Kodak Price Rises?

bdial · Jun 27, 2008

So, theoretically, they have the technology to produce a Kodachrome with the grain characteristics of the new TMax 400?
That would be incredibly cool.

Most of the little boxes in my fridge are yellow.

Photo Engineer · Jun 27, 2008

Kodachrome 400 with T-grains was awesome, but was rejected by the public during trade trials in the mid to late 80s. The public reaction was "ho-hum" and was reported as such in mags such as Popular Photography and etc.

PE

AutumnJazz · Jun 27, 2008

Photo Engineer said:
Kodachrome 400 with T-grains was awesome, but was rejected by the public during trade trials in the mid to late 80s. The public reaction was "ho-hum" and was reported as such in mags such as Popular Photography and etc.

PE

What sucks is that even if you had some engineering samples in a freezer somewhere, you couldn't get it developed, could you?

Photo Engineer · Jun 27, 2008

It went through the regular Kodachrome process.

I never mentioned having or not having samples.

PE

Ian Grant · Jun 27, 2008

Photo Engineer said:
Kodachrome 400 with T-grains was awesome, but was rejected by the public during trade trials in the mid to late 80s. The public reaction was "ho-hum" and was reported as such in mags such as Popular Photography and etc.
PE

By the mid to late 80's Kodachrome had lost it's magic, the Fuji E6 films were outstanding and had none of the disadvantages of Kodachrome, & the painfully slow turnaround on processing. OK Kodachrome could be processed at many places in the US, some may have been fast but in the rest of the world it was far too slow.

In comparison I would shoot E6 and have the results in a couple of hours at a trade lab, that's including the travel there and back, much faster when I did my own which I always did when push processing. Kodachrome II and 25 were always outstandingly films, but the 64 & 200 were not and so after testing them I preferred to stick to the E4 and then E6 Fuji 100 & 400, and later also the improved E6 Ektachromes.

Commercially I need fast processing and Kodachrome just wasn't practical, virtually every other photographer I knew felt the same. So a 400 ASA Kodachrome was of absolutely no interest.

My clients wanted to see the images by the next day at the latest, not a week later.

Ian

bdial · Jun 27, 2008

I was thinking more in terms of what it could be like with the current tmax-2 technology. In that mid-80's timeframe I was much more interested in the 25 speed Kodachrome, and for most things would be now too, if either existed.
When I was in the Air Force in the early 70's, our Kodachrome went to a local lab, and came back the next day, or perhaps 2 days. No real penalty compared to getting Ektachrome done in the A.F. lab which was also a 1 - 2 day turnaround.

Photo Engineer · Jun 27, 2008

Getting classified film processed in your own lab in the military was very important.

Ian;

Fuji E6 products in the 1989 - 1992 approximate time frame were pretty bad. This had been reported in several magazines of the time. In fact, Fuji recalled the product and ceased production for a few months to rectify the problem(s). They got a bad rep with the first products. Then their ads didn't help. It was two staring eyes with the title underneath "From the people who brought you Pearl Harbor". That was objectionable here in the US and led to a big flop on Fuji's part. They rapidly changed the ad to be the same eyes and the words "These eyes can see color than no one else can, they are the eyse of a Fuji engineer" or something close to that.

PE

Christiaan Phleger · Jun 28, 2008

Ha1 I remember that ad! Both versions! I started to shoot a bit of Fujichrome 100 in about 87-88, and it was quite good, I remember hearing from the 'pro's' that you needed to process it at a lab that was running Fuji's E-6 process for best results, which I used in San Diego at the time. But I do recall there being quite a bit of difference with a good and bad processed batch of Fujichrome. Most of the Pro's I assisted at the time shot EPR and EPN, and 'dabbled' in Fujichrome for that 'Wild' 80's look.

During the 1991-94 redesign of Surfer magazine, it was pretty much a directive from the photo department to shoot Fuji Velvia at 100, then push one or 1 1/3 stop. They ran really washed out whites with dense blacks, and popped out colors. Just like it looked on the light table...

So, PE, do you still have a sample of the 400 speed K around? Hmmm?

Removed Account · Jun 28, 2008

Photo Engineer said:
Then their ads didn't help. It was two staring eyes with the title underneath "From the people who brought you Pearl Harbor".

I hope they got a refund from their advertising copywriter! Maybe he was paid under the table by Kodak to come up with that Duesy...

Martin Aislabie · Jun 28, 2008

Going back to the original thread......
I don't understand the attitude of a section of photographers, they seem to want to pay peanuts for their film and chemicals and then moan vociferously when the products get pulled because they don't make money for Kodak (or Ilford/Fuji/.....)
We film lovers are all in the same shrinking market and sooner or later we learn that we are going to have to pay premium prices for the privilege.
Photography is an expensive hobby and it is only going to get more so in the future
I for one would rather be paying profitable prices for Cameras, Lenses, Film, Chemicals & stuff and have a thriving vibrant selection of products at my disposal than write about how much I miss products X & Y
Martin

Photo Engineer · Jun 28, 2008

Martin;

Kodak does the R&D and charges for it. Everyone else in the color field gets a rather free ride. It isn't fair, but who on APUG cares.

PE

Kodak Price Rises?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency