak is doing as follows: What has Kodak done or not done that is within its control irrespective of worldwide pandemic, wars etc which affects all its fellow film makers

If there are reasonable grounds for not blaming Kodak or any of the other film makers then fine but in many case we do not have the evidence to exonerate Kodak which is what the supporters want to do on almost a blanket basis

We can all "rationalise" and forgive Kodak for various problems but this only is justified if there is clear evidence that the facts demonstrate that the problem is clearly outside of its control

In many cases all we know is not in fact what we know but what each of us "feels". Kodak was a U.S. giant but is not that any longer. This may be difficult to come to terms with but we need to look at Kodak's behaviour and examine it to see if it stands up to scrutiny in the existing world. Otherwise we are in danger of sounding like Archie Bunker when he sings "Those were the days "

Reminiscing is not an ideal way to analyse the world as it exists now if we want to decide how Kodak or any other film company reacts to what is a vastly different world

pentaxuser

You can always change brands.

 

[MattKing]

You can always change brands.

It isn't particularly easy to do that if you use colour negative film.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

It isn't particularly easy to do that if you use colour negative film.

I was trying to make a point to the people who were complaining over and over about Kodak. If you don't like the way a company does business, stop complaining, and stop dealing with them. If you think their product is so good you don't want to change, then be a little patient and understanding and show some appreciation for the great products they make.

Nothing's perfect especially now with the production and delivery problems companies are facing across the world. Look at Ford and GM and other automakers. They can't ship cars because they can't get the chips to run these cars. Because of car shortages, I've had to extend my auto lease 6 months and may have to buy the leased car next month or take out a car loan to buy it, something I'd prefer not to do. New cars are being sold higher than the MSRP. Leases run a couple of hundred more per month. Look what's happening to homes, rents, gas and food. Film supply and costs are the least of our problems. Interesting, Chamonix 4x5 cameras in China are months backlogged on ordering. They've got a couple of hundred orders for their 45F-2 that have to be produced. That's good to know because it means the film market is doing well despite inflation.

 

[NB23]

As far as I can see, Bulk rolling is a Routine business for Kodak. Just look at all the bulk films they offer.

So.... when someone says that bulk rolling is not kodak’s primary business and sounds super apologetic about it, I feel it’s ok to note that Kodak could easily offer bulk portra but they just don’t want to, as opposed to ”not able to”.
Basically it’s just kodak being themselves.

 

[pentaxuser]

You can always change brands.

So that's an answer to the theme of what I was trying to say about judging Kodak's actions or those of any other film maker's? Clearly I was unsuccessful in what I attempted to do

pentaxuser

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

As far as I can see, Bulk rolling is a Routine business for Kodak. Just look at all the bulk films they offer.

So.... when someone says that bulk rolling is not kodak’s primary business and sounds super apologetic about it, I feel it’s ok to note that Kodak could easily offer bulk portra but they just don’t want to, as opposed to ”not able to”.
Basically it’s just kodak being themselves.

Kodak Alaris offers 100-foot rolls for three Pro films in 35mm. Tmax 100, Tmax 400 and Tri-X 400.

https://imaging.kodakalaris.com/sites/default/files/wysiwyg/film/2021_Pro_Film_Catalog_List.pdf

They also offer larger sheet film on special order.

https://imaging.kodakalaris.com/sites/default/files/wysiwyg/film/2021_Pro_Film_Special-Order.pdf

I don't know what Kodak does as they're a different company that supplies motion pictures film for Hollywood as well as Pro film to Kodak Alaris.

So that's an answer to the theme of what I was trying to say about judging Kodak's actions or those of any other film maker's? Clearly I was unsuccessful in what I attempted to do

pentaxuser

I was trying to explain that today, many manufacturers are having difficulty in producing products due to supply chain and distribution problems. China is shut down in many areas due to Covid. There's a war in Europe. Ships are stuck in harbors not able to unload because the government shut down everything before and we haven't caught up.

Kodak Alaris people aren't magicians. Try to be a little flexible. If a particular film isn't available from Kodak, shoot Ilford or something else. Maybe you'll find another stock that you'll like even better. Sometimes the best thing to happen to us is when we have to change from the usual. Serendipidy.

 

[Agulliver]

Hmmm ... A worldwide pandemic with its terrible supply, distribution and pricing issues with all kinds of things, now a serious war going on with energy supply implications ..... But what the heck ... Ain't it just a lot easier just to blame it all on Kodak? Yeah, the Mgt there made a lot of really big mistakes in the past. But crying over spilled milk won't help a bit now. Gotta be glad they're still trying, and making darn good film at the same time.

The supply issues with C41 films pre-dates the pandemic. Though I am absolutely in agreement that the plague and possibly the Russia/Ukraine war will not have helped. It does stem from Kodak successfully scaling back production about a decade ago and then experiencing big increase in demand for colour films from 2018 onwards. Kodak couldn't keep up, and appear to have taken a strategic decision to ensure their professional lines receive priority, especially Portra.

Fuji are more secretive, but it is thought that they haven't succeeded in scaling down production of film. It's rather unclear what they're doing regarding 35mm and 120 film right now but Instax seems to be a big seller and still in current production.

As you say, Kodak are still 100% in the business and working towards adapting to a shifting industry landscape.

 

[koraks]

I feel it’s ok to note that Kodak could easily offer bulk portra but they just don’t want to

With good reason, probably.
The market for single rolls and pro-packs serves most amateurs and any remaining pros that still shoot film. Bulk rolls would only serve a small part of the amateur market. Moreover, it's a part of amateur market with an even lower willingness to pay than the amateur market in general. So small and unattractive segment, overall.

You're stuck on the issue whether they could technically manage bulk rolls. Obviously they could. It's just that the market rationale is missing.

Whether you find that legitimate or not is another issue. If you feel you have compelling arguments, get in touch with Alaris to put forth your business case. That'll immediately divert your energies to something more constructive than asininely beating the same dead horse ad nauseam here.

 

[NB23]

With good reason, probably.
The market for single rolls and pro-packs serves most amateurs and any remaining pros that still shoot film. Bulk rolls would only serve a small part of the amateur market. Moreover, it's a part of amateur market with an even lower willingness to pay than the amateur market in general. So small and unattractive segment, overall.

You're stuck on the issue whether they could technically manage bulk rolls. Obviously they could. It's just that the market rationale is missing.

Whether you find that legitimate or not is another issue. If you feel you have compelling arguments, get in touch with Alaris to put forth your business case. That'll immediately divert your energies to something more constructive than asininely beating the same dead horse ad nauseam here.

Thank you but your biased analysis is not satisfactory and does not take into account the market as it is. Baseless assumptions, false logic, and so on.

Like, for instance, Ilford offering competitively priced bulk. Foma as well. Or fuji pricing its films well below kodak’s.

I invite you to read the op’s post and to then try convincing him he’s a sub-amateur category... or myself...

The truth is maybe that the photrio core members are 70+? What say you about this? I’m not convinced that you and a few folks who participated in this thread are in touch with the market out there.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

We also don;t know where the hangup is. Remember that Kodak Alaris in Great Britain does not manufacture Kodak film. They own the rights and distribute and market the film. But, it still is manufactured by Kodak in Rochester New York, USA. So the problem could be in Rochester or in GB or both. Alaris's hands could be tied due to problems with Rochester. I don't know how much pressure they can put on them.

Frankly, how does the pricing agreement work between the two? If Rochester raises their prices to Alaris, does Alaris have to absorb them or is there some legal arrangement that was made when the bankruptcy proceeding gave Kodak's film rights to Alaris? Can Alaris go elsewhere for production?

Does anyone know the answers to these questions?

 

[Huss]

My freezer is still full, so I am not having problems with 35mm film availability.

Help the man out. He's LA local and needs it. It's just sitting in your fridge. I'm sure he'll pay you.

 

[koraks]

The truth is maybe that the photrio core members are 70+? What say you about this?

That it has nothing to do with what I said.

I’m not convinced that you and a few folks who participated in this thread are in touch with the market out there.

More so than you, it seems.

Let's see if Henning at some point wages in. Generally he knows what's up. As it is, there's your opinion and there's mine. Based on how you generally analyze matters, I see little reason to change my views based on your brainburps.

 

[MattKing]

Does anyone know the answers to these questions?

The answer a couple of years ago - pre-covid - was that given all their equipment and structure and staffing and other realities, it cost Eastman Kodak too much to do it.
Remember, that in what the current realities are, that the cost of shutting down the regular confectioning line in order to produce the specialty bulk films is part of the cost.
That may indeed also be a part of why the small volumes of black and white film sold by Kodak are as expensive as they are - their color film sales are massively larger.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

The answer a couple of years ago - pre-covid - was that given all their equipment and structure and staffing and other realities, it cost Eastman Kodak too much to do it.
Remember, that in what the current realities are, that the cost of shutting down the regular confectioning line in order to produce the specialty bulk films is part of the cost.
That may indeed also be a part of why the small volumes of black and white film sold by Kodak are as expensive as they are - their color film sales are massively larger.

My question is what are the legal requirements Eastman Kodak has to meet to make products for Kodak Alaris per the court's decision on the Kodak bankruptcy? How are they allowed to pass along their costs to Alaris?

 

[MattKing]

They sold the exclusive marketing rights for a bunch of their products to Kodak Alaris.
The rest is up to the two parties. Kodak Alaris wants something made for sale, and Eastman Kodak gives them a price. Then they negotiate.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

They sold the exclusive marketing rights for a bunch of their products to Kodak Alaris.
The rest is up to the two parties. Kodak Alaris wants something made for sale, and Eastman Kodak gives them a price. Then they negotiate.

First of, Eastman Kodak did not sell their rights to Alaris. I thought that was the Kodak bankruptcy determination to pay off Alaris's entitlement to retirement pension funding for their employees who originally worked for Kodak.

Leaving that aside, how does Alaris negotiate with one party? Who's Eastman Kodak's competitor in this situation? MAybe that's why the prices are so high from Alaris. They're stuck with Eastman Kodak prices.

 

[NB23]

The answer a couple of years ago - pre-covid - was that given all their equipment and structure and staffing and other realities, it cost Eastman Kodak too much to do it.
Remember, that in what the current realities are, that the cost of shutting down the regular confectioning line in order to produce the specialty bulk films is part of the cost.
That may indeed also be a part of why the small volumes of black and white film sold by Kodak are as expensive as they are - their color film sales are massively larger.

Totally amateur reasoning from kodak, if what I am reading is true. A true lack of management and no knowledge of the market. Seems that Kodak are still in their old ways.

The problem here is quite simple, and it is a logistics problem, not a manufacturing problem.

Nobody is asking kodak to shut down their regular confectioning in order “produce a few bulk rolls”. This indeed would be very costly and stupid.

No. What kodak does not understand (or has not even considered) is that they should streamline their production to efficiently include the manufacturing of bulk rolls. No disruption, but an efficient streamline.

There is absolutely no way in the world that a bulk roll ends up being more expensive (or equally, or only 10% cheaper) than its equivalent in single rolls. The only reason for this is because of bad management. Which actuallly begs the question: is there even a manager?

If streamlined correctly, by a good managing team, kodak films could end up costing less, produced in higher numbers, and bulk rolls would be available at a very reasonable cost.

By what I understand, a lot of money is lost at kodak thanks to no management at all.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Totally amateur reasoning from kodak, if what I am reading is true. A true lack of management and no knowledge of the market. Seems that Kodak are still in their old ways.

The problem here is quite simple, and it is a logistics problem, not a manufacturing problem.

Nobody is asking kodak to shut down their regular confectioning in order “produce a few bulk rolls”. This indeed would be very costly and stupid.

No. What kodak does not understand (or has not even considered) is that they should streamline their production to include the manufacturing of bulk rolls.

There is absolutely no way in the world that a bulk roll ends up being more expensive (or equally, or only 10% cheaper) than its equivalent in single rolls. The only reason for this is because of bad management. Which actuallly begs the question: is there even a manager?

If streamlined correctly, by a good managing team, kodak films could end up costing less, produced in higher numbers, and bulk rolls would be available at a very reasonable cost.

By what I understand, a lot of money is lost at kodak thanks to no management at all.

The only reason Kodak is manufacturing film for Alaris may be because the bankruptcy court told them they had too. Maybe they have no interest in doing any of it and would like nothing more than dropping the whole film line? See my post #40 and 42.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Totally amateur reasoning from kodak, if what I am reading is true. A true lack of management and no knowledge of the market. Seems that Kodak are still in their old ways.

The problem here is quite simple, and it is a logistics problem, not a manufacturing problem.

Nobody is asking kodak to shut down their regular confectioning in order “produce a few bulk rolls”. This indeed would be very costly and stupid.

No. What kodak does not understand (or has not even considered) is that they should streamline their production to efficiently include the manufacturing of bulk rolls. No disruption, but an efficient streamline.

There is absolutely no way in the world that a bulk roll ends up being more expensive (or equally, or only 10% cheaper) than its equivalent in single rolls. The only reason for this is because of bad management. Which actuallly begs the question: is there even a manager?

If streamlined correctly, by a good managing team, kodak films could end up costing less, produced in higher numbers, and bulk rolls would be available at a very reasonable cost.

By what I understand, a lot of money is lost at kodak thanks to no management at all.

On exactly what facts and data do you base your accusations that Kodak management is so clueless? Since you claim to be so knowledgeable, you need to show up at Kodak board meetings and make your case for taking over the company and running it properly. I am sure that you could clue them in that all the problems evolve from the fact that you are angry that you personally are having trouble paying for film.

 

[pentaxuser]

Obviously there is a reason(s) why Kodak do not choose to supply bulk rolls of colour film but do still do so with b&w albeit at a higher price than cassettes. Some of us rationalise that those reasons make sense to Kodak( obviously) and because we want to believe that Kodak does it for rational cost reasons we construct, as best we can, a case why this is justified and logical.

However none of us know the real reason(s) if we are being honest. We none of us has inside knowledge. As I understand it, Kodak did sell its bulk rolls some years ago at a cheaper price than its cassettes but this changed a few years ago. Was this done well after the large decline in film sales and there is an economies of scale argument that says that bulk rolls while once profitable in the heyday of film is no longer so due to the large decline in sales?

So can anyone say when the price advantage of bulk roll purchase over cassettes was changed so it was reversed? This may tell us something about the validity of the economies of scale argument that is usually made due to the great decline in film sales


However in recent times we blame the lack of supply of C41 films on the fact that Kodak has in fact scaled its facilities down to an extent that its facilities cannot now cope with the sudden rapid increase in demand

So does this scaling down not apply to its bulk rolls as it seems that both Ilford and Foma can still supply bulk rolls cheaper than cassettes? Both of course operate on smaller scales than Kodak

Can we be sure that there is evidence that either (a) it is not possible to offer bulk rolls of C41 even if Kodak had the will to do it or (b) if it were possible but resulted in Kodak needing to charge more than for its cassettes then the demand for C41 would not support a higher price?

It seems to me that if Kodak cannot currently meet its consumer demand for C41 then that indicates that consumers would be prepared to pay more proportionally speaking for bulk rolls of C41? Isn't this the simple economics of supply and demand

Clearly there are more good questions in this situation than there appear to be good answers.

I doubt if there are many, if any, other companies actions' that meet totally with our approval in the way that Kodak's actions seem to for a core of our members.

So, despite that the fact that it is American and produces our hobby's needs which we naturally value greatly, are we really sure that everything it does has to be in the Kodak consumers' best interests and that whatever affects us adversely is never Kodak's fault?

Is it not time to simply say that some good questions do not have good answers even for Kodak diehard supporters?

pentaxuser

 

[MattKing]

The only reason Kodak is manufacturing film for Alaris may be because the bankruptcy court told them they had too. Maybe they have no interest in doing any of it and would like nothing more than dropping the whole film line? See my post #40 and 42.

The bankruptcy court didn't tell Eastman Kodak any such thing. The bankruptcy Trustee negotiated a deal where, in return for $600,000,000.00 and a release of The Kodak Limited Pension Funds super-priority claim, plus an offer of employment to a large number of Eastman Kodak and Eastman Kodak subsidiary employees that Eastman Kodak could no longer afford to employ, The Kodak Limited Pension Fund obtained exclusive worldwide marketing rights to Kodak still films, Kodak still photo-chemicals, Kodak colour photographic paper, plus some other digital related products. The Pension fund also received a bunch of ownership and leasehold interests in manufacturing facilities around the world that were primarily involved in the production of photographic paper.
So the majority of Eastman Kodak's employees, who they could no longer afford to employ, retained similar employment.
The super priority is something that is wielded effectively by a part of the UK government that has statutory authority to protect the pensions of UK workers. Kodak Limited - the UK subsidiary of Eastman Kodak - was at one time very large. It had the highest number of employees, outside the USA. While its pension fund was well funded, the actuarial realities were such that the projected claims on that fund had gone from less than what was in the fund to an amount that substantially exceeded the amount of the fund.
The deal between the fund and the bankruptcy trustee was approved by the UK pension authorities, the pension fund trustees, the management of Eastman Kodak in bankruptcy and, effectively, the majority of the other creditors.
As a result of all that, the bankruptcy court approved the settlement, which took the .
single existing liability out of the bankruptcy equation. And the $600,000,000.00 made it possible for Eastman Kodak to continue producing the things they still produce.
The Pension Fund incorporated Kodak Alaris to run the business they received from the settlement. They are a separate entity, even if they work cooperatively with Eastman Kodak. Directly and indirectly they have worldwide reach, with worldwide responsibilities and employees, while Eastman Kodak's operations are limited mostly to the USA (excluding some small marketing resources relating to their motion picture film and other businesses - they are, for instance, a pre-eminent source of chemistry for developing printed circuit board films).
Kodak Alaris have all the responsibilities for measuring market needs and opportunities for still films. They have one manufacturer for those products, who sells them only to them. But that manufacturer - Eastman Kodak - is constrained by limitations involving people, access to component ingredients and other things, limits to their available machinery, and probably most importantly, limits to their available capital. So with their production capacity being more limited than the demand for the products they make, they and Kodak Alaris have to negotiate.

 

[Lee Rust]

Complaining about Kodak is easy to do, but as Matt details, their situation is complex. I would guess that the packaging and distribution of bulk film, especially color, creates enough logistical problems that EK feels justified in charging a premium.

We live in a very different world from even three years ago. In the not-too-distant past, who would have imagined that the redoubtable Eastman Kodak would eventually be having ongoing problems sourcing basic components like film backing paper, metal caps for film cassettes, or even film base itself? I remember those days when the distinctive sharp odor of methylene chloride pervaded the Rochester air downwind of Kodak Park whenever a new batch of acetate was being cooked up. Those vapors are gone now, along with the exhaust stacks from which they once issued. These days, aside from the emulsions themselves, many of the components for Kodak products are outsourced, where once they were largely created in-house.

 

[DREW WILEY]

They make their own Estar (PET) film base, and even sell it to others. It has distinct advantages over acetate for most still applications anyway. Methylene chloride is no longer necessary for those who wish to gamble with their health, ever since "street art" became popular, and spray paint cans became a worthy substitute for outright glue sniffing. There are still plenty of creative mutagenic options to rot out your brains prematurely.

 

[destroya]

i bought a 400 foot bulk roll of ektachrome 100 last month for less than 50% of the single roll cost. so it can happen. but why let it get to you?