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

[George Mann]

The demise of most E6 labs is a far greater loss than the loss of Kodachrome.

An opinion that you are entitled to, but one I don't agree with.

 

[George Mann]

If Kodak was serious about the return of Kodachrome, they would develop a new process that a few select labs could readily handle.

 

[Sirius Glass]

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

Both Popular Photography and Modern Photography consistently rated the various Ektachromes better than Kodachrome. You should rush to see an ophthalmologist as soon as possible.

 

[Sirius Glass]

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?

Obviously you have not the slightest idea about the difficulties processing Kodachrome and how much easier and more practical to process Ektachrome.

 

[cmacd123]

even back in the E-4 and K-12 days, more than one article mentioned that the E-4 films were more accurate, but that folks who had gotten used to Kodachrome since the 1930s may have a preference for the look, perhaps because it is what they expected a colour image to look like.

And yes, I do believe that K-14 was intended as a much easier process to run than K-12. Just like C-41 was easier and faster than C-22 and E-6 was easier and faster than E-4 (who remebers the smell of Benzyl Alcohol in the morning

 

[Sirius Glass]

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.

Oh no, now it has happened again. You agree with me again. Go sit in the corner for a while and review the errors in your ways!

 

[Sirius Glass]

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!

See there is someone else that got muddy skies with Kodachrome. Kodachrome deserved to die.

 

[George Mann]

You should rush to see an ophthalmologist as soon as possible.

Both you and PE are regular comedians!

 

[George Mann]

Kodachrome deserved to die.

SACRILEGE!

 

[cramej]

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

Color 'accustalgic', maybe.

 

[George Mann]

Color 'accustalgic', maybe.

Nothing is perfect, not Kodachrome, and certainly not I!

 

[Sirius Glass]

SACRILEGE!

Not in the Church of Ektachrome.

 

[George Mann]

Not in the Church of Ektachrome.

Who's holy water is muddy when not viewed in the exact, proper light!

 

[RPC]

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

As I said in an earlier post, the numbers of those who want it back are a drop in the bucket compared to the numbers needed to justify its return. I am sure Kodak took this into consideration when they deemed it "just not practical to replicate in today's market".

 

[Sirius Glass]

Who's holy water is muddy when not viewed in the exact, proper light!

Again you got it wrong. Kodachrome had the problem with muddy skies. Ektachrome has the skies we remember. You might want to consider taking more time crying in your beer.

 

[RPC]

If Kodak was serious about the return of Kodachrome, they would develop a new process that a few select labs could readily handle.

Any new film and process would likely not reproduce the original look, and would not really be Kodachrome. E-6 satifsfies the vast majority's reversal film needs. So is there any point?

 

[George Mann]

As I said in an earlier post, the numbers of those who want it back are a drop in the bucket compared to the numbers needed to justify its return. I am sure Kodak took this into consideration when they deemed it "just not practical to replicate in today's market".

An assumption that hasn't been substantiated nonetheless.

 

[George Mann]

Again you got it wrong.

No I am not, Mr. muddy sky WAH WAH boy! Ektachrome clearly turns muddy when underexposed!

 

[Sirius Glass]

An assumption that hasn't been substantiated nonetheless.

Yes it has. For the last decade of Kodachrome, the sales of Ektachrome out stripped Kodachrome. The only reason Kodak kept Kodachrome around for so long was to have the 75th anniversary bragging rights.

 

[Lionel1972]

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.

And what evidence do you have about the zero demand for Kodachrome in the futur if it were suddenly available again? As far as I know the demand for Ektachrome was very low right before Kodak announced they are bringing it back, and suddenly A LOT of people got interested and Kodak gets asked on a daily basis when it will be available to purchase. Given the legendary status Kodachrome has (technical performances aside, not unlike Polaroid films), I’m pretty certain the demand would be quite overwhelming..

 

[George Mann]

Any new film and process would likely not reproduce the original look, and would not really be Kodachrome.

Assumptions are too easy to make!

E-6 satifsfies the vast majority's reversal film needs. So is there any point?

E6 is currently an endangered species!

 

[RPC]

And what evidence do you have about the zero demand for Kodachrome in the futur if it were suddenly available again? As far as I know the demand for Ektachrome was very low right before Kodak announced they are bringing it back, and suddenly A LOT of people got interested and Kodak gets asked on a daily basis when it will be available to purchase. Given the legendary status Kodachrome has (technical performances aside, not unlike Polaroid films), I’m pretty certain the demand would be quite overwhelming..

See the thread title and source. Kodak's investigation results are good evidence. As such, there is no reason to make it available again. The success of Ektachrome remains to be seen, and as I said in an earlier post, its return was much more feasible than Kodachrome.

 

[Sirius Glass]

No I am not, Mr. muddy sky WAH WAH boy! Ektachrome clearly turns muddy when underexposed!

No, actually both Modern Photography and Popular Photography published many articles complaining about the muddy skies with Kodachrome. Kodak also admitted problems with Kodachrome having muddy skies. Ask PE about it. You are viewing Kodachrome through rose color psychedelic glasses.

 

[RPC]

Assumptions are too easy to make!

Let's see if PE chimes in and what he has to say about it.

E6 is currently an endangered species!

Are you assuming Kodachrome has a better chance?

 

[George Mann]

No, actually both Modern Photography and Popular Photography published many articles complaining about the muddy skies with Kodachrome. Kodak also admitted problems with Kodachrome having muddy skies. Ask PE about it. You are viewing Kodachrome through rose color psychedelic glasses.

I only see objectionable levels of mud when viewing Ektachrome!