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

[markjwyatt]

Photographers and photographic companies struggled for over 150 years to end up with true 3-color. commercially viable photography. In the 1920s (or perhaps a bit earlier), they finally came up with something better than any alternative (hand dyeing prints, hand applied 2-color emulsions, etc.). It was complicated , it was difficult to deal with, but they had it. It was Kodachrome. And Kodak had it and was the first to have it- then we got Fantasia, and the world went "WOW".Kodachrome was the first to naturally be followed by new innovations. But ultimately it was complicated, and the new innovations (E-n, then digital) were easier to use and arguably as good or better. Many would say that Kodachrome was the best (and I won't argue, I shot it and it was great). Considering that practically anyone could process the alternatives, and very, very few could process Kodachrome (because it was the first commercially viable thing they got working; though complicated), it makes sense that ultimately the first technology gets retired. Tube amplifiers did get replaced by solid state; though some kept tubes alive, but not on a huge scale- and Kodachrome is all about "scale". Big scale to manufacture (like all films), but also to process (unlike most films). Digital is challenging all film on both scales.

My 2 cents. And that is not to say that if Kodachrome did come back I would not shoot it again!

 

[Lionel1972]

I don't know. You didn't answer my questions.

On an individual level how many rolls one shoots per year as no value in this argument. Again it all depends on how many people we can convince to shoot transparency film even once in their life. The price also depends on how many people shoot it, not how much they shoot. If you had asked anyone how much would they be willing to pay for a HD TV back when they were just introduced to the market, you would have concluded that there would never be a market for HD TV.

 

[Theo Sulphate]

In the past 45 years, I've shot exactly one roll of transparency film and it was Ektachrome. Yes, this is anecdotal (just one data point). For me to be interested in Kodachrome, it would have to be a ciné film, as obviously I'm not interested in transparencies.

For those who do love transparencies, I hope Ektachrome becomes a reality.

 

[foc]

 

[RPC]

You have no more evidence regarding the potential market than I have. And how can you say "and never will be"? Do you have a crystal ball in order to know the future? If you don't your assertion about the future is baseless. Again simple logic here.

The evidence that there is no market is in the pages of this thread, but you have been ignoring it. No matter what is said, you refuse to listen and continue with your baseless arguments, while contributing no meaningful evidence of your own.

The evidence that there is no potential future market is the total lack of any evidence to the contrary--absolutely no indication exists that there will ever be a demand for Kodachrome to return any more than there will ever be for the horse and buggy to return and replace or exist along side the automobile; a logical thinker would see the reverse.

I ask again: have you sent that letter to Kodak yet, informing them of your great way of thinking? Stop bothering us with your ridiculous notions; we cannot bring it back.

 

[faberryman]

I ask again: have you sent that letter to Kodak yet, informing them of your great way of thinking? Stop bothering us with your ridiculous notions; we cannot bring it back.

He doesn't shoot much transparency film so he is not exactly a poster boy for Kodachrome. The writing is on the wall for Velvia and Provia so stock up. Don't get caught short as some did with Acros.

 

[mshchem]

View attachment 199821

I knew it!

 

[Lionel1972]

The evidence that there is no potential future market is the total lack of any evidence to the contrary--absolutely no indication exists that there will ever be a demand for Kodachrome to return any more than there will ever be for the horse and buggy to return and replace or exist along side the automobile; a logical thinker would see the reverse.

So you need indication of a phenomenon for it to exist or even for it to appear in the future? So tell me which indication you found for the return of Ektachrome?
And by the way, there were no indication that earth was not flat prior to Christopher Columbus arriving in the Americas according to all the experts of his time. I guess you would have concluded that it meant there would never be a market for around the world touristic trips.
I don't need to write a letter to Kodak, Kodak knows there is interest in Kodachrome else they would have never investigated what it would take to bring it back.

 

[faberryman]

So tell me which indication you found for the return of Ektachrome?

Kodak's announcement. I was surprised. It is not out yet, so maybe they are rethinking its release.

 

[Lionel1972]

Kodak's announcement. I was surprised. It is not out yet, so maybe they are rethinking its release.

Latest interview I read, Ektachrome is still in the process of being tested and they are aiming for a release in the summer/fall time frame.

 

[faberryman]

So you need indication of a phenomenon for it to exist or even for it to appear in the future?

No, but I can take available information and make informed decisions about what is likely to happen in the foreseeable future. And I'm not ranking a Kodachrome revival high on the list. Of course anything can happen. Or not.

 

[Sirius Glass]

In the past 45 years, I've shot exactly one roll of transparency film and it was Ektachrome. Yes, this is anecdotal (just one data point). For me to be interested in Kodachrome, it would have to be a ciné film, as obviously I'm not interested in transparencies.

For those who do love transparencies, I hope Ektachrome becomes a reality.

In the last thirty-five years I have not shot slide. But I did use Kodachrome and Ektachrome Super 8 for a few years.

 

[Lionel1972]

And I'm not ranking a Kodachrome revival high on the list. Of course anything can happen. Or not.

I'm not ranking Kodachrome revival high on the list either. I'm just saying there is probably more interest for Kodachrome now that is is gone than back when it died, since currently there is likely more film shooters that never had the chance to shoot Kodachrome and wish they could than old photographers who are not interested in Kodachrome anymore.

 

[RPC]

So you need indication of a phenomenon for it to exist or even for it to appear in the future? So tell me which indication you found for the return of Ektachrome?
And by the way, there were no indication that earth was not flat prior to Christopher Columbus arriving in the Americas according to all the experts of his time. I guess you would have concluded that it meant there would never be a market for around the world touristic trips.
I don't need to write a letter to Kodak, Kodak knows there is interest in Kodachrome else they would have never investigated what it would take to bring it back.

You have it wrong. Kodak knows there is no interest, because that is what their investigation found.

But hey, you have so much more wisdom than they do. Just look at all the convincing arguments you have presented in this thread, including this post.

Send that letter to Kodak and convince them. As you said in one of your posts, the return of Kodachrome might save them! I'm sure they'd love to hear that!

 

[E. von Hoegh]

So you need indication of a phenomenon for it to exist or even for it to appear in the future? So tell me which indication you found for the return of Ektachrome?
And by the way, there were no indication that earth was not flat prior to Christopher Columbus arriving in the Americas according to all the experts of his time. I guess you would have concluded that it meant there would never be a market for around the world touristic trips.
I don't need to write a letter to Kodak, Kodak knows there is interest in Kodachrome else they would have never investigated what it would take to bring it back.

Eratosthenes made an accurate calculation of the circumference of the earth 1750 years before Columbus, at which time (ca. 240 bce) it was well known the earth was not flat.

 

[Truzi]

-snip-

And by the way, there were no indication that earth was not flat prior to Christopher Columbus arriving in the Americas according to all the experts of his time.

-snip-
E. von Hoegh beat me to it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_Earth

 

[E. von Hoegh]

-snip--snip-
E. von Hoegh beat me to it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_Earth

Thales of Miletus said "never argue with an idiot, a third party can't tell which is the idiot".

 

[Sirius Glass]

-snip--snip-
E. von Hoegh beat me to it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eratosthenes
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spherical_Earth

Thales of Miletus said "never argue with an idiot, a third party can't tell which is the idiot".

It is responses like these put realism back into the thread and add a bit of humor. Please keep it up!

 

[E. von Hoegh]

"With stupidity the gods themselves struggle in vain" (Schiller, "The Maid of Orleans") ("Mit der Dummheit, kampfen die Götter selbst vergebens")

 

[Photo Engineer]

If you are not pulling my leg, THAT's Great!
Mike
All I want is good film, EK could bring out an E-6 or C-41 film and call it Kodachrome, that would be great to see the brand again. Whatever EK does, if they can equal what Fuji offers in reversal film, we will be fortunate.
Mike

I am not pulling your leg. See "Sands of Mars" by A. C. Clark.

PE

 

[E. von Hoegh]

Hey guys, sorry for just getting back to this thread now. It’s a crazy time of year in my high school’s band program, so I’ve been playing drums 2-4 hours a day for the past 2 weeks!

Thanks Mike! I’ve already got a Carousel from the 80’s that works pretty good, and I’ve shot some Velvia 50. But I haven’t tackled processing my own E6 yet, so that could be a fun challenge to take on!

Thanks! The name “Old Reliable” came from my grandfather, who drag raced Chevy’s and Dodge’s back in the early 60’s to about 1974. He sadly passed away of a heart attack well before I was born, so I thought I’d honor him. A good bit of the Kodachrome’s that our family has we’re taken at and around NHRA events. All those cars still look gorgeous!


“Is better” was definitely the phrase to use!

Errrm.
A bit of advice. The plural is not apostrophised, to wit:
"Chevys suck". "Mopars rule".
The posessive gets the dangler though: "Mopar's big block engines were about the toughest". "Chevy's 283 was my favorit small block".
Oh, and listen to John Bonham.

 

[BrianShaw]

Yawn.

 

[Lionel1972]

Eratosthenes made an accurate calculation of the circumference of the earth 1750 years before Columbus, at which time (ca. 240 bce) it was well known the earth was not flat.

I am well aware of Eratosthenes' calculation of earth circumference, but you really think his works were "well known" by Columbus contemporaries? How come then that Columbus is held responsible for proving that the Earth is not flat among the general population?

 

[Lionel1972]

Oh, and listen to John Bonham.

Can't agree more with you on this one. Big fan of John Bonham here.

 

[Lionel1972]

You have it wrong. Kodak knows there is no interest, because that is what their investigation found.

But hey, you have so much more wisdom than they do. Just look at all the convincing arguments you have presented in this thread, including this post.

Send that letter to Kodak and convince them. As you said in one of your posts, the return of Kodachrome might save them! I'm sure they'd love to hear that!

So you really think Kodak put time and effort to investigate what it would take to bring back Kodachrome knowing all along there was no interest and there will never be any? If you don't, you prove my point.
Come on, you know that letter idea is stupid. Do you have any evidence that such a letter made any difference in the decisions of a big company?