KA: Kodachrome "just not practical to try to replicate in today's market."

[removed account4]

Then first we would have to discuss how careful Kodak was with their wording so far.

LOL you mean back in 2006 when mr pérez told the world that film photography was dead ?
==
personally i think kodak / EK / KA should build a mausoleum in rochester, like they did for grant in nyc ..
and they should put kodachrome on it or in it along with all the other films and papers and kodak products
people refuse to acknowledge is not around anymore .. let people visit it, pay their respects and move on..

 

[George Mann]

OK everyone, what specific aesthetic qualities of K-14 Kodachrome was it that you liked & why?

To my eye, it was the most accurate and realistic color slide film, and the most tolerant of exposure error.

 

[E. von Hoegh]

LOL you mean back in 2006 when mr pérez told the world that film photography was dead ?
==
personally i think kodak / EK / KA should build a mausoleum in rochester, like they did for grant in nyc ..
and they should put kodachrome on it or in it along with all the other films and papers and kodak products
people refuse to acknowledge is not around anymore .. let people visit it, pay their respects and move on..

Bad idea John. That will just give rise to a whole new batch of conspiracy theories about what's buried in Kodachrome's Tomb.

 

[Photo Engineer]

To my eye, it was the most accurate and realistic color slide film, and the most tolerant of exposure error.

It was not. Your eyes must have a problem. It just looked good.

PE

 

[George Mann]

It was not. Your eyes must have a problem. It just looked good.

PE

Regardless, there are many who agree with me!

 

[Lionel1972]

It was not. Your eyes must have a problem. It just looked good.

PE

Isn't it what we all want from a film? I mean accuracy and neutrality have their value for some applications but for a lot of us what is the most rewarding is how good it looks to our own eyes.

 

[RPC]

That's all well and good, but in its later years, NOT ENOUGH preferred its look anymore and/or were more attracted to the attributes of other films or mediums for it to continue in production. That's what counts.

 

[kruiwagen]

Isn't it what we all want from a film? I mean accuracy and neutrality have their value for some applications but for a lot of us what is the most rewarding is how good it looks to our own eyes.

Agree. I shoot film for it's characteristics and the workflow involved in it. If I want spot-on accuracy and resolution I will shoot digital. Among films, Kodachrome itself had a unique look to it. The colors were just amazing.

 

[Lionel1972]

That's all well and good, but in its later years, NOT ENOUGH preferred its look anymore and/or were more attracted to the attributes of other films or mediums for it to continue in production. That's what counts.

The market "in its later years" is irrelevant to today and tomorrow markets. It's just like you would say that the electric cars concept didn't sell enough in the early 20th century (not enough people prefered it over the combustion engine cars) therefore it is delusional to think about reintroducing electric cars today.

 

[AgX]

Good point.
But it is not only the look of the film that counts, but there must be processing available at reasonable cost. (In your analogy of electric cars we today are even in a much better position concerning infrastructure than 100 years ago, not so for film processing.)

 

[Lionel1972]

All we need for Kodachrome processing is one lab (inhouse Kodak lab?) doing it for the global market, for a start. Shouldn't be too difficult to keep that lab busy. Kodak has recently opened new labs around the world for cinema processing so it shouldn't as impossible as some people think it is. If K-14 is too complex, I would be completely satisfied with Kodachrome II if it could make things simplier.
As for the electric car analogy, in the 80's the infrastructure for making electric car again wasn't there anymore, did it prevent people to think about developping electric car again?

 

[AgX]

How expensive would it be sending one roll around the globe twice? Not even mentioning scanning issues.

 

[twelvetone12]

How expensive would it be sending one roll around the globe twice?

A lot. The principal reason I quit Kodachrome after the Lausanne lab closed. It was so unpractical that I did not even develop my two last rolls.

 

[Lionel1972]

Up until 2010 many people still paid for sending their rolls of Kodachrome to the USA from around the world. How many people send their film to Richard Photo Lab or some other labs in the USA from around the world? I think you would be surprised how many.
What scanning issues? All those vintage Kodachrome images online haven't been scanned? I've scanned 35mm and 4x5 Kodachromes on an Epson flatbed scanner without any problem.

 

[AgX]

X-ray scanning issues.

It is hard to establish figures, but I know one film retailer and one lab operator reporting about fresh film being x-ray damaged during international mailing. Basically this issue comes true for sending exposed film around the world.

 

[Lionel1972]

It sounds unacceptable that sending fresh film to the retailers world wide would suffer this issue. Fuji and Kodak must have sorted out this issue a long time ago I guess.

 

[removed account4]

Bad idea John. That will just give rise to a whole new batch of conspiracy theories about what's buried in Kodachrome's Tomb.

good point .. LOL

 

[lantau]

It sounds unacceptable that sending fresh film to the retailers world wide would suffer this issue. Fuji and Kodak must have sorted out this issue a long time ago I guess.

They send their product on pallets with freight forwarders. Trusted sender and recipient. They can make arrangements that are not possible for you using ordinary mail .

 

[jtk]

All we need for Kodachrome processing is one lab (inhouse Kodak lab?) doing it for the global market, for a start. Shouldn't be too difficult to keep that lab busy. Kodak has recently opened new labs around the world for cinema processing so it shouldn't as impossible as some people think it is. If K-14 is too complex, I would be completely satisfied with Kodachrome II if it could make things simplier.
As for the electric car analogy, in the 80's the infrastructure for making electric car again wasn't there anymore, did it prevent people to think about developping electric car again?

My impression is that Kodachrome fans rarely have experience with the better E6 labs or the wonders of E6 film. It's better stuff than K25. The demise of most E6 labs is a far greater loss than the loss of Kodachrome.

 

[MattKing]

Canada Post no longer has a special rate for mailing film. If I were to mail a roll of film to the US for processing, I would need to pay small parcel rates - at least $8.78 using a guess as to the package size.

 

[BMbikerider]

How expensive would it be sending one roll around the globe twice? Not even mentioning scanning issues.

Quite! I totally agree. The last Kodachrome I used was way back in 2006 and that was Kodachrome 200. In UK it was sent to Kodak's HQ near London and from there sent en-mass to a Laboratory in Switzerland. Everything before where Kodachrome was concerned was always done in UK.

It was around 2 weeks before I got the processed slides back and they were - to put it mildly - BLOODY AWFUL! There had been 4 x 36 exp cassettes, exposed during a holiday in Germany and Austria and all had a strong pink colour cast. Not only on clear film forming part of the picture but the other colours were affected too. Reds were distinctly magenta and sky's that should have been blue were a light brown!. I complained to Kodak in UK and whilst they sympathised, they blamed me for getting the colour balance incorrect. I disagreed because even the leader included in the film was pink and I have no control over that. I never used Kodachrome again. Nor did they reply to my second letter!

 

[RPC]

The market "in its later years" is irrelevant to today and tomorrow markets.

What evidence do you have that today's and tomorrow's markets are any more favorable to its return?

The "look" of Kodachrome, accurate or not, was highly dependent on exact manufacture and processing. The feasability of restarting both with all the inherent problems, expense and near zero demand, is likewise near zero.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Kodachrome had a serious problem reproducing some colors, and also with making a good neutral. At best, grays and blacks came out greenish. Neutral step scales show this clearly. It was a very unusual dye set designed for image stability, but making a compromise with some colors.

PE

 

[George Mann]

It's better stuff than K25.

K64 was where it was at (nothing better)!;o)

 

[George Mann]

What evidence do you have that today's and tomorrow's markets are any more favorable to its return?

I guess you have missed all of the people campaigning for its return!