Kodacolor 100. New

[dcy]

Actually, they say "sub-brands of existing films".
Whatever "sub-brands" may mean.
And they only say that on Instagram, so I can't read much else.

Whether they say "sub-brand" or "re-brand", the point is that they say it is an existing film, just with different branding. Right?

@gbroadbridge made a good point that changes in branding / trade name are common in other industries.

 

[MattKing]

Whether they say "sub-brand" or "re-brand", the point is that they say it is an existing film, just with different branding. Right?

Not necessarily.
The way that films come into being, it may be something like a tweaked recipe, using technology from version A, less the inclusion of feature B in order to minimize price, plus the updates made necessary due to component availability found first in version C, adjusted in order to be usable on substrate E, rather than the previous choice of substrate T.
There are strong similarities between film manufacture and the operation of commercial kitchens and their development of recipes - as the availability of fresh ingredients change, so do the recipes.
So the films may be brand new, but their design makes use of earlier work, applied in the context of current market conditions, current component availability, and current conditions respecting things like substrate availability.
Dealing with many of those variables is just as necessary for existing film versions - otherwise they would be subject to constant, unwanted changes and/or wide swings in affordability/profitability.
And in the case of Kodak, the other potential source of variability is the arrangements between Eastman Kodak and Kodak Alaris.
There may, for example, be an agreement between Eastman Kodak and Kodak Alaris that expands what Eastman Kodak can sell directly, provided that the product sold differs in particular ways from the main Kodak branded still film. And that agreement may be in return for Kodak Alaris receiving other advantages, or it might be a joint agreement designed to help Kodak Alaris' manufacturer (Eastman Kodak) deal with certain realities - like increasing silver and acetate prices - that impact significantly both entities' businesses.

 

[mshchem]

I agree

 

[George Mann]

Ooh, how about KodachromE6

Are you cheering for it?

 

[koraks]

Perhaps it's a profile issue for Portra and my Coolscan needs different profiling.

As soon as you mention 'profiling' it's clear to me that the color adjustments you're doing are 100% sure to be not optimal for your actual negatives. So the first place to start fixing this issue is in your color workflow. Do not depend on any film profile in your scanning software to fix the colors; it will never work.

 

[dcy]

Not necessarily.
The way that films come into being, it may be something like a tweaked recipe, using technology from version A, less the inclusion of feature B in order to minimize price, plus the updates made necessary due to component availability found first in version C, adjusted in order to be usable on substrate E, rather than the previous choice of substrate T.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say... I understand that recipes get tweaked. All I'm saying is that Kodak stated clearly that these are existing films with different branding. Either they did not tweak the films, or they did not feel that the tweaks where significant enough to be worth a mention in the announcement. The point is, Kodak is not claiming that they're new emulsions. It's fine and good to try to figure out what the films are, and I am as curious about that as anyone. But when a YouTuber makes a video and says something like

"today we'll try to figure if these are completely new films or if these are existing Kodak products that they're just rebranding and selling as something else"

I kind of feel that they're manufacturing a controversy, and a viewer could get the impression that Kodak is being deceptive, when in reality they said in plain English that these are existing films.

 

[albireo]

"today we'll try to figure if these are completely new films or if these are existing Kodak products that they're just rebranding and selling as something else"

I kind of feel that they're manufacturing a controversy.

They certainly are. Remember than in the world of clicks-for-cash and 1 minute attention spans, 'business as usual' attracts less attention than controversy.

The only film youtuber worth following for me as of 2025 is Steve O'Nions. No sponsor, no shouting, no shitty background music, just musings on photography, nature, and -why not- sometimes gear.

Hint for me/personal cue: if the video starts with something like 'This thing is sponsored by SQUARESPACE' it's going to be crap.

 

[loccdor]

Yes, it's important to realize that most of the medium to larger channels on YouTube are primarily driven by acquiring money now. Much more so in comparison to the previous decades. So if there isn't a controversy, but it would be lucrative if there was one, they will often manufacture it.

That's another reason I enjoy sites like this where people are not getting paid to express themselves. Cuts out that negative motivating temptation.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I worked in the home appliance industry for 20+ years. When I started at the Amana Iowa plant it was owned by a division of the defense giant Raytheon, we made refrigerators for our own brands plus units for GE, Whirlpool etc. We were bought and sold several times. I worked for Raytheon, Maytag and Whirlpool, never had to relocate, my office changed, a bit .
The plant is still there, no engineering now, but still making Amana, Maytag, Whirlpool, Kitchenaid etc, etc. They make good product, but important to understand most of the brand difference is features and decoration.
Kinda like color negative film

My new GE Profile washer does not work as well as their last one, especially in the spin cycle. You have to keep readjusting the balance. Made in China? Wherever it's not as good.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Not necessarily.
The way that films come into being, it may be something like a tweaked recipe, using technology from version A, less the inclusion of feature B in order to minimize price, plus the updates made necessary due to component availability found first in version C, adjusted in order to be usable on substrate E, rather than the previous choice of substrate T.
There are strong similarities between film manufacture and the operation of commercial kitchens and their development of recipes - as the availability of fresh ingredients change, so do the recipes.
So the films may be brand new, but their design makes use of earlier work, applied in the context of current market conditions, current component availability, and current conditions respecting things like substrate availability.
Dealing with many of those variables is just as necessary for existing film versions - otherwise they would be subject to constant, unwanted changes and/or wide swings in affordability/profitability.
And in the case of Kodak, the other potential source of variability is the arrangements between Eastman Kodak and Kodak Alaris.
There may, for example, be an agreement between Eastman Kodak and Kodak Alaris that expands what Eastman Kodak can sell directly, provided that the product sold differs in particular ways from the main Kodak branded still film. And that agreement may be in return for Kodak Alaris receiving other advantages, or it might be a joint agreement designed to help Kodak Alaris' manufacturer (Eastman Kodak) deal with certain realities - like increasing silver and acetate prices - that impact significantly both entities' businesses.

Maybe Alaris is getting a royalty for each roll sold directly by Eastman. I suspect the new owners of Alaris are talking more to Eastman than the old ones who were only concerned about Alaris's retirees' pensions.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

As soon as you mention 'profiling' it's clear to me that the color adjustments you're doing are 100% sure to be not optimal for your actual negatives. So the first place to start fixing this issue is in your color workflow. Do not depend on any film profile in your scanning software to fix the colors; it will never work.

This is why I like shooting chromes. You can see just by looking at the results if you nailed the exposure and composition. They're easier to scan as well. You don't have to be a digital chemist to get the colors right.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

I'm not sure what you're trying to say... I understand that recipes get tweaked. All I'm saying is that Kodak stated clearly that these are existing films with different branding. Either they did not tweak the films, or they did not feel that the tweaks where significant enough to be worth a mention in the announcement. The point is, Kodak is not claiming that they're new emulsions. It's fine and good to try to figure out what the films are, and I am as curious about that as anyone. But when a YouTuber makes a video and says something like

"today we'll try to figure if these are completely new films or if these are existing Kodak products that they're just rebranding and selling as something else"

I kind of feel that they're manufacturing a controversy, and a viewer could get the impression that Kodak is being deceptive, when in reality they said in plain English that these are existing films.

Maybe they didn't know what Kodak said about these products.

 

[koraks]

This is why I like shooting chromes. You can see just by looking at the results if you nailed the exposure and composition. They're easier to scan as well. You don't have to be a digital chemist to get the colors right.

Yes, chromes generally scan much more easily. They have other drawbacks, of course. But getting the colors right in scans is easier than with color negative film.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

Yes, chromes generally scan much more easily. They have other drawbacks, of course. But getting the colors right in scans is easier than with color negative film.

By the way, getting the colors "right" does not mean to match the Velvia film colors. I never compare the scan result to it. I just adjust until the colors look right to my taste. I don't have to match some dead Japanese engineer who developed the colors decades ago. That was his taste.

 

[koraks]

We're fortunately entirely free in deciding what we want in our photos!

 

[bfilm]

By the way, getting the colors "right" does not mean to match the Velvia film colors. I never compare the scan result to it. I just adjust until the colors look right to my taste. I don't have to match some dead Japanese engineer who developed the colors decades ago. That was his taste.

You can, of course, do what you want with scans. But it seems an odd approach to me. The distinctive colors and overall look is largely the reason for choosing any particular slide film and what has made different ones famous over the years. Accurately recording and maintaining those distinctive colors is the entire reason for making custom scanner profiles with transparency targets. It has generally been the approach with slide film to stay true to what the film has recorded.

 

[bfilm]

And before digital color management, it was a real art form to adjust scans for accurate color. As can be seen here on the control panel in these pictures of the circa 1970s one-ton all-analog Dr.-Ing. Rudolf Hell Chromagraph DC 300 drum scanner that scanned directly to color separations. The operator could not even see the color correction adjustments they were making before printing, so it had to be done all from experience and skill.

 

[BrianShaw]

Whether they say "sub-brand" or "re-brand", the point is that they say it is an existing film, just with different branding. Right?

@gbroadbridge made a good point that changes in branding / trade name are common in other industries.

Right!

 

[BrianShaw]

My new GE Profile washer does not work as well as their last one, especially in the spin cycle. You have to keep readjusting the balance. Made in China? Wherever it's not as good.

If it’s the top load version, check the suspension system of the basket/drum. They sometimes fail and many times can be resurrected by greasing the bottom cups with a good silicone grease. It seems to me that sometimes the factory does an inadequate job of the basics on occasion.

And don’t be so quick to besmirch Chinese manufacturing…

 

[flavio81]

No disputing that technically there are differences, but realistically any normal viewer at normal viewing distance is unable to see any difference even in a 4 foot long print.

4 foot long print, they would be readily evident. As well as smaller sizes.

Not just that, the color rendering of the epson flatbeds is different, for example, to a drum scanner.

I could put examples, but we'll be straying way off topic.

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

You can, of course, do what you want with scans. But it seems an odd approach to me. The distinctive colors and overall look is largely the reason for choosing any particular slide film and what has made different ones famous over the years. Accurately recording and maintaining those distinctive colors is the entire reason for making custom scanner profiles with transparency targets. It has generally been the approach with slide film to stay true to what the film has recorded.

Setting the levels (black and white points) gives me 95% of film colors. I do some tweaking by adding contrast and sharpness to my taste. It matches Velvia 50pretty closely. I just don;t bother to see if they line up exactly with the film results. I can;t tell the difference unless I compare holding up the film so no one else could either and they don;t have the original film to compare too. Here are some of my scans for Velvia 50 with my own post scan edits. Could you tell if these don't match the original film results? I;m sure some match closely and some not. But I wouldn;t know which.

Flickr Search

www.flickr.com

 

[Alan Edward Klein]

If it’s the top load version, check the suspension system of the basket/drum. They sometimes fail and many times can be resurrected by greasing the bottom cups with a good silicone grease. It seems to me that sometimes the factory does an inadequate job of the basics on occasion.

And don’t be so quick to besmirch Chinese manufacturing…

China's getting better as Japan once did. However, the biggest problem is as companies offshore their production to China or any other cheap supplier, it becomes a race to the bottom. Every company is looking for lower costs to compete better so the materials and workmanship go down. I think Kodacolor 100 and 200 are an example how quality goes down to become more competitive.

 

[bfilm]

Setting the levels (black and white points) gives me 95% of film colors. I do some tweaking by adding contrast and sharpness to my taste. It matches Velvia 50pretty closely. I just don;t bother to see if they line up exactly with the film results. I can;t tell the difference unless I compare holding up the film so no one else could either and they don;t have the original film to compare too. Here are some of my scans for Velvia 50 with my own post scan edits. Could you tell if these don't match the original film results? I;m sure some match closely and some not. But I wouldn;t know which.

Okay, I understand. Your earlier statement had made it sound to me like you perhaps just made it totally different from the film, and that is what had seemed a bit odd.

 

[brbo]

I kind of feel that they're manufacturing a controversy, and a viewer could get the impression that Kodak is being deceptive, when in reality they said in plain English that these are existing films.

English is not my first language, so I might've missed where EK said in plain English which existing film is Kodacolor 100 and which is Kodacolor 200... Can you tell us so we and the YT folks can stop guessing?

We all know Kodocolor 100/200 are not new films. It would be beyond crazy for EK to come up with new films as shitty as that.

 

[BrianShaw]

China's getting better as Japan once did. However, the biggest problem is as companies offshore their production to China or any other cheap supplier, it becomes a race to the bottom. Every company is looking for lower costs to compete better so the materials and workmanship go down. I think Kodacolor 100 and 200 are an example how quality goes down to become more competitive.

The greater point, perhaps, is that ALL products wherever made have been in a "race to the bottom" for decades. Cost control and maintaining market shre has been a major problem for a long time. Kodacolor 100 and 200 quality hasn't changed... they are what the are: an existing product that is at whatever level they always were at. If anything, the quality associated with the name "Kodacolor" may be different now than it was in the olden days but comparing then to now could be a fool's errand.