Kodak Gold vs Colorplus

Berri said:

I think this is the last word on this (old) thread.
I couldn't possibly immagine that the ColorPlus I just bought (expiry date 2020) was actually produced many years ago...this would be cheating.

Click to expand...

If you are freezing a masteroll from New production (produced 02/2019 for example) AND you will store it under controlled condition (like manufacturers handle proffesional) there will come no expiration date onto the masterroll. You will have a production number, a date of production, an emulsion number a.s.o.


If your computer aided storage system will inform you that a production bottleneck need a reserve from stored freezed films you begin to assemble from freezed masterolls. (after defreezing under perfect controled conditions - masterolls are realy expensive).

THEN you have the need to locate an expiration date. It is the same date as you will have from fresh masterolls produced last week.

Of course you can't freeze assembled films with given expiration date on package and correct the date with New package years ago!

Today there is the opposite situation of bottleneck in production! A real bottleneck on demand.

An example : production scale of Gold 100/200/400 in the year 2000 = in the near of 1 billion 136-36 equivalents. It isn't important to calculate the exact scale (784 millions,980 millions, or "just" 697 millions) the point is to look theese dimentions.
Produced in 2000 in several facilities in different regions.(Kodak wasn't able to produced all Gold films in Rochester within 12 month).
Some special films I mentioned above reached "just" some single percent of Kodak complete E6 Portfolio (around 14 films in varying formats).
AND ....not to forget E6 reached just 7-8,5 % of the full film market (including bw films) in EUROPE)
EUROPE was the best market for E6 generally (in other regions E6 can't reach that percentage of sellings in relation to all films.)
But if we devide "just" 800.000.000 films (from the Gold family) with 5,9% (E6 market share)
we come to a scale of "around" (sorry my calculator is offline) 45 million Kodak E6 in 2000.

If we imagine that 45 million films produced and sold within 12 month we may think (from todays
perspective) "This is a good scale"!!!!!!

But we should not forget that this scale was in 2000 to the niche of slide films from Kodak in
TOTAL.!
What about the very special E6 Kodak films ? With a percentage of max. 3%???

They have been produced in a scale around 1,3 million (3% of 45 million). And this 2000th smal scale production was very expensive.

Today the procedure is the same with Kodak Gold....!

It is compensated from todays pricing.

PE is correct if we regard Kodak Ektachrome. (The 100% film for sure wich can't be assembled from masterolls out of the past (out of unsaled high scale production).
This film is backed and be shipped and sold..
I agree with PE if we regard KodakPortra films (have a look at todays pricing of Portra)
With Ektar 100 I have some doubts. Kodak had obviously problems to assemble 120 Ektars.
Wich indicates that no film for assembling 120 was avaible (beside the mystique backing paper problem).
But who cares about : A time to time backing of Ektar film is realistic (this film is relative new and never saw highest scale production).
ALL bw films do not have any problem in low scale production.!

But with Colorplus PE made a little mistake (never mind about - who is perfect?).

There isn't a paralel production of Gold AND Colorplus today (but continious assembling).

AND (from interest to friends of Colorplus) : Kodak will NOT start a new production run with
Colorplus (otherwise Colorplus is at the nearly same pricing with Ektar100!)....

The possible scenario wich remains "Could" be that Kodak will sell Gold200 in Colorplus canisters
(what they did in the past from my point....2009/2010 I can't remember exact).

But this would pressupose that Kodak is sitting in big amounds of Gold films and "have" to sell it
to every price!!! - I don't think so.

with regards

PS : What is the reason to have a look in a special forum? To find "further" information - right?
Sometimes this "information" have no official character - perhaps some will agree!

But (to a little part of you friends) - if you just (and sometimes only) need original announcements
of manufacturers there isn't a need for Forums any more.

Because everybody is able to contact his dealer and order latest manufacturers sale brochures.

Some people belive everything what they find there....

I personaly make own thougths and contact alternate sources....

I'm glad you know so much of what goes on behind closed doors at KP. Even though I live only 5 miles away, I seem to know less than you do.

PE

Photo Engineer said:

It is very easy to produce 2 short run films and has been done often in the past. Ektachrome 200 and 100 were once the same film. We made 2x the amount of 200 and overcoated 1/2 of it with a 0.3 neutral density dye to reduce the speed by 1 stop.

Kodakchrome was the most recent example of a short runner that was coated once a year and stored. Current films are not stored for significant times.

PE

Click to expand...

You mentioned it PE (coated and stored) pls. compare the scales of Kodachrome from the past with all films today.

with greetings

PS : After 2003 there wasn't any economic way remaining with Kodachrome64 so
(last solution ) Kodak increased pricing and that was the final death to Kodachrome.

Photo Engineer said:

I'm glad you know so much of what goes on behind closed doors at KP. Even though I live only 5 miles away, I seem to know less than you do.

PE

Click to expand...

My intention isn't to contradict you in any form PE !

May be we are both wrong ?

But I have more than strongest doubts on Colorplus manufacturing in small scale with nice pricing.

Otherwise you are right and I have no worry with "cinis me pelagus" - not to understand from
E.E but you will!

with greetings to you in small scale Rochester next door production


PS : May be Colorplus200 with expiration 2020 is from your own PE licence cellar factory
...then you should increase pricing step to step because it is a good film.

Anyone with any real experience in manufacturing any consumer product, particularly one sold internationally, will know that there are so many variations in production costs, economic scales of manufacture, overheads, distribution costs, local taxes and a dozen other variables, that the assumptions and speculations which "trendland" puts forward, make absolutely no sense in the real world of business.

railwayman3 said:

Anyone with any real experience in manufacturing any consumer product, particularly one sold internationally, will know that there are so many variations in production costs, economic scales of manufacture, overheads, distribution costs, local taxes and a dozen other variables, that the assumptions and speculations which "trendland" puts forward, make absolutely no sense in the real world of business.

Click to expand...

The only concern of "variables" in film production today is scale railwayman3 - also in the real world.
But let me explain : To change production in emulsion backing for a new run (for a further AND different film than produced before) Kodak made test runs to calibrate the production prozess.
With bw film it isn't such a great and expansive procedure.
But color film in any form (c41/E6) is (in highest quality like todays standart) an absolute high tech product.
The relation of test emulsion (wich is to be wasted) to the complete production scale is the
key of calculation per unit (per film)......(internal costs/unit) .....you can forget your taxes, your shipping, your packaging from costs if you are able to produce a 35mm film equivalent for a couple of cent and sell it for USD 1,89 .
A scale of hundred millions allowes to calculate 100 million USD for R&D, production calibration,
kilometers of test runned film as trash a.s.o into the price per film. Internal cost USD 1,- per film!
In cases of low earnings an increasement of 30cent from pricing per sold film solves all problems.
What about a scale of 220.000 films in the real world ?

with regards

PS : I realy can't remember in this moment to hear anything else than information from you like
"Trendland is telling nonsense"?? Perhaps I have to think about twice.But I can not remember a sort of reasoning.!
Would we start with this now (with a sort of reasoning -just a little- from you)?
Then would you explain to me in short how "overheads"," distribution costs" "local taxes" killed the whole film manufacturers within 5 years?
Perhaps I will change my mind and agree with you.
To the topic : Advantage of interims masterolls freezing (from calculation,costs,logistic):

Less costs in production per unit due to a scale 5 - 10 times higher in comparison to "just in time" production.
Minus costs of energy and storage = flexibility in small demand periods to smaller costs.

And today manufacturers are forced to grab the same trick box like they did in the good old days
with smalest demand films (KodakEPJ 1998......).

Otherwise they have to sell their test run film material to come to positive calculation (like Ferrania)

Photo Engineer said:

It is very easy to produce 2 short run films and has been done often in the past. Ektachrome 200 and 100 were once the same film. We made 2x the amount of 200 and overcoated 1/2 of it with a 0.3 neutral density dye to reduce the speed by 1 stop.

Kodakchrome was the most recent example of a short runner that was coated once a year and stored. Current films are not stored for significant times.

PE

Click to expand...

That's an interesting insight. But E200 being made into E100, what was the logic behind it? That's curious if it was back in the heydays and all production would sell quickly; Unless I may guess the coating schedule was tight for a single long run of E100. Did anyone notice? i.e. assuming E200 is slightly grainier.
Good to hear B38 is running well and there's turn around of the stocks. New Ektachrome being made in 120 & Sheet is good news, but the latter I guess would be small production runs. Together with that, there seem to be plans for TMZ in 120, a product that was never released!

Photo Engineer said:

It is very easy to produce 2 short run films and has been done often in the past. Ektachrome 200 and 100 were once the same film. We made 2x the amount of 200 and overcoated 1/2 of it with a 0.3 neutral density dye to reduce the speed by 1 stop.

PE

Click to expand...

So there was no benefit to using Ektachrome 100 over 200 unless you wanted a slower shutter speed or wider aperture?

This was many years ago.

But, you gained considerable sharpness and some people reported a different color rendition. I could measure the former, but I did not believe the latter.

PE

So the nd layer made for more sharpness? How did that work? Will similar happen if I use an nd camera filter with faster film?

John, the ND was coated in the film itself. This prevents internal reflections and thus improves sharpness.

PE

Photo Engineer said:

This was many years ago.

But, you gained considerable sharpness and some people reported a different color rendition. I could measure the former, but I did not believe the latter.

PE

Click to expand...

To press the stop switch of a 24/7 run from coating machines was for sure one oft the most expensive operational steps in film manufacturing.

with greetings

PS : I never used slide film faster than ISO 100. But years ago Kodak stated that Ektachrome 100 was derived (came from) E200.
To the smaler grain of E100 in comparison to E200 : The difference wasn't obviously not "very much".
I can't say exactly caused from lack of experience but what I heard was an advantage in smaler grain compared with an advantage from pull developement. (without disadvantage from contrast,)

John51 said:

So the nd layer made for more sharpness? How did that work? Will similar happen if I use an nd camera filter with faster film?

Click to expand...

Thats a good idea in general John51 : to me just 2 camera filters make "real sense" first is pol filter
the second is ND (to handle the contrast) [neutral density].
But to come to real sharp pictures with high resolution ND (on the lens) isn't a great deal.

Like monstercars from the engine ( more displacement more power ) it is simular with film :
More format is the best way for more resolution.
If you can't operate this : less speed give (in general) more resolution (smaler grain).
And not to forget the aperature of each lens has a "sweet spot" pls. google. Often beteeen 5,6 - 8.
with regards

"Trendland" is the same entity who was convinced that Foma RetroPan 320 was somehow old stock of Fomapan 800 repurposed. There is a further track record of "Trendland" not trusting film manufacturers and questioning the provenance of various film products.

If PE says it...then so it is. I'm sure PE is not infallible but his knowledge of the industry past and present is far better than anyone else posting here.

Agulliver said:

"Trendland" is the same entity who was convinced that Foma RetroPan 320 was somehow old stock of Fomapan 800 repurposed. There is a further track record of "Trendland" not trusting film manufacturers and questioning the provenance of various film products.

If PE says it...then so it is. I'm sure PE is not infallible but his knowledge of the industry past and present is far better than anyone else posting here.

Click to expand...

That's right Agulliver, RetroPan 320 is a reformulated oldschool film of Foma : (FomaT800/Paterson Acupan800 in GB)

with greetings

PS : Sure PE is allways right - no question about (it would be silly ) but we all are humans and humans can fail - and that is a good think.
AS I mentioned : Perhaps we are both wrong ( and Colorplus comes from licenced China manufacturing ).
To me it is quite clear it can't come from2015/2016/ 2017/2018 production by Kodak but perhaps from a much to big scaled 2010 manufacturing. What would make real sense.!

Photo Engineer said:

John, the ND was coated in the film itself. This prevents internal reflections and thus improves sharpness.

PE

Click to expand...

Similar to having multi coating on a lens then.

John51 said:

Similar to having multi coating on a lens then.

Click to expand...

Simular to a RAM jet layer

with regards

John, similar only; Trendland, NO - not REM Jet layer.

PE

Although it might seem non-sensical, Kodak does have a huge B38 with capacity to spare that can produce both Kodak Gold and VR200/Colorplus. Very plausibly they're also toll coating runs of VR100, 400 & 800 for Lomography (ie. "made in USA" in the packaging) and read that one of the B&W seemed like TMax. The 100 CN films have multiple lines, because aside of Ektar they're making Proimage 100, which went from a regional product to being distributed in US and EU.

Still making my mind around a E200 in E100, very curious and interesting the ND layer improved characteristics. In a way even marketable as a "sharper" E100, though it may have been grainier.

Photo Engineer said:

John, similar only; Trendland, NO - not REM Jet layer.

PE

Click to expand...

OK I see - more in concern of antihalation was my idea.
with greetings

trendland said:

What would make real sense.!

Click to expand...

No It wouldn't make sense.

trendland said:

The only concern of "variables" in film production today is scale railwayman3 - also in the real world.
But let me explain : To change production in emulsion backing for a new run (for a further AND different film than produced before) Kodak made test runs to calibrate the production prozess.
With bw film it isn't such a great and expansive procedure.
But color film in any form (c41/E6) is (in highest quality like todays standart) an absolute high tech product.
The relation of test emulsion (wich is to be wasted) to the complete production scale is the
key of calculation per unit (per film)......(internal costs/unit) .....you can forget your taxes, your shipping, your packaging from costs if you are able to produce a 35mm film equivalent for a couple of cent and sell it for USD 1,89 .
A scale of hundred millions allowes to calculate 100 million USD for R&D, production calibration,
kilometers of test runned film as trash a.s.o into the price per film. Internal cost USD 1,- per film!
In cases of low earnings an increasement of 30cent from pricing per sold film solves all problems.
What about a scale of 220.000 films in the real world ?

with regards

PS : I realy can't remember in this moment to hear anything else than information from you like
"Trendland is telling nonsense"?? Perhaps I have to think about twice.But I can not remember a sort of reasoning.!
Would we start with this now (with a sort of reasoning -just a little- from you)?
Then would you explain to me in short how "overheads"," distribution costs" "local taxes" killed the whole film manufacturers within 5 years?
Perhaps I will change my mind and agree with you.
To the topic : Advantage of interims masterolls freezing (from calculation,costs,logistic):

Less costs in production per unit due to a scale 5 - 10 times higher in comparison to "just in time" production.
Minus costs of energy and storage = flexibility in small demand periods to smaller costs.

And today manufacturers are forced to grab the same trick box like they did in the good old days
with smalest demand films (KodakEPJ 1998......).

Otherwise they have to sell their test run film material to come to positive calculation (like Ferrania)

Click to expand...

I wasn't intending to be rude, and regret if my comments came across too harshly. My only point is that it seems unproductive to apply too much speculation and reasoning to something
like Kodak's arrangements for film production, when none of us has any real knowledge or understanding of their internal operations. It would be the same for any kind of business or manufacture. But I would argue that the pricing of any product sold in international markets must be influenced by local overheads, sales taxes and distribution costs....hence different prices in different countries. Another example is quantity......exactly why my local Lidl or Aldi can undercut others on branded products, they buy vast quantities direct from the factories,
giving guaranteed large orders to the manufacturers, minimum distribution costs and quick turnover of stock back into cash, even if at a lower profit-per-unit. Same business model as when Poundland was selling 36 exp. Kodacolor and AgfaPhoto Vista for £1 per film.

None of us??? That is not exactly correct.

PE

Photo Engineer said:

None of us??? That is not exactly correct.

PE

Click to expand...

Clearly, a few have knowledge beyond that of mere film consumers.

I think he perhaps meant that nobody we know of is currently sitting in the boardroom hearing the inner whispering...

I know what he meant Brian. Can't a guy have a little fun sometimes?