Kodak ‘Investigating What it Would Take’ to Bring Back Kodachrome

[jnamia]

So you agree with me.

Kodak puts out Kodachrome 2k or some nonsense and it'll sell like hotcakes. A few greybeards will have aneurisms and everyone else will happily shoot Kodacrome2k and move on.

I agree with you 100%. but you know, there's tri x and then there's tri x .. I hope they alert the ICU when they do the release so they can stock up on iron lungs and O3 tents, it's gonna be crazy times! my butler was good at deciphering my blinks, but I also had a twitch that made it tough .. "2 twitches and a blink" meant "your other left" ..

 

[flavio81]

Thing is, Provia is a better film overall than Kodachrome ever was (even archivability is probably up there).
In fact, it's probably the best colour film ever made.
And it's available right now.
Go shoot it, instead of yearning for something that would probably become old hat to you after a few tries.

This. Shoot it before Fuji"film" kills it or gives us rebadged Ektachrome!!

Well said, Green Tentacle. I agree 100%. I only wish Astia 100F was available too.

 

[flavio81]

is tmax400 better than tri x (400/320)?

Yes!!! This is wonderful film and too hard to buy in my city so I need to content myself with Delta 400. But i do have some TMY on the freezer for special occasions.

 

[Cholentpot]

I agree with you 100%. but you know, there's tri x and then there's tri x .. I hope they alert the ICU when they do the release so they can stock up on iron lungs and O3 tents, it's gonna be crazy times! my butler was good at deciphering my blinks, but I also had a twitch that made it tough .. "2 twitches and a blink" meant "your other left" ..

I've shot both Tri-X's and have loads of the Soviet emulsions from FSU countries. Tmax 400 is nicer. I know this is sacrilege here but that's my opinion. I did not grow up in the heyday of film, Tri-X before I knew anything was just another kind of film. Shot side by side with Tmax I preferred the Tmax off the bat. I wouldn't say no to Tri-X but I'd chose Tmax over it.

 

[MattKing]

Kodacrome2k

Kodachrome2K is so twenty years ago!

 

[Cholentpot]

Kodachrome2K is so twenty years ago!

Sounds like where Kodak is. Maybe iKodakhrome2.0

 

[jnamia]

I've shot both Tri-X's and have loads of the Soviet emulsions from FSU countries. Tmax 400 is nicer. I know this is sacrilege here but that's my opinion. I did not grow up in the heyday of film, Tri-X before I knew anything was just another kind of film. Shot side by side with Tmax I preferred the Tmax off the bat. I wouldn't say no to Tri-X but I'd chose Tmax over it.

sounds good. not sure what you mean by both tri x's there's been like 30 of them just in the past 50 years ... they keep "fixing" it to look tmaxy-digital. LOL
whatever ... none of it is that important in the grand scheme of things. LOL. im glad you enjoy what you enjoy that's what's its all about ..

Sounds like where Kodak is. Maybe iKodakhrome2.0

I don't think kodak exists anymore
that's why I mentioned Sino promise and "™"

 

[Cholentpot]

sounds good. not sure what you mean by both tri x's there's been like 30 of them just in the past 50 years ... they keep "fixing" it to look tmaxy-digital. LOL
whatever ... none of it is that important in the grand scheme of things. LOL. im glad you enjoy what you enjoy that's what's its all about ..

Pre pour-pre-wash-out-and-you-get-purple and the purple stuff.

 

[Sirius Glass]

It's not that nobody cares about Kodachrome.....but some of us who do care also acknowledge that it's not coming back due to insurmountable obstacles including the K14 process. Those obstacles will remain insurmountable unless some huge lottery winner decides to be altruistic and lose their entire fortune on it, or the film market increases in size 100-fold.

You are correct. No one cares about Kodachrome but a few old cranks. No one shoots slides any more, see the shutdown of DR5; people shoot digital instead of slides.

 

[pentaxuser]

It's about what feels good and the nostalgia. Tmax-400 is a-ways better than Tri-X but people will die on that hill and claim Tri-X is the greatest ever. Even though it's not the same Tri-X as it was.

Tri-X is evocative, it's an emotional attachment. Brings back memories of the greats who used it.

Sounds like there's an analogy here with the Alamo. The last man to die in the 1960 film was Jim Bowie if I remember correctly. Anyone here like that? Answers on a post card, please

pentaxuser

 

[Minolta93]

what a waste of research time and money. Kodachrome™ look can be achieved easily with any color film with a heavy cyan cast no one really cares about Kodachrome film. maybe Sinopromise or LOMO can make a cheap Chinese knockoff that says Kodachrome™ .. it will look and act like same thing except it will be better because it won't cost 300dollars a roll to process.

You know, I wouldn't mind a Lomochrome slide film...

 

[Cholentpot]

Sounds like there's an analogy here with the Alamo. The last man to die in the 1960 film was Jim Bowie if I remember correctly. Anyone here like that? Answers on a post card, please

pentaxuser

I remember Davy Crockett banging away with a musket and the movie fading out. One of the first films I ever saw mind you.

 

[jnamia]

You know, I wouldn't mind a Lomochrome slide film...

exactly !

 

[Sirius Glass]

I remember Davy Crockett banging away with a musket and the movie fading out. One of the first films I ever saw mind you.

The movie ignores that the whole reason that Mexico attacked is the Davy Crockett, Jim Bowie et al where in Texas to bring slavery into Texas. Mexico had no problems with Americans settling in Texas as long as they did not have or bring slaves. This movie like other Disney movie white washed the facts to make the movies palatable to the general public.

 

[Helge]

Silly rabbit.

It's not about what's better. It hasn't been for decades when it comes to film. It's about what feels good and the nostalgia. Tmax-400 is a-ways better than Tri-X but people will die on that hill and claim Tri-X is the greatest ever. Even though it's not the same Tri-X as it was.

Tri-X is evocative, it's an emotional attachment. Brings back memories of the greats who used it.

Provia is better in most ways that matter, than any digital sensor.
Resolution, colour discernment, lack of quantisation errors.

Long exposures is a matter of just letting it rip. No noise or heat problems.

Even dynamic range is good. It rolls off more gently than a sensor taken to the limit.

 

[Sal Santamaura]

...not sure what you mean by both tri x's...

Rolls (135 and 120) of TX400 vs sheets of 320TXP. Two extremely different films:

https://imaging.kodakalaris.com/sites/default/files/files/products/f4017_trix_320400_1.pdf

Their characteristic curves are very unlike each other.

 

[Down Under]

My (usual cynical) thoughts on all this.

Kodachrome is now ancient history. It was also, before Kodak pulled the plug on it, an entirely different film from the K-25 and K-64 I recall from the 1970s. The glorious Technicolor-like hues of the past had been quite muted in the last avatar, or maybe "mutation". 120 Kodachrome was, for me anyway, a complete disaster. None of my publishers would use it, the plate makers all said it was too iffy to scan with the equipment of that era.

Kodak made its decision many years ago and out it went, along with many other films we now all fondly recall (I won't go into my quest to get them to bring back Panatomic-X).

Poster #4 has a Nikon D800 but wants to race back to Kodachrome. I have a D800 too, in fact I have two, they are such great image-making machines. However, unlike him, I won't be jogging off to buy K-whatever, not at the price they would surely ask for it. And send it back to Rochester for processing?? Not in ten lifetimes. Kodak did that with K-120 in the '80s and it bombed, massively. I was told by one of their reps in Australia that it went to Japan for processing. Two of my 'shoots' got lost and eventually turned up, many months later. By then my client had insisted I reshoot the assignment (an architectural one), which I did. With Fujichrome Velvia.

Let us not forget that eventually we all have to learn this - life in the real world isn't what we want it to be, but as it is.

 

[Cholentpot]

The movie ignores that the whole reason that Mexico attacked is the Davy Crockett, Jim Bowie et al where in Texas to bring slavery into Texas. Mexico had no problems with Americans settling in Texas as long as they did not have or bring slaves. This movie like other Disney movie white washed the facts to make the movies palatable to the general public.

Sir, this is a Wendy's

 

[DonW]

My (usual cynical) thoughts on all this.

Kodachrome is now ancient history. It was also, before Kodak pulled the plug on it, an entirely different film from the K-25 and K-64 I recall from the 1970s. The glorious Technicolor-like hues of the past had been quite muted in the last avatar, or maybe "mutation". 120 Kodachrome was, for me anyway, a complete disaster. None of my publishers would use it, the plate makers all said it was too iffy to scan with the equipment of that era.

Kodak made its decision many years ago and out it went, along with many other films we now all fondly recall (I won't go into my quest to get them to bring back Panatomic-X).

Poster #4 has a Nikon D800 but wants to race back to Kodachrome. I have a D800 too, in fact I have two, they are such great image-making machines. However, unlike him, I won't be jogging off to buy K-whatever, not at the price they would surely ask for it. And send it back to Rochester for processing?? Not in ten lifetimes. Kodak did that with K-120 in the '80s and it bombed, massively. I was told by one of their reps in Australia that it went to Japan for processing. Two of my 'shoots' got lost and eventually turned up, many months later. By then my client had insisted I reshoot the assignment (an architectural one), which I did. With Fujichrome Velvia.

Let us not forget that eventually we all have to learn this - life in the real world isn't what we want it to be, but as it is.

People who made their living from photography, and I mean their LIVING not weekend warriors, had no use for the last iteration of Kodachrome. My D800e does me just fine thank you very much. I'm retired now but since digital matured no commercial client wanted anything to do with analog films. I enjoy analog now because my livelihood doesn't depend on client commissions. When analog was the only game in town there was nothing to compare it to. Kodachrome for magazines and advertising and negative for everything else. Those days are gone. The economies of scale would never work for a reintroduction of Kodachrome.

There is only one film I would like to be brought back. Agfa APX 100. The real stuff not this want-to-be crap they are passing off as APX. Currently available negative films are great, but I do miss APX100.

I just wish I had my D800e back in the 70's!!

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Investigate what it would take to make HIE-2, instead. At least an IR film where just a yellow filter will give you the Wood Effect.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Investigate what it would take to make HIE-2, instead. At least an IR film where just a yellow filter will give you the Wood Effect.

HIE and Ektachrome IR were considered National Asset by the US Defense Department so for decades the department paid Kodak to keep the production lines open and running. That of course included the supply line up and running. When money because tight and the department was convinced the digital electro-optical infrared sensors were superior for all of the department's need the financial support of the two films was discontinues. The short version is that those two films will not be coming back. We will never see IR films with those capabilities again.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

HIE and Ektachrome IR were considered National Asset by the US Defense Department so for decades the department paid Kodak to keep the production lines open and running. That of course included the supply line up and running. When money because tight and the department was convinced the digital electro-optical infrared sensors were superior for all of the department's need the financial support of the two films was discontinues. The short version is that those two films will not be coming back. We will never see IR films with those capabilities again.

It still has more of a chance of coming back than that Kodachrome stuff... In the words of Styx, Never, Never. Never say never... (except when you're talking about Kodachrome )

 

[Agulliver]

The issues with Kodachrome are many and complex. HIE basically comes down to money.....in that the process of developing it isn't wholly unlike anything else on earth. It's *highly* unlikely for the reasons Sirius stated. Like a lot of films which theoretically could be brought back, it would need the film market to have a "sea change" again. While I am delighted to see film sales continue to climb, we're still talking a need for orders of magnitude more before things like bringing back HIE are even considered.

The analogy might be vinyl records. From the nadir in the early to mid 90s where the very existence of the industry was in doubt to a huge success story where heavy machinery once out of production for decades is now being manufactured again (record presses) and the products are again seen in supermarkets. But for that to happen with film will take a decade or more of sustained growth in the film market, doubling year on year for 15 years. So....instead of whining, go out there and buy film. And maybe we'll get Plus-X back in a decade.

 

[jnamia]

Rolls (135 and 120) of TX400 vs sheets of 320TXP. Two extremely different films:

https://imaging.kodakalaris.com/sites/default/files/files/products/f4017_trix_320400_1.pdf

Their characteristic curves are very unlike each other.

I know and I can't figure out which is which even though I have shot rolls and sheets of both. all I know from shooting something in that family is one is smoothed out and fine tuned and kind of like t max and it 's too bad, but I guess it's what the public wants .. in the end it isn't about pleasing 200 people who might want one thing, it's what the 200,ooo,000 people will keep buying and buying and buying

 

[pentaxuser]

The movie ignores that the whole reason that Mexico attacked is the Davy Crockett, Jim Bowie et al where in Texas to bring slavery into Texas. Mexico had no problems with Americans settling in Texas as long as they did not have or bring slaves. This movie like other Disney movie white washed the facts to make the movies palatable to the general public.

Yes there is always historical reality to be faced unfortunately. So what's next Sirius, some hard facts about Kodak to keep us grounded ?

pentaxuser