How much will Kodak film prices increase?

138S · Dec 28, 2019

MattKing said:
And yet, it was Kodak Alaris who were the main motivators for bringing back Ektachrome (still) film, not Eastman Kodak, who sell the motion picture version.

I'd say that the Ektachrome resurrectors were the Vision 3 people.

They made this camera:

https://www.kodak.com/consumer/products/super8/default.htm

Kodak Vision 3 it's the most powerful imaging system in the world for cinematography, blowing miles away anything digital, but "No Film School" (https://nofilmschool.com/) had remarkable success in helping industry digitalization by teaching technicians, none of those may shadow what spielberg, tarantino, nolan etc do. A single scene shot by Kamiński for spielberg has more excellence than all those "No Film School" technicians will get together in their entire careers, they take a full beating with no bone spared. It is like this... nothing can be done... perhaps things will change in the future but today we have that situation.

But motion film required an school for new young technicians, and that new Super 8 camera was an important tool.

Of course Vision 3 is negative film, so an student would require a complex process to project his shootings, solution was reversal stuff.

What Alaris did to bring back Ektachrome ? Saying that they would distribute it ? It was EK who resurrected the emulsion, and this was a really hard job, KA only distributes it as they have the right to intercept the commercialization of EK still film.

The small sells of motion Super-8 Ektachrome cannot justify making the emulsion, so EK needed the still film market, single problem is Alaris is in the middle taking a share of the profit after doing almost nothing, challenging viability. They distribute EK film because they have the exclusive right, not because they good in marketing.

The Alaris contribution to Ektachrome resurrection is void, the very hard job was made by EK, which after the shrink they still treasure a crop of amazing technicians, those have the merit, IMO.

Tom Kershaw · Dec 28, 2019

138S said:
Kodak Vision 3 it's the most powerful imaging system in the world for cinematography, blowing miles away anything digital, but "No Film School" (https://nofilmschool.com/) had remarkable success in helping industry digitalization by teaching technicians, none of those may shadow what spielberg, tarantino, nolan etc do. A single scene shot by Kamiński for spielberg has more excellence than all those "No Film School" technicians will get together in their entire careers, they take a full beating with no bone spared. It is like this... nothing can be done... perhaps things will change in the future but today we have that situation.

I'm not sure I understand your point of view. Surely Ektachrome and Vision 3 (negative film) are very different products but present a choice, much as we can chose to photograph with film technology or digital, along with the varying degrees of analogue that go along with the process, motion picture or stills? Kodak Alaris still have the marketing and distribution responsibility etc for stills film which must have costs associated with it.

138S · Dec 28, 2019

Tom Kershaw said:
I'm not sure I understand your point of view. Surely Ektachrome and Vision 3 (negative film) are very different products but present a choice, much as we can chose to photograph with film technology or digital, along with the varying degrees of analogue that go along with the process, motion picture or stills? Kodak Alaris still have the marketing and distribution responsibility etc for stills film which must have costs associated with it.

Please let me clarify, digital is fantastic and some scenes in a film shooting have to be shot digitally, also what first they do with Vision 3 is scanning and processing it hybrid.

But Vision 3 is technically way superior to digital for cinematography for several reasons, one is dedicated spectral response which sensors lack, another one is 5 stops highlights latitude: in cinematography shadow detail and high ISO is irrelevant, the good job is made at ISO 50 and what matters is highlights, also Vision sports a selective saturation capability that amazingly today's 3D LUTs are not able to match, with digital they routinely desaturate to have something to show.

Digital is superior in the shadows, but this is irrelevant because they have truckloads of lightning in a shooting.

Of course a cinematographer may prefer digital, in fact medium is only a share of cinematography, and many dull scenes won't show a difference or even it won't be possible to say what medium was used, ...but when we have the good lights for shooting then film shines... glares have textures helping volume depiction, and shadings are naturally graded depicting face volumes with immersive 3D sensation. Digital movies don't have that, never, not a single one, see Rambo II or the The Goodfather in film, volumes are perfect, compared 2020 digital movies look like those egiptians in the piramids, all flat, I think this is a fact, if one have eyes... a flat depiction can be nice, but they are not able to show immersive depth, for example.

Tom Kershaw said:
Kodak Alaris still have the marketing and distribution responsibility etc for stills film which must have costs associated with it.

Well, IMO they don't have "the responsibility", they have "the right". If EK could they would get rid of KA ASAP, just speculating. KA has that right because EK took the money of UK Kodak Pension Plan in the bad times, and EK had a debt, so EK is a prisoner of KA.

Now KA wants to sell that "right" to another company because the fund is almost crashed from several pitfalls they made.

Me, what I want as a film lover is that they make business plans for the long term, not inflating short term profits to sell better the commercialization rights they own, because this can damage color film survivality in the long term.

Tom Kershaw · Dec 28, 2019

138S said:
Please let me clarify, digital is fantastic and some scenes in a film shooting have to be shot digitally, also what first they do with Vision 3 is scanning and processing it hybrid.

But Vision 3 is technically way superior to digital for cinematography for several reasons, one is dedicated spectral response which sensors lack, another one is 5 stops highlights latitude: in cinematography shadow detail and high ISO is irrelevant, the good job is made at ISO 50 and what matters is highlights, also Vision sports a selective saturation capability that amazingly today's 3D LUTs are not able to match, with digital they routinely desaturate to have something to show.

Digital is superior in the shadows, but this is irrelevant because they have truckloads of lightning in a shooting.

Of course a cinematographer may prefer digital, in fact medium is only a share of cinematography, and many dull scenes won't show a difference or even it won't be possible to say what medium was used, ...but when we have the good lights for shooting then film shines... glares have textures helping volume depiction, and shadings are naturally graded depicting face volumes with immersive 3D sensation. Digital movies don't have that, never, not a single one, see Rambo II or the The Goodfather in film, volumes are perfect, compared 2020 digital movies look like those egiptians in the piramids, all flat, I think this is a fact, if one have eyes... a flat depiction can be nice, but they are not able to show immersive depth, for example.

Thanks for that. I'm interested in cinematography but it is not an area I have any expertise or experience in. On the stills front, I hope Kodak films don't keep going up in price. One note though is that Kodak Alaris seems to allow / achieve much higher prices in Europe and the UK compared to North America which is rather irritating...

Anon Ymous · Dec 28, 2019

Tom Kershaw said:
... One note though is that Kodak Alaris seems to allow / achieve much higher prices in Europe and the UK compared to North America which is rather irritating...

I think the same is true for Ilford products as well and yes, it is irritating. Perhaps it's a market size kind of thing, but still irritating.

Agulliver · Dec 28, 2019

Do remember that throughout the EU, prices are typically quoted with VAT (sales tax) included....often this is as much as 20%. In the USA prices are typically quoted without sales tax. That accounts for some of the apparent price differences.

Anon Ymous · Dec 28, 2019

@Agulliver Yes, you have a point about VAT/sales tax. BTW, it can get considerably higher than 20%, it's 24% over here...

Arthurwg · Dec 28, 2019

If you think Tri-X prices are bad, take a look at New55 peal-apart 4x5 PN 400. They are asking $15 for each exposure, and from what I've seen the results are truely bad, especially when compared to the original Polaroid product.

138S · Dec 28, 2019

Agulliver said:
Do remember that throughout the EU, prices are typically quoted with VAT (sales tax) included....often this is as much as 20%. In the USA prices are typically quoted without sales tax. That accounts for some of the apparent price differences.

VAT is 20% but Portra 160 4x5" (10 sheets) in the EU is 200% of the US price, $70 vs $37.

It could be a joke, but sadly it's the crude reality. This is unbearable. If Alaris wants to exterminate LF color in the EU then they are on track, no doubt.

Also tink that many countries don't have the standard of living USA or Germany has, so at Alaris they are LF exterminators.

For the moment the single thing one can do in the EU is using a 120 roll film back in the view camera.

Tom Kershaw · Dec 28, 2019

138S said:
It could be a joke, but sadly it's the crude reality. This is unbearable. If they want to exterminate LF color in the EU the they are on track.

I've noted this as I've some ideas I'd like to work with in 5"x4" color. I do have a roll film back (6x9cm) so we'll see. Prefer working with sheet film in the darkroom.

138S · Dec 28, 2019

Tom Kershaw said:
I've noted this as I've some ideas I'd like to work with in 5"x4" color. I do have a roll film back (6x9cm) so we'll see. Prefer working with sheet film in the darkroom.

The other choice is taking a plane from the EU and travelling to NYC to buy film, the flight's cost comes for free if buying a few film boxes.

How can Alaris be that crazy ?

Are they to release one sheet boxes now in the EU?

MattKing · Dec 29, 2019

138S said:
What Alaris did to bring back Ektachrome ? Saying that they would distribute it ? It was EK who resurrected the emulsion, and this was a really hard job, KA only distributes it as they have the right to intercept the commercialization of EK still film.

This is inconsistent with what my Eastman Kodak sources tell me - Kodak Alaris were the ones who were the main motivators behind the E6 revival. It probably wouldn't have happened if there was not a perceived benefit as well to the motion picture marketplace.
Many of the people in Kodak Alaris were former Eastman Kodak employees. The relationship between the two entities is quite symbiotic. It is quite clear though that the marketing and distribution expertise (concerning still films, photo-chemistry and colour photo paper) is all at Kodak Alaris - Eastman Kodak has been energetic about dispensing with that side of the business.
The publicly available accounts for Kodak Alaris show a business that has reasonable net profits, before taxes and depreciation. The cash generated by that business may not be enough for the pension authorities who own Kodak Alaris, but the business itself appears to be strong and healthy.
The worst thing that could happen would be to have the marketing of film products brought back into Eastman Kodak, which itself considers film to be unimportant.

mshchem · Dec 29, 2019

Kodak Pension Plan 2 (KPP2) was created during the bankruptcy of Eastman Kodak. It is not able to meet the payments to the 11,000 retirees in the UK. The UK Pension Protection Fund is in the process of absorbing KPP2 into the PPF. This started in the 1st quarter of 2019. PPF intends to sell the assets, Kodak Alaris, at a fair market price. If this stalls the PPF is prepared to continue operate those businesses. The PPF wants to invest in renewable energy, wind power and the like.

Here's a link to the PPF annual report page 46 tells the story about Kodak. The Kodak pension claim is the largest in the history of the PPF.

https://www.ppf.co.uk/annual-report

Agulliver · Dec 29, 2019

The VAT is only part of the price difference, but often the biggest part. Note that KA don't set the prices you pay for your film. KA sell on to distributors, who in turn sell to the retailers. The prices you pay are all affected by the manufacturing costs, the price the distributors are paying to KA, the prices retailers are paying to distributors and on their own overheads.

And always remember to compare like with like. Don't cherry pick the cheapest US pricing for a product quoted without sales tax and try to compare it to the most expensive UK price including VAT.

Portra 160 sheet film can be had for £47.99 plus VAT at several retailers including Amazon.co.uk, TeamworkPhoto and others. Shopping around never hurts.

Tom Kershaw · Dec 29, 2019

Ok a fairer comparison - so 'full price' at Freestyle Photographic (actually less as they are offering 10% rebate I've not included) for TMY-2 50sheets 5x4 - inc 20% extra to account for VAT equates to about £171. Price at Morco who are a competitive UK retailer is £212 inc VAT.

Anon Ymous · Dec 29, 2019

@Agulliver There's always the non trivial chance that Kodak Alaris, Ilford, Fuji ... sells to the US distributor at a lower price. The US is a large market, with a population above 300M, served by a single distributor. The EU might be a larger market, with or without the UK, but is served by several distributors, probably as many as the member states. This, and the VAT/sales tax inclusion probably explains the large price difference.

138S · Dec 29, 2019

Anon Ymous said:
@Agulliver The EU might be a larger market, with or without the UK, but is served by several distributors, probably as many as the member states. This, and the VAT/sales tax inclusion probably explains the large price difference.

It may explain some differences, but Portra 4x5-10 price has no explanation. $70 vs $37

There is a distributor that covers the entire EU: Amazon, they also sport crazy low logistic costs, but price is the same 200% of the US price.

Anon Ymous · Dec 29, 2019

138S said:
It may explain some differences, but Portra 4x5-10 price has no explanation. $70 vs $37

There is a distributor that covers the entire EU: Amazon, they also sport crazy low logistic costs, but price is the same 200% of the US price.

Amazon isn't a distributor, but a retailer, or a set of retailers to be more precise. These retailers buy from whatever distributor supplies the local markets where they're located, so an EU state distributor. In other words, there's no advantage to be had by buying from Amazon.

138S · Dec 29, 2019

MattKing said:
This is inconsistent with what my Eastman Kodak sources tell me - Kodak Alaris were the ones who were the main motivators behind the E6 revival. It probably wouldn't have happened if there was not a perceived benefit as well to the motion picture marketplace.

IMO what Alaris did is "Icing and no cake". It's easy to be a motivator if another one makes then industrial effort, makes the investment and takes all financial risk of the operation. Me, I'd also have applauded the Vision 3 people initiative, if I had granted the distribution of a new product at no risk, if it doesn't sell just smile.

MattKing said:
The relationship between the two entities is quite symbiotic.

I see it quite different: the relationship is parasitic, IMO. EK doesn't use KA to distribute because they do a good job, but because they are contractually bound.

I don't see the Alaris marketing excellence... I have Portra sheets at 200% price in the EU compared to US. I'm also able to not sell a single Portra sheet box in the EU like them.

Now Alaris is selling the division, and they even consider selling comercialization rights of EK products to ilford, a direct chantage as ilford is a direct competitor.

They are focused to get the highest short term profit to lubricate that sell, damaging long term viability, IMO.

Where the symbiosis is?

MattKing said:
(colour photo paper) is all at Kodak Alaris

https://petapixel.com/2016/04/13/kodak-alaris-trouble-shuts-manufacturing-plant-uk/

You may know that Alaris carped bombed color photopaper manufacturing facilities, in a chain of missmanagement pitfalls. Now they sell paper made by a 3rd party in the Canada IIRC, not relocated to 3rd world, outsourced to a Canada manaufacturer.

138S · Dec 29, 2019

Anon Ymous said:
Amazon isn't a distributor, but a retailer, or a set of retailers to be more precise. These retailers buy from whatever distributor supplies the local markets where they're located, so an EU state distributor. In other words, there's no advantage to be had by buying from Amazon.

You are right, but we may agree that Amazon has the capability to be the main (or even exclusive) EK distributor in the world for pictorial film, lowering distribution cost to a minimum.

Today film is not sold by humans but by computers, so a concentration in the supply chain is easier than ever.

Distribution changed totally. In the past a dense commercial physical network had to be assembled to place film in the shops of every small village, today film is purchased from an smartphone and customer pays before shipping.

I see no reason, beyond taxes, for the film to be a cent more expensive in the EU than in the US, if there are costs in the middle you remove what's in the middle, because distribution can be digitally centralized.

If Alaris is that excellent, they should be able provide a cost effective supply chain also in the EU, as film retailers order electronically without phone calls. I suspect that Alaris has a cost efficient distribution in the UE, but they fix that price.

If Alaris does not have an cost efficient distribution in the UE, then they are pretty silly.

Tom Kershaw · Dec 29, 2019

138S said:
If Alaris does not have an cost efficient distribution in the UE, then they are pretty silly.

Considering my experience of ordering T-Max film this autumn in the UK, I'm not sure how efficient Kodak Alaris are.

Sirius Glass · Dec 29, 2019

138S said:
I love Eastman Kodak, but I hate Kodak Alaris. This deserves an explanation.

Today film lovers are mainly enthusiasts, my personal view is that Kodak marketing policy is oriented to short term profits because they have no faith in film, they don't know what the business will be in the future, in fact present sells are a surprise for them, their internal predictions had stated that color film had to be extingushed by now.

So a problem is that rather building a larger consumer base to ensure larger profits in the long term they tend to extract every cent from present users, discouraging new users. This haas been seen in the sheet film pricing.

What happens with Alaris? They are selling their business !!!

See this: https://www.insideimaging.com.au/2019/exclusive-kodak-up-for-sale/

‘Management is actively marketing the business and expects to complete a sale of the PPF business before 31 March, 2019. Changing circumstances may extend the time to complete the sale beyond 31 Marc h 2019 but management is responding to these changes and continues to be committed to the plan,’ stated the Kodak Alaris report.'

OK, imagine you are a Pension Plan that is selling his "Droit du seigneur" on Kodak film commercialization... What would you do ? You have to lure investors and you want a good price for your "Droit du seigneur"...

Best idea is a bet for short term profits, and if this damages long term viability of film then this is secondary.

Film users are enthusiats, they sport some kind of idealism, most don't expect any profit from his activity, but if they feel that they are vampirized then they may drop, so IMHO present situation is dangerous.

Me, I spend less film or I'll simply shot wet plate, but I feel that present policy may be felt as a sort of extortion and this may damage color film viability in the long term, because idealists don't like extortion.

A pallet of film rolls if worth $150,000 (color plus) to $500,000, so there is no excuse to produce less, if market wants film there is no excuse to do what necessary to put film in the market. Hey, this country made the Liberty class ships 80 years ago.

My vision is that Alaris (and others) a have short time priorities (selling their "Droit du seigneur" ) that may damage film survability in the long term. I love kodak film, I hate what can damage its long term survival, and Alaris is a hazard.

You better contact your Representives and Senators and start an investigation. Check under your bed while you are at it. They will arise as vapors from your floor and get you!

138S · Dec 29, 2019

Sirius Glass said:
You better contact your Representives and Senators and start an investigation. Check under your bed while you are at it. They will arise as vapors from your floor and get you!

There is no conspiracy theory:

"In the financial report Chairman Mark Elliott wrote, ‘We are in advanced discussions with a bidder to sell the PPF business and all of its assets."

(https://www.insideimaging.com.au/2019/exclusive-kodak-up-for-sale/)

When a corporation is to be sold then short term profits are the priority, you don't need to take care of customers you won't see anymore... no MBA required to understand it.

Just I hope next owner makes business plans for the long term making a bet for expanding customer base.

Sirius Glass · Dec 29, 2019

138S said:
There is no conspiracy theory:

"In the financial report Chairman Mark Elliott wrote, ‘We are in advanced discussions with a bidder to sell the PPF business and all of its assets."

(https://www.insideimaging.com.au/2019/exclusive-kodak-up-for-sale/)

When a corporation is to be sold then short term profits are the priority, you don't need to take care of customers you won't see anymore... no MBA required to understand it.

Just I hope next owner makes business plans for the long term making a bet for expanding customer base.

Most here believe that they are. They are using their own retirement money to keep Kodak products alive. If they did not they would be hurting their own retirements. Hence the comment about looking under your bed.

138S · Dec 29, 2019

Sirius Glass said:
Most here believe that they are. They are using their own retirement money to keep Kodak products alive. If they did not they would be hurting their own retirements. Hence the comment about looking under your bed.

To start with, they destroyed the color paper industry they got in exchange for the money in the pension fund that evaporated, color RA-4 paper is extensively used for printing digital images, so it always had a market, but they carped bombed that business.

It is EK that manufactures and keeps alive kodak products, not KA.

KPP2 missmanaged his assets, now "The trustees of KPP2 intend to hand over what’s left of the Kodak Alaris group – after attempts to sell some or all of the various business units – to the UK Pension Protection Fund. This is a government-run fund which looks after people whose pension funds have failed them. ...so Boris Johnson may be next Kodak distributor.

The question is how much damage this situation will do to color film survavility in the long term.

How much will Kodak film prices increase?

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency