Kodak no longer selling E100D directly to customers?

[GarageBoy]

As per this reddit thread



Seems like you have to be associated with a production before they'll sell you 400' rolls of E100D... bummer

 

[koraks]

What gives; most of us mere mortals got it from distributors anyway; not directly from Kodak. I don't see how this is going to make any difference except for the handful who somehow directly bought their film from Kodak. Who were they, anyway? I imagine you must go through a lot of 400ft cans for Kodak to be willing to sell to you directly in the first place.

Once it's in the distributor's hands, it's up to them to decide where it goes to downstream in the supply chain. And I don't expect them to give one hoot about what arrangements there are between Eastman Kodak and Alaris - as long as the customer pays.

 

[Michael Howard]

I find this a bit depressing, given the virtual monopoly Kodak has on slide film. I was just about to order a 400' roll, which would be about a 4 year supply for me. I will not pay >$20/roll for slide film, so I won't be shooting it, unless I get it from Flic Film or the Atlanta company selling spooled rolls of it. My fear is, THEY won't be able to get it anymore, either.


Kodak could make up for this action by selling their own 100' spools of it via Alaris for, say, $200 a roll. I can afford that. I won't hold my breath.


Edit: I think I will call the number to order tomorrow and see if I can get it. We shouldn't assume a Reddit post is the absolute truth.

 

[mshchem]

I bought a 400' roll. Most of it is in my fridge. If this does come to pass it's probably to passify it's big customers. Also Kodak doesn't want any Tom, Dick or Harry packaging "Real Ektachrome" for sale. Control of distribution, age, storage conditions etc.

 

[MattKing]

Most likely Eastman Kodak - which is not in any way resourced or set up to deal with large numbers of small retail orders - decided that they will just feed the distribution chain for small volume motion picture customers.
E.g. direct sellers like B&H.
This is the B&H listing for 16mm:

 

[pbromaghin]

400' 35mm is currently $645 at B&H. Pretty darned cheap per roll for someone who can handle 400 ft.

 

[Michael Howard]

That is a decent price, but it was cheaper from Kodak directly. IF Kodak's statement on the Reddit thread that it is intended only for direct to movie productions, then will B&H, Flic, or Atlanta be able to keep it in their lineups? That, to me, is the question. I suspect yes for B&H, and unknown for Flic and Atlanta, who repack the film into canisters.

 

[Disconnekt]

Not suprising, especially since back in March Reflx Lab had posted that they had to fill out a "production form" in order to buy bulk film from them

 

[koraks]

will B&H, Flic, or Atlanta be able to keep it in their lineups? That, to me, is the question.

Ask yourself this question: would it be of any interest whatsoever to make it impossible for indie producers and private individuals to shoot Kodak movie stock in their old Bolexes etc? Tha answer is obvious: of course not. So logically they'll not shut down the distribution channel. They just appease Alaris and get rid of some tiny nuisance customers in one smooth movement by creating a hurdle for small-scale direct sales.

All this means that you'll be able to shoot your Kodak cine film in a still camera in the future just fine, but you may have to get it through a select set of distributors. Which has been the case here in Europe for a long time anyway, so it looks like at this side of the globe, nothing much is going to change at all.

 

[BHuij]

Is the Ektachrome 100D sold as a motion picture film (400' rolls) exactly the same emulsion as the Ektachrome 100 available as 36-exposure rolls? Just different edge markings, I assume?

There are a few people buying it in enough volume that I imagine they'd still be able to get it. I've seen 100D rebadged as Atlanta Film Co Euphoric 100, Flic Film Chrome 100, KinoChrome, and probably another few I'm not remembering right now.

 

[koraks]

Atlanta Film Co Euphoric 100, Flic Film Chrome 100, KinoChrome, and probably another few

Reflx Lab

These are in all likelihood the kind of parties EK is trying to put the thumb screws on, as they're likely to put a real dent into regular Ektachrome and C41 film sales. I don't believe for a minute they care all that much about the few Joe Averages who jump through the necessary hoops to respool a 400ft roll into 72 cassettes every other year for their own use. As long as they can divert a reasonable part of the clientele that now opts for "3rd party fancy schmancy brand name" respooled cine film back to their still film product lines, they probably have the arguments they need to convince Alaris they're not backstabbing their business partner.

 

[BHuij]

I don't shoot enough 35mm slide film to be too concerned about the 100D (although knowing that they're manufacturing thousands of feet of the stuff and still charging $20/roll for 36 exposures does kinda rub me the wrong way).

More concerned about whether the trend continues with Vision3. I'm in love with 250D, I like it better than any C-41 film, and I've considered doing a group buy on a 400' roll so I could stockpile some of it. But I guess as long as the FPP can still get it, I'm fine.

 

[koraks]

250D is lovely; I shoot it all the time.
Just get the 400ft roll and work out the details later. I bet you'll end up chucking it into the fridge and shooting it all by yourself. It tends to disappear a little faster if you've got a lot of it at hand.

 

[loccdor]

Guess the past year was a good time to buy those 60 rolls of expired Sensia after all. And here I thought I had an impulse control problem.

 

[MattKing]

These are in all likelihood the kind of parties EK is trying to put the thumb screws on, as they're likely to put a real dent into regular Ektachrome and C41 film sales. I don't believe for a minute they care all that much about the few Joe Averages who jump through the necessary hoops to respool a 400ft roll into 72 cassettes every other year for their own use. As long as they can divert a reasonable part of the clientele that now opts for "3rd party fancy schmancy brand name" respooled cine film back to their still film product lines, they probably have the arguments they need to convince Alaris they're not backstabbing their business partner.

I'm going to disagree with you here.
When the disruption caused by Covid forced Kodak Alaris and Eastman Kodak into revising the licensing agreement between them - and it did - one of the things that resulted was much more flexibility for Eastman Kodak with respect to making film available to other targets. This is what resulted in more access for Cinestill and others.
Eastman Kodak just isn't set up to deal with lots and lots of little orders. They are a B2B manufacturer.

 

[GarageBoy]

This also might be Kodak Alaris wanting their cut

 

[MattKing]

This also might be Kodak Alaris wanting their cut

They aren't entitled to a cut - that isn't the deal.

 

[Patrick Robert James]

I wonder if this extends to their other films like 5222?

 

[SMD]

to respool a 400ft roll into 72 cassettes

Is it so thin that 72 full frames (not cimematographic full frames) will fit in a 36 cassette?

 

[MattKing]

Is it so thin that 72 full frames (not cimematographic full frames) will fit in a 36 cassette?

No.
400 feet is long enough to make up 72 rolls of 135-36, at the usual rate of 18 rolls per 100 feet.

 

[mshchem]

I am happy to still film from Kodak Alaris. I think in over 50 years I have (actually) finished a bulk roll 2 or 3 times. I bought a 400' roll of E100 and Double X mostly out of curiosity and to go crazy with a long roll back for a Nikon F2.

I think the only conspiracy is Fujifilm

 

[koraks]

When the disruption caused by Covid forced Kodak Alaris and Eastman Kodak into revising the licensing agreement between them - and it did - one of the things that resulted was much more flexibility for Eastman Kodak with respect to making film available to other targets. This is what resulted in more access for Cinestill and others.

Does that automatically mean that Alaris is happy about the arrangement, and that they wouldn't exert pressure on EK to try and stop the bleeding? Also, EK's own interest is evidently there; I don't doubt that their still image products realize a higher EBITDA (for both EK and Alaris) per square meter than the cine film. The latter is by definition a bulk product, and the difference in retail price is too big to ignore. I really don't think this is just about getting rid of the small nuisance customers; it's just as much about shifting 'rogue' cine film buying back to still film product lines. Of course, Alaris' exact involvement in this will likely remain undisclosed.

 

[Bill Burk]

I think it’s going to have a chilling effect on the lively film community

 

[MattKing]

Does that automatically mean that Alaris is happy about the arrangement, and that they wouldn't exert pressure on EK to try and stop the bleeding? Also, EK's own interest is evidently there; I don't doubt that their still image products realize a higher EBITDA (for both EK and Alaris) per square meter than the cine film. The latter is by definition a bulk product, and the difference in retail price is too big to ignore. I really don't think this is just about getting rid of the small nuisance customers; it's just as much about shifting 'rogue' cine film buying back to still film product lines. Of course, Alaris' exact involvement in this will likely remain undisclosed.

We will be able to tell if and when we start seeing how the availability and pricing shakes out through the other outlets that currently sell Eastman motion picture film.
I doubt that Ektachrome is front of mind with Kodak Alaris.

 

[Lachlan Young]

I'm going to disagree with you here.
When the disruption caused by Covid forced Kodak Alaris and Eastman Kodak into revising the licensing agreement between them - and it did - one of the things that resulted was much more flexibility for Eastman Kodak with respect to making film available to other targets. This is what resulted in more access for Cinestill and others.
Eastman Kodak just isn't set up to deal with lots and lots of little orders. They are a B2B manufacturer.

And if people screw up with products being used off-label, then demanding hand-holding from the manufacturer who wasn't recommending using the products in that way in the first place, there will come a point at which taking measures to force people to use the correct product makes sense.