Final run of Kodak Supra Endura...stock-up time is now

sepiareverb · Mar 19, 2010

hrst said:
You again bite off the people who like to use and need Kodak products, for all those years and in the future. I'm really starting to wish you'd just shut up and be done with it.

Throw me on your ignore list.

I likely shoot and C-print more color film than 90 or 95% of the people here. These incremental cuts which require figuring out some new material are a real PITA and something I end up wasting a lot of time with. Makes my getting the M9 that much more valuable, as without contact sheets color film becomes less of a useful material. This is going to put a lot of labs that are left out of business if they can no longer make a proofsheet without digitizing everything. I wish Kodak would just sell off the entire silver photographic business while there are still some products left so artists wouldn't be stuck with the decisions made for stockholders.

You may like Kodak products, and I still use some of them, but none of us will be using them in another few years at this rate.

2F/2F · Mar 19, 2010

sepiareverb said:
Throw me on your ignore list.

I likely shoot and C-print more color film than 90 or 95% of the people here. These incremental cuts which require figuring out some new material are a real PITA and something I end up wasting a lot of time with. Makes my getting the M9 that much more valuable, as without contact sheets color film becomes less of a useful material. This is going to put a lot of labs that are left out of business if they can no longer make a proofsheet without digitizing everything. I wish Kodak would just sell off the entire silver photographic business while there are still some products left so artists wouldn't be stuck with the decisions made for stockholders.

You may like Kodak products, and I still use some of them, but none of us will be using them in another few years at this rate.

The ignore feature does work extreme wonders.

I feel your pain and anger, but I would not arrogantly assume that you shoot and print more color the way that you did, or believe that this gives me special privileges to make certain statements as if they should be taken with more weight than anyone else's, nor would I rather have Kodak close the whole shebang. Ridiculous on all three counts. Be practical. Be adult. Anything is better than nothing, even if it is not what you want. Everything is a compromise.

hrst · Mar 19, 2010

Well said, 2F/2F. That's what I meant.

And sepiareverb, I was joking a bit, I don't want to ignore for that. I just wanted to demonstrate your attitude at you.

But, direct your anger at economical recession and the system/people who cause this kind of recession, not towards individual companies like Kodak who are not 100% the cause.

Kodak film business is going on quite well considering the situation, and I think that producing Supra Endura would be still profitable in longer run. But, recession makes sudden investments like coating a new master roll for a year's or two's need impossible. They have to cut some less-selling products to survive right now, even if they were enough-selling products on longer term or at better times. On the long term, it may be unwise as they lose customers. But if you get too angry and stop buying the remaining products just for that, it just works as a catalyst for chain reaction towards more discontinuations. So, logically, then you should also be angry at yourself, if this is the road of your selection!

Remember that also Fuji makes this kind of decisions and have even worse PR problems. We have no other (good) choices! Let's believe in both Kodak and Fuji for color products.

sepiareverb · Mar 19, 2010

A different company running the silver division is practical. The shareholders don't appear to worry about products as the continuing cuts of the line are making the number of people who can use the products smaller. I'm surely not going to use a paper that can only be run through a digital enlarger or light jet printer. I'm a drop in the bucket at best I know that. I'll get what paper I can and print what I can on it, and then pack it in if I have to. I have no desire to sit at the feet of an inkjet printer and watch it spit out identical copies onto expensive paper. Color will become nothing more than $ work.

And the ignore button is right there to the right of 'Quick Reply'. Please do use it. I do.

I use Fuji films much more than Kodak as they deal with the kinds of light I shoot in over the course of a roll much better, and I like the color better. Fuji is no angel in this kind f thing either you're right there. I'm not going to make a difference to Kodak or Fuji no matter how much I can shoot every day. To think I am is delusional. They're shooting themselves in the feet again. Blame the recession or blame the companies themselves- the end result is the same: fewer products for those morons like us still using analog processes instead of embracing the inkjet print. It seems to me long term thinking is in short supply in Rochester when it comes to silver products with decisions like this being made. My opinion. I'm no sage.

michaelbsc · Mar 20, 2010

sepiareverb said:
... the end result is the same: fewer products [for those morons like us still using analog processes].... It seems to me long term thinking is in short supply in Rochester when it comes to silver products with decisions like this being made. My opinion. I'm no sage.

I had to think about this for a while.

From the 30K foot view, there are really more products. Just not silver based for us morons. And in terms of economic viability, Kodak has to think about a global marketing strategy, not niche marketing.

Hell, even 10 years ago I was telling someone how the B&W market had become a boutique market. This film for this, that film for that, all with different process time. In 1960 the local processor dumped all the rolls of B&W from Grandma to little Billy in the same vat, much like C41 became.

What we ask for many times is that Kodak hand make Halston dresses for us, and sell them at Wal-mart prices. Kodak doesn't dislike us. We're asking for the impossible.

Who was it a few messages ago that pointed out we're obviously no longer the hand that feeds them. I suggest that the hobbyists never were the hands that fed them. We benefited from the mass market. Now the mass market is moving, and we're complaining.

Tell a guy from a century ago who hand coated his own emulsions that we've "only got two dozen commercial products left."

sepiareverb · Mar 20, 2010

michaelbsc said:
And in terms of economic viability, Kodak has to think about a global marketing strategy, not niche marketing.

Exactly why a spin off could make more sense for both shareholders and users.

accozzaglia · Mar 20, 2010

If Imation could do it, then Kodak Film could do it.

Photo Engineer · Mar 20, 2010

michaelbsc said:
Hell, even 10 years ago I was telling someone how the B&W market had become a boutique market. This film for this, that film for that, all with different process time. In 1960 the local processor dumped all the rolls of B&W from Grandma to little Billy in the same vat, much like C41 became.

Tell a guy from a century ago who hand coated his own emulsions that we've "only got two dozen commercial products left."

In manuals from the 40s, I see that each film had its own preferred development time and there were dozens of films then and dozens of developers. Even so, the photofinishers of that time used one developer and one development time. So the pro used select developers with select times, but the photofinisher used one developer and time fits all. Pictures that I did using optimum conditions at home were just as good as those I ran at my daytime job in a photofinishing plant. Nothing has changed.

Now, I coat my own emulsions. I have about 5 products from just my lab and I have supplied them to others and taught others to make them. Some of them have come up with formulas better than mine. There is always room for improvement. In any event, I can see dozens of cottage industries producing hundreds of film and paper products. What will be missing is color. Oh, and what else will be missing is probably MF and 35mm.

So, IMHO, your comments are negated by facts that I have personally experienced and see coming.

PE

Photo Engineer · Mar 20, 2010

sepiareverb said:
Exactly why a spin off could make more sense for both shareholders and users.

Never gonna happen! I've explained this so many times, I am tired repeating the argument. The spin off does not NOT make sense. Take my word for it!

PE

thisismyname09 · Mar 20, 2010

Photo Engineer said:
What will be missing is color.

Just out of curiosity, what is the likelihood of someone, or maybe a group of people, being able to make a color emulsion in their home? Is there something that simply makes it impossible for the individual to do, or is it just not worth the effort to try it?

Photo Engineer · Mar 20, 2010

I have explained this too so many times it is becoming tedious. Sorry. There are literally thousands of operations that go into making a color emulsion. It is, on average, about 20X harder to make than B&W, and that is a simplification.

You need up to 9 emulsions in up to 20 layers with a normal B&W emulsion set plus the color imaging chemistry.

I suggest that anyone wishing to try this or suggesting that someone try this make their own pancrhomatic B&W film, coat it and test it. They will get a simple understanding of the situation. Then, multiply this by about 20.

PE

Ektagraphic · Mar 20, 2010

If Kodak doesn't coat film every day....that is if....I know they do a lot of movie film but not sure how often they coat....what do the people do that work the coating operation when they are not coating? What other things could they have them do?

hrst · Mar 20, 2010

Making emulsions for next coating? Getting ready for next coating? Slitting film? I'm sure it takes time.

cs_foto · Mar 20, 2010

thisismyname09 said:
Just out of curiosity, what is the likelihood of someone, or maybe a group of people, being able to make a color emulsion in their home? Is there something that simply makes it impossible for the individual to do, or is it just not worth the effort to try it?

It is very hard because you have to home-make a process that took 100 years to develop industrially.

the government should take over these companies (or the part of the particular company that deals with the process/product in question) and make them co-operatives.

no?

hrst · Mar 20, 2010

Maybe we could do a simple, primitive Kodachrome-type color film with contrast, color and crossover problems and some coating defects at home. But it would still take very much time and may not be satisfactory, and then we would need to engineer a Kodachrome-type process for it.

Prest_400 · Mar 20, 2010

They sell a LOT of print film. Most of it, is motion picture.

hrst said:
Making emulsions for next coating? Getting ready for next coating? Slitting film? I'm sure it takes time.

I posted on one of these long film availiability threads the quantity of print film they sell. Someone (PE if I recall correctly) posted little notions of the process, maybe there were times of the preparation process too, the coating itself doesn't take much time, more was the preparation before and after. Someone said, and I agree, that it's similar to a rocket launch.

Someone mentioned that was switching to Ilford color paper. The swiss Ilford factory can coat film? Nowadays they only seem to coat Paper products.
I wonder how they are going with the Ilfocolor and Ilfochrome lines, I hear few about their situation.

Making film at home. Well, B&W film at the actual level needs a lot of technology (and more important, lots of $) for making it. Color is much more special; Somekind of dye, a coupler, and many things more that I don't have a remote idea of.

With a lot of $, it would be no problem I guess. Buy or build this machine, R&D this and that, get a few engineers and employees, buy that strange coupler, and you could buy everything for the process. Now, the other thing would be having profit.
Even slitting and packaging is something expensive. All are custom build machines, that need it's engineering. That's why I guess Ilford/Harman are using a 1950's 120 spooler and PE mentions that 35mm and 120 may be out on the long run.

Photo Engineer · Mar 20, 2010

Ok, it takes one day to make and test an emulsion. Make that 9 days for the entire set of emulsions in a color film then. It takes about the same 9 days or more to make the 3 dispersions for the Yellow, the 3 dispersions for the Magenta and the 3 dispersions for the Cyan. That can include testing. It takes 1 day to make the interlayer dispersions and 1 day to make the CLS layer, and one each for the overcoat and undercoat dispersions. It takes several days to turn out support, but once going you don't want to stop, so you keep going as fast as you can cast, tenter and test it. A week or more for a run of several master rolls.

It takes a full day to bring these together, and then you coat in about 1 hour or less (per master roll). This entire operation has been scheduled in about May of 2009 and better be right or you make too much (or too little).

Of course, this does not include the weeks of organic synthesis of couplers (6 minimum), dyes (4 minimum), sensitizers (9 minimum), antifoggants (9 average), along with making sure the support is subbed or is going to be subbed and making sure that there is enough gelatin and silver on-hand for this work.

And, while you are doing this, another team is behind you prepping for tomorrows coating so they are running right up your behind, and if you slip, they walk all over you because they gottta meet their timetable too!

Why does this keep coming up!? You really need a preexisting B&W factory, lots of money and the promise of profit to get into color. And the profit is not that huge, or you would have small B&W coaters converting to color all over the place.

PE

accozzaglia · Mar 20, 2010

Photo Engineer said:
Why does this keep coming up!?

Consumer demand, left unfulfilled. Small or great, demand is still demand.

Someone with on APUG with finance-fu should consider creating a fund to support learning/teaching internships for emerging chemistry whiz kids who would like to take it in a photographic direction. Call it the Organic Imaging Fund. APUG members who subscribe can willingly pay a set or arbitrary amount to the fund, while all subscriptions could have one U.S. dollar added that also would go to said fund. A board of directors — say, the moderators mixed with some longtime members — would determine where and for whom this fund could be disbursed.

AgX · Mar 20, 2010

Prest_400 said:
The swiss Ilford factory can coat film? Nowadays they only seem to coat Paper products.

They coat films too: Ilfochrome Micrographic

michaelbsc · Mar 21, 2010

Photo Engineer said:
... In any event, I can see dozens of cottage industries producing hundreds of film and paper products. What will be missing is color. Oh, and what else will be missing is probably MF and 35mm.

This is exactly what I see coming, the boutique model. And those dozens of emulsions will not be cheap. Maybe not prohibitively expensive, but not cheap. Cheap comes from economy of scale. And cottage industry production lacks economy of scale.

hrst · Mar 21, 2010

michaelbsc said:
This is exactly what I see coming, the boutique model. And those dozens of emulsions will not be cheap. Maybe not prohibitively expensive, but not cheap. Cheap comes from economy of scale. And cottage industry production lacks economy of scale.

I can't see exactly this.

It's because simple emulsions (BW) are also cheap to manufacture commercially even on a variable, smaller scale on very cheap price and good quality (many small, but still not boutique-like companies, like Adox etc., and of course Ilford as a bigger player)

And, on the other hand, if some emulsion is too hard to manufacture on a variable, small scale for these manufacturers (that is: good color products), then it's also impossible for a home user / boutique to do.

So, there may be some small boutique-type home hobbyists (I probably being one of them ), but the majority of products will come from smaller BW manufacturers that can produce also smaller batches. Color products will just fade until a point there are a few, maybe about five, good products for "general use", and maybe some home experiments with...... "experimental" results!

michaelbsc · Mar 21, 2010

hrst said:
I can't see exactly this.

It's because simple emulsions (BW) are also cheap to manufacture commercially even on a variable, smaller scale on very cheap price and good quality (many small, but still not boutique-like companies, like Adox etc., and of course Ilford as a bigger player)

And, on the other hand, if some emulsion is too hard to manufacture on a variable, small scale for these manufacturers (that is: good color products), then it's also impossible for a home user / boutique to do.

So, there may be some small boutique-type home hobbyists (I probably being one of them ), but the majority of products will come from smaller BW manufacturers that can produce also smaller batches. Color products will just fade until a point there are a few, maybe about five, good products for "general use", and maybe some home experiments with...... "experimental" results!

I will still proffer that these won't be cheap. As I said, not prohibitively expensive, but not cheap, much the same as tubes of "artists" paint isn't cheap. Tubes of paint are not prohibitively expensive or my wife and I wouldn't spend so much time in craft stores.

In fact, one scenario I've envisioned is that photographic materials will become available in craft stores, much like tubes of paint and brushes. They are, after all, kindred spirits. And if it's all B&W stuff, then the shelf life and keeping requirements (no refrigeration) make it more feasible.

With the advent of the modern Internet support factor added in, it is no longer necessary for the local chemical/equipment/film supplier to be knowledgeable as it was in the past. So a pegboard with packaged dry chemicals - that the clerk has no clue what it's for, a few "kits" that have a tank and few tools, and maybe a few other sundries.

People would probably still make "big" purchases from a web site. But if sundries were readily available, I would certainly buy them. And I expect others would as well.

MB

Photo Engineer · Mar 21, 2010

The high quality emulsions with good characteristics are rather hard to make and expensive due to the particular chemistry used. But, apart from that, coating them with low defects, suitable for 35mm use is very very difficult.

PE

RPC · Mar 22, 2010

Photo Engineer said:
I have kept Supra Endura at room temperature (68 F avg) for 1 year with no appreciable change.

PE

Does it make a difference if it is stored in the original package or kept in a paper safe?

RPC

Photo Engineer · Mar 22, 2010

RPC said:
Does it make a difference if it is stored in the original package or kept in a paper safe?

RPC

IDK, as I have never tried this. So, I will say it probably does make a difference based on prior experience with other materials. But that is a guess.

PE

Final run of Kodak Supra Endura...stock-up time is now

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency