Product Availability

tjaded · Jul 6, 2007

I just processed my first roll of EIR film today (well, yesterday now...I should go to bed!) and, of course, I see some interesting possibilities with the film. And, much like Paul Strand predicted in his quote below, EIR is going bye bye. Rather than go through my usual smacking of the forehead with palm of hand, I decided to try something different...I wrote Kodak and asked for a bunch of it. For free. I know it won't happen, but it made me feel a little bit better. My own little protest--if they don't value the product (I know, I know!) then it should be given away! This, like most everything else I do, is somewhat tongue-in-cheek. But I do know this--"Everytime I find a film or paper that I like, they discontinue it" is a truism, it's just that now, everytime it happens I am going to write a letter asking for some of that useless dead stock they have taking up space!
Adios,
Matt

Andy K · Jul 6, 2007

Good idea, what's the email address?

tjaded · Jul 6, 2007

Almost instant reply--short answer, they have nothing left to give. Here is what they said:

I am sorry to say that, although we anticipated enough stock to bring
us
through year end 2007, once the discontinuance of Kodak Professional
Ektachrome Infrared EIR Film was made, all existing stocks of the film
were purchased and we have none remaining.

Unfortunately, the demand for such esoteric films as Kodak Professional

Technical Pan and Kodak Professional Ektachrome Infrared EIR Films was
too low for us to be able to make it consistently to the high standards

we have for our film and therefore the decision to discontinue the film

was made.

kombizz · Jul 7, 2007

nice one

AgX · Jul 7, 2007

As the late Kodak EIR is cut to perf. 35mm film from Kodak 1443 or the resp. masterroll (obvious by looking at their datasheets), the statement from Kodak posted above either means that the production of type 1443 is also stopped and the latter is just sold out of storage, or that the statement concerning EIR and maintaining the quality of its production is nonsense…

tjaded · Jul 7, 2007

Assuming someone cut down 1443 to say, 4x5 sheets...could you use it in regular holders? Considering how touchy the 35mm is, I cannot imagine a regular 4x5 holder would work.

Nick Zentena · Jul 7, 2007

Agfa aerial put out a statement claiming they would provide film at least until 2009. I know people cut down B&W aerial film for use in film holders so I guess you could do it with the other films also.

OTOH I don't want to faint by asking how much a roll of 9.5" colour film is.

Nick Zentena · Jul 7, 2007

BTW used to be somebody on Ebay selling aerial B&W film. Is he gone?

Photo Engineer · Jul 7, 2007

These two products were made at such a low volume that the production equipment for emulsion making could no longer be used. This made 1000 liter batches of emulsion.

They had to fall back to the pilot lab scale or 100 liter batches. At that scale, variability would go up and would cause problems. As volume dropped they would then lower the scale to 10 liter batches at which point it would be nearly impossible to make a 'production' run. The HIE would spoil on the shelf if they made 1000 l batches and would vary too much at 100 l or 10 l.

Kodak may have even had to go to very slow speeds on the 21" wide machine due to low volume.

It is pretty hard to do with small runners. Kind of like asking Ford to make ten 1965 Mustang replicas every year just for special customers. Can you imagine how hard / expensive that would get?

PE

tjaded · Jul 7, 2007

Oh well. I got to try it, I can grab a few rolls here and there for a time...no huge loss for me. We get a fair amount in at the lab from a local photographer that does some absolutely amazing aerial shots. I hope he/she stocked up. It seems that a whole body of work could be forced to end if not...that is unfortunate.

Ken Nadvornick · Jul 8, 2007

Photo Engineer said:
Kind of like asking Ford to make ten 1965 Mustang replicas every year just for special customers. Can you imagine how hard / expensive that would get?

By far my favorite analogy yet...

The problem, it would seem, is that Ford is way too big - and in too much competitive financial trouble - for this to be worth their time.

However, my 16-year-old son tells me that there are currently so many small niche companies profitably supplying aftermarket Mustang parts to the Mustang niche market that one could assemble a brand new, perfectly workable 2007 (1965) Mustang from aftermarket catalog offerings alone.

The solution, it would seem, is simply staring everyone in the face...

Ken

ajuk · Jul 8, 2007

The thing with colour infrared film is there is no digital equivalent is there?

Petzi · Jul 8, 2007

Nick Zentena said:
Agfa aerial put out a statement claiming they would provide film at least until 2009. I know people cut down B&W aerial film for use in film holders so I guess you could do it with the other films also.

On a side note, aerial film is rather thin, it is not very suitable for a standard LF film holder. Aerial film magazines use a vacuum for flatness.

Photo Engineer · Jul 8, 2007

Ken Nadvornick said:
By far my favorite analogy yet...

The problem, it would seem, is that Ford is way too big - and in too much competitive financial trouble - for this to be worth their time.

However, my 16-year-old son tells me that there are currently so many small niche companies profitably supplying aftermarket Mustang parts to the Mustang niche market that one could assemble a brand new, perfectly workable 2007 (1965) Mustang from aftermarket catalog offerings alone.

The solution, it would seem, is simply staring everyone in the face...

Ken

Ken;

Yes, it might be if getting custom organic chemicals was as easy as getting aftermarket Mustang parts. But, you will find that the organic chemicals needed, the support, and a lot of other things are not only expensive, in many states they are now illegal to own or make. Read some of the posts about that.

I need a 3 necked flask to make these, and in two states at least, they are illegal as are glass beakers.

As for digital equivalents to EIR, no, there are none. Digital can 'see' IR but cannot capture it with the shifted sensitivities (false color) that EIR could do.

PE

Nick Zentena · Jul 8, 2007

Petzi said:
On a side note, aerial film is rather thin, it is not very suitable for a standard LF film holder. Aerial film magazines use a vacuum for flatness.

OTOH at least some of the users here have done it. So it seems to work.

Petzi · Jul 8, 2007

Yeah but you have an issue with sag. 4x5" is probably going to work better than 8x10" for example.

tjaded · Jul 8, 2007

Something funny/cool just happened...I just decided I would check out eBay to see if there was any EIR on there and ended up being an auction that I won. As far as I can tell, I just won about 25-30 rolls of EIR and about 60 rolls of other random film all for less than the price of ONE roll of EIR! Yay stupid people selling off stuff and not knowing how to list on eBay!

AgX · Jul 8, 2007

That really seems a bargain.

But in case you have well kept (frozen) EIR to compare with, perhaps you can tell us how IR-sensitive those films are.

I'm not sure whether the sensitivity in such films just decreases in amplitude or whether the wavelenght maximum decreases, or both...

Though even if it fell down to that 750nm something as the low end IR-films it still should work with some additional CC-filtering.

Thanasis · Jul 9, 2007

ajuk said:
The thing with colour infrared film is there is no digital equivalent is there?

Isn't that the case for all film??

Helen B · Jul 9, 2007

ajuk said:
The thing with colour infrared film is there is no digital equivalent is there?

I guess there is, but it depends on what properties you want to be equivalent. In many ways digital is a lot more suitable for false-colour infrared imaging than film is, particularly in technical applications.

Best,
Helen

Brac · Jul 11, 2007

Maybe if the Adox/Fotoimpex plans to do small production runs of products equivalent to certain Agfa ones proves to be a technical and commercial success, that type of small scale low fixed costs method of manufacturing might one day allow someone to make colour infra red film. Well, it's a nice thought!

Photo Engineer · Jul 11, 2007

Helen B said:
I guess there is, but it depends on what properties you want to be equivalent. In many ways digital is a lot more suitable for false-colour infrared imaging than film is, particularly in technical applications.

Best,
Helen

Helen;

Digital cannot and does not do false color imaging. EIR does because the sensitivities are shifted and you use the filter to eliminate any blue portion of the spectrum.

Digital retains its normal sensitivity in all cases, but merely imposes an infra red component on the image.

PE

AgX · Jul 12, 2007

There are multispectral cameras with separate spectral channels, especially for aerial surveying. I guess Helen was referring to those.

Roger Hicks · Jul 12, 2007

Photo Engineer said:
Helen;

Digital cannot and does not do false color imaging. EIR does because the sensitivities are shifted and you use the filter to eliminate any blue portion of the spectrum.

Digital retains its normal sensitivity in all cases, but merely imposes an infra red component on the image.

PE

Dear PE,

Yes, but surely you can reassign any group of wavelengths to any colour in the image as presented, and filter out any group or groups. Or am I missing something? (It's late and this is far from impossible).

Cheers,

Roger

Photo Engineer · Jul 12, 2007

Roger, in digital, the blue is blue and IR sensitive, the green is green and IR sensitive and the red is red + IR. In film, the blue is blue + green, the green is blue + red, and the red is IR.

I'm not sure how you would accomplish this feat in digital then, due to the sensitivity SHIFT in analog. Oh, you might approach it in PS, but nothing like in film. It would take massive manipulation in PS to do it which defeats the purpose of just clicking a shutter with analog.

PE

Product Availability

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency