KODACHROME a question for photo engineers.

df cardwell said:

Effete ? Hardly. YOU should be lucky to accomplish 1% of what Edsel did in his too short life.

Effete ? Bozo.

Click to expand...

No need to call me a name here, please. My opinion, scholarly for the most part, of Edsel Ford's coming to prominence stands (overrefined, privileged, etc.). At least he was no thug like Harry Bennett, and that can't be anything but a good thing, really. Moreover, he was a valuable philanthropist for the arts, which is a good thing. It's not like effete is an be-all, end-all, and it certainly wasn't in this circumstance.

But in the meantime, I'll be sure to reach that 1% quota by the time I hit the age of 35. Of course, without his pampered upbringing, his masculine birthright, and his access to an inheritance which empowered him to head a pre-existing major company, this might be a bit hard to do.

[But I still enjoy shooting Kodachrome, lest we digress too much from the topic.]

when the dust settles..we will see who is still kind of standing...
my point was not to get fuji to make a kodachrome product..that would be silly my request was how much money do you need to make it worth your while to do a batch of my choosing...the response nothing,tumble weed pass's through the frame.
so i will be dealing with lovely fuji velvia,some communications issues to do with language but not the lack of dialogue i have experienced with the big getting smaller by the day yellow one.
if they are still losing millions from kodachrome ,which i doubt ..they should cut and run and dump the raw product in landfill...
most people within kodak do not know it still exists anyway..
as for the crazed few that still like this product,passion is always better than indifference...
on a previous post it was mentioned that ektachrome 64 in super 8 was losing loads of money.and it was kept on because they thought it was a good route for students..it is losing cash and not selling because it is bad...compared to kodachrome 40..which it replaced...and when you compare it to the indi companies selling velvia and provia in super 8..kodak had a nice 100asa motion picture stock but they choose the sub standard product 64.
kodak make good choices but also make seriously bad ones...
they are not innocent victims...they are part authors of there own misfortune.
bad choices..and terribly bad timing...
i will still purchase some kodak products...but if i can i would rather support ilford and fuji,it is childish of me but i want to do my little bit for companies that still care or at least pretend to.

Alan;

Sorry to hear that. Kodak does care. They make Kodachrome when it loses money for them, just because you and others like you want it. That counts as caring in my book.

PE

Someone needs to educate me here. Just reading PE's comment that "Kodachrome is so obsolete, it is over 20 years old." I'm not sure that just because something is 20 years old makes it obsolete. Computers for sure, but not everything. Some people shoot Kodachrome because it supposedly has a particular look that they like. Perhaps it does, and I personally think it looks pretty darn good, even when compared to the competition. But the thing going for Kodachrome is its archival quality. How long will it last if stored under proper conditions? I've heard reports of 150 years, but I guess we won't know that until that time comes.

I would like to leave color photos behind as my father did so my children, grandchildren, and great-grandchildren can see what members of the family looked like and what it was like many years prior. Yes, there is always black and white, but color is nice too.

Does Kodak produce another film that has the archival quality of Kodachrome, or does Fuji, or any other manufacture? If so, will somebody please list them so that I have a film to fall back on if Kodak discontinues Kodachrome? If there isn't one, then it still fills a valuable need and I'm not convinced it is really obsolete.

Dave

Photo Engineer said:

Sorry to hear that. Kodak does care. They make Kodachrome when it loses money for them, just because you and others like you want it. That counts as caring in my book.

Click to expand...

This is why I try to keep things in perspective. I know many of us want Kodachrome to stick around as long as Kodak can allow it, but frankly, it is a flat out miracle it has stuck around for what will now certainly be 75 years.

So as frustrating as it is to hear you say that something as unique as Kodachrome is "Obsolete", what you say above is true. We are lucky it was ever made in the first place.

I know what it is like to lose money...

I have personally poured tens of thousands into the project when I should have been boosting my marketing efforts in getting enough commercial, advertising and editorial work to keep me afloat. In the past 8 months, my income has plummeted over 70% so I will be, for the first time in my 17 years as a professional photographer, very lucky if I am able to make ends meet at this year's end.

The timing on my desire to take a break from commercial work and shoot Kodachrome full time? You guessed it, incredibly bad and frustrating.

But like Kodak, I am not doing this for the money, I am doing it because for now, it is the right thing to do, be part of something that has a deeper meaning.

PE, thanks for your forthright reply. I would like to reserve a chance to respond to it at a later time.

More to the point of what Alan's frustration drives home is that as a company, Kodak's reputation with its consumers is not so hot. But I am not convinced that Kodak cares about its consumers. If this were genuinely the case, then direct lines of communication to appropriate parties would not be as Byzantine and convoluted as what Alan and doubtless others have run against: aloofness, communication incompetence, and a general sense of pestering annoyance at what is the "small time" buyer: the individual consumer. The individual consumer (especially ones with no historical family ties to Kodak personnel) is what put them on the map originally. If trends seem to be a proper indicator, then the individual consumer (professional or personal) is what will keep them placed on the map, even if their placement is smaller than it once used to be. It's better than not being there at all.

If Kodak genuinely cared, they'd go out of their way to ask, "We want to know what you're thinking, and we want to build a relationship with you, the buyer, the consumer, the professional. How can we help? How can we be of service? How can we make it painless for you to reach the right person in the right department on the first go without hassle?"

This is what Harman and Fuji are doing by making their presence known on APUG. The modernist methodology of corporate paternalism -- something Henry Ford was great at doing, incidentally -- is defunct in a social networking corporate culture. Kodak has yet to embrace this change. They bleed because they don't reach out (or they just don't know how and are loath to ask for directions, kind of like dad when taking that wrong turn which led the family 500km astray from their intended destination). They fail to coagulate the bleeding because they have hesitated to switch gears to adapt to the way which other businesses must relate to their consumers as a condition for their own viability. And even that isn't a guarantee. As a consequence, those companies which have operated within these modernist principles are the very companies in the headlines now for running their operations in a very top-down, corporation-knows-best flow with little consideration to consumer changes at the ground level.

Secretly, Kodak seems to know that nixing the Kodachrome line entirely will hurt them badly. There is no way they will be able to spin it positively in the press. It would be like eliminating the anachronistic but venerable Rolleiflex, even in a world when solid state electronics have phased out mechanicals wholesale. For a company that needs no further setbacks in the public eye, retention of Kodachrome in light of how the company firewalls itself from consumer transparency is actually an intangible "soft asset" it can ill-afford to lose at this time. Should Kodak develop the next big "it"/"killer" product and sweep away the feet of a new generation of consumers (think iPod in 2001), then sure, the quiet good-bye of a signature trade brand like Kodachrome won't hurt. But with a stock price as low as you say it is, PE, Kodak knows that staving off bad P.R. is one asset it can ill-afford to lose. This is why Kodachrome persists even as it might lose money with each run: the alternative of nixing it without a good strategic and product backup would be even more costly to the Kodak corporate brand.

accozzaglia said:

Secretly, Kodak seems to know that nixing the Kodachrome line entirely will hurt them badly. There is no way they will be able to spin it positively in the press. It would be like eliminating the anachronistic but venerable Rolleiflex, even in a world when solid state electronics have phased out mechanicals wholesale. For a company that needs no further setbacks in the public eye, retention of Kodachrome in light of how the company firewalls itself from consumer transparency is actually an intangible "soft asset" it can ill-afford to lose at this time. Should Kodak develop the next big "it"/"killer" product and sweep away the feet of a new generation of consumers (think iPod in 2001), then sure, the quiet good-bye of a signature trade brand like Kodachrome won't hurt. But with a stock price as low as you say it is, PE, Kodak knows that staving off bad P.R. is one asset it can ill-afford to lose. This is why Kodachrome persists even as it might lose money with each run: the alternative of nixing it without a good strategic and product backup would be even more costly to the Kodak corporate brand.

Click to expand...

I think we all know this is why Kodak is keeping it around, especially since there a rather profound anniversary date involved that is unique to Kodachrome, 75 years. Kodak would look terrible if they did not acknowledge it somehow, even if it is just keeping the product around long enough for people to bear witness to it.

But I too admit I have ran into communication troubles with Kodak on these matters, they are far more secretive than most. Heck, you can use google earth to see the details of an air force base in the U.S. but when you go to check out the Kodak plant in Rochester, it is all blurred out, no dice.

Nothing is for certain with this film or this company..except that it is going to be *real* interesting for the next 1-2 years.

The closest modern management analogue I can think of is NASA, PKM-25.

accozzaglia said:

...This is what Harman and Fuji are doing by making their presence known on APUG...

Click to expand...

Don't get me wrong, but...

Kodak's decisions/approach hasn't always been perfect in the past, that's for sure. They have frustrated many loyal customers. So, to some extent, people have a "right" to nag about them. But let's get serious, all that kodabashing here is just too much. They just take more than a fair share of bashing. If there ever was a chance to have a Kodak representative here, like Simon Galley of Ilford (who does an *exceptional* job by the way), it's gone! I don't believe it will ever happen.

I doubt that. Customer relations is a tough job few people are willing (or qualified) to do, but demonstrative performance of strong customer relations efforts is the first move for damage control and rebuilding a good reputation. Constructive criticism -- which I would think this conversation is -- certainly is more useful to hear than do-no-wrong prostration is. Our conversation is hardly scaring a big company away (that wasn't officially ever here to begin with). If anything, this conversation gives them an invitation to step in and participate in the relations process.

Oh, I'm not talking about this thread! I wasn't even talking about Alan Doyle's frustration. I find it within reason. It's other threads that are weird. I can't point to one right now, but sometimes they get bashing for no reason. No matter what Kodak does - good or bad - someone will nag about it.

I just ordered 50 more rolls from Freestyle to replace the film I shot in the past few months, it's all I can do for now.

Well, lets start with the state of Kodachrome as a product. It uses emulsions more than 20 years old. They could make even better color and a more coatable product probably if they modernized it. Imagine a 400 speed Kodachrome with the grain and sharpness of a 100 or 25 speed Kodachrome.

The cyan dye is a weak point. In fact, it is known to be hard to scan and known to give greenish neutrals. I have pointed this out before. This cyan can be considerably improved with no overall degradation.

So, I can imagine a new family of fine grain, high speed Kodachromes with better color quality than the present products, but how to get them done? Very difficult in todays climate.

Now, on to customer relations and bear with me please.......

Imagine your house is burning down and you are outside in the cold, confused and upset when a neighbor comes over and wants to talk to you about the way you cut your lawn. How do you react? Now, you don't want to be impolite or annoy him, but I imagine that in your current state you may just have to ignore him and deal with the firemen, police and EMT people present. Right? Well, Kodak's house is on fire and they have lost a huge percentage of seasoned people. They are currently undermanned and lack cash to bolster their staff and time to season them, so I give them a pass on many things.

In fact, they have filled special orders of products for LF photography and done other things to help us such as bring out the new Ektar and the new B&W products that are easier for UV printing.

So, they know what to do, but lack the staff to keep in full contact.

OTOH, I might add that every time Kodak makes a direct move it seems someone wants to sue them. If you look at the internal project that were cancelled due to the possibility of a lawsuit, you would be surprised. Just one example was the use of CD-6 in the color paper line.

I hope this helps.

PE

regardless of my experience i will be helping kodak lose a tiny little bit less money,by buying as much k64 as i can...
a kind of experiment gold finger like to see what is happening...if they refuse my business i will make it public.
a corporation that is not prepared to do business with a customer..even though they are losing money..sounds a little communist to me...
my anger is simple i have money i want to spend..i cannot because it is a non standard item fine..life is tough.
this so called obsolete k64 technology is in the 2009 kodak product list..available to purchase if your joe smow from Albuquerque or colonel gaddafi of libya...i here he just loves those colors...heck kodak sold kodachrome to adolf hitler during the last real world war...
i have asked a simple question i want to buy as much of your product as i can afford..between 1000 and 6000 thousand rolls still waiting for an email..
i did not even ask for a discount...
but it is probably my fault as poor kodak all they get is a bashing..if i called up bill gates or steve jobs...i would not be put through to them obviously..but i would be put through to a trouble shooting manager..who would work out my issues and get me help with the sales stuff.
i called mr perez's office ended up being put through to 16 different people from la to new york and back.
i then ended back up in new york with someone saying...we have sent you an email..

Hi Alan,

I spoke the person who is familiar with still film and could best answer the question. They said there is no more Kodachrome 64 at Kodak.

If you would like to pursue some other kind of film the person to speak to is
I am sorry that I have to give you a negative answer.

Best,
and this was from pro stills dept...so if you have a dead product but you still have supplies is it not a good idea to try to shift those supplies and should you not tell your staff in the relevant depts we have this lets get it out the door.

accozzaglia said:

No need to call me a name here, please.

Click to expand...

It was a kind name. Think of it as ... a slap.

Consider getting a refund on your tuition, if your opinion of Edsel Ford was formed as a result of your seminar.

OR, perhaps come visit us in Detroit sometime. There was far more to the man than you have grasped.

The old notion of 'master one thing, master all things' cuts both ways.
Your spurious image of Ford, even as a sidetrack to the Kodachrome thread, casts all your observations into question.

Feel free to PM me if you would like to discuss EF. Or, go read a book.

Start with an english dictionary, american, canadian, or british would be sufficient. Check out effete.

Photo Engineer said:

Now, Kodachrome is so obsolete, it is over 20 years old.
PE

Click to expand...

On that definition, almost all my photo equipment is obsolete.

Not to mention the "alternative processes" and LF cameras which a lot of APUG members use? And my wife's watercolor artists' materials?

If all we wanted was super-accurate color pictures, we'd all have switched to Fuji years ago, and would now be dumping that in favor of d******!

I was pretty typical of the passionate Kodachrome shooter. When it became easier to get perfect E-6 processing on the other side of town, than it was to get good K14 processing AT ALL from Kodak, most pros bailed out. This was ... the mid to late '80s ? At the same time, agencies tightened up production schedules, and there was no longer TIME to work in Kodachrome. One day, you had a cabinet full of same-batch-Kodachrome, and getting deadly accurate results from your filter packs, and the next.... weird Qualex magentas that cost more than one of us a client. There WERE boutique labs, here and there, but when agencies shortened the lead times ... nobody could make it. A&I was a noble try to save Kodachrome, but it was futile. That was a long time ago. And folks are STILL trying to save K14 ? It has been on life support for 20 years... as a service to the public.

For Kodak to make products in great enough volume to sell at a reasonable profit, the volume has to be enormous. If Kodak was a boutique sized manufacturer, like Ilford / Harmon, they'd be able to better meet the reduced demand. A THOUSAND rolls of film, or even 10,000 rolls... that's like turning an offset press on and
off.

Don't blame Kodak. Blame your neighbor, who took her film to Fotomat, or to the cut rate place in the mall.
K14 has always need skilled labor. In the old days, when labor was cheap, and goods were expensive, Kodachrome was profitable. Today, when labor is expensive and material is cheap, the power curve is all wrong.
Cheap goods killed quality goods. Nothing new. Do you wear a chinese made shirt ?

Oh, but you should have seen 120 K64. Under a Hazylight, with a 150/2.8 Sonnar ... wonderful.
A 617 Linhof ? Unspeakable. But those days are gone, and won't be coming back.

sorry,help me here cos you seem to know a lot...i am a potential customer i look on a website it says kodachrome k64..if i see it should i not be allowed to buy whatever i want...especially if the company concerned is struggling.
if any one from kodak wants to pm me great...but i state this again this is an existing kodak product.i have tried to create a demand by trying to purchase but big yellow little yellow one as of today does not want to supply.

Alan

GO TO YOUR LOCAL CAMERA SHOP AND WRITE UP AN ORDER !

Easy.

Trying to buy a thousand rolls, or whatever, online is like trying to order 1000 pizzas over the phone. Maybe the personal touch will be helpful.

So wait, let me get this straight....

A real Kodak person has told you that there is no Kodachrome? Or was it someone at a photo store?

If at a photo store, I get the same story. They just don't want to order it for some reason. But AFAIK, Kodak has Kodachrome 64 in stock. I will check with my sources.

PE

i had a nightmare being passed around in kodak..
one person in motion picture was aware that k64 was an existing product..they put me in touch with a group in rochester part of that email reply i put up was the emailed reply..from the man that knows...who ever he is..
after the email i called and said you are wrong and was told it was available in b&h,i was told it could be old stuff,who knows where they get the film from..but it aint us.maybe it is from france or germany...
i left the email and name details off cos i do not want to get any one into trouble...
had an exec who knew the product but kept saying hey forget that stuff..you wanna use ekta 100 thats much better quality than kodachrome.

I just verified that Kodak is still shipping Kodachrome 64, but that many stores do not want to order it!

So, it is still there. And, if you call their 800 number and ask, they should be able to do what I just did.

PE

There is easily over 2,000 rolls in all the major U.S. supply chains, that would get you over the 1,000 you qouted on the low end. But if you really wanted to deal with only one source, than I suggest either B&H, Freestyle or Dwayne's as they are the primary places to get the most recent stock.

And for the record, I contacted my source at Kodak directly about two hours ago. He is a major department head that is very involved with Kodachrome. He said your order is large and seems to range quite a bit in quantity, but to the best of his knowledge, you could place the order although it might take a bit longer than average to fill it.

If you want to go through B&H, contact Henry Prosner and he will help, he posts on this forum often. If you want to go through Freestyle, ask to talk to one of many super helpful customer service reps and they will more than take care of you. The same goes for Dwayne's Photo. But no matter who you go through, you are talking about $8,000-$48,000 in Kodachrome, expect to make at least 70% of the payment up front.

At this point, all signs point to yes as to you getting an order for 1,000-6,000 rolls of KR-64 filled if that is what you wish. You just have to be serious, persistent and go through the proper channels.

Unless you plan on being a distributor, going through Kodak is not going through the proper channels, that is what retailers are for...

i am have found a indi dealer....the question has been asked..but i want 1 new batch from one source,not 100 from one place 300 from another..
my take it is to do with world wide allocation issue..we have a quantity that is meant to last an 18 month cycle...and if 1 customer wants to buy a large supply it will affect the allocation..say kodak uk has 1000 the main dealer for kodak has 200 i come along and need more it is a problem.
for kodachrome...if i wanted ektar 100 no problem 5000 whatever..
but the last chunk of raw material has been allocated to many markets and that is why i am being offered smaller amounts..
i would not want to walk into 10 photo stores and buy up product this is pathetic...
the question has been asked kodak through one dealer can take a big order or not..
i will wait for the email...

A couple of things...

First of all, Alan, I do not mean any disrespect, and I do not mean this in a spiteful way, but in your posts your grammar and punctuation is less than perfect. If this is the same manner in which you communicate with Kodak, then perhaps that is why they won't take you seriously?

Secondly, is there anything that can be done by the photographic community in an attempt to save Kodachrome? I realize there are threads like this on many forums, and there is the Kodachrome project, but could we perhaps start a petition, or letter writing campaign?