Survey - How many rolls of Kodachrome would you commit to shoot a year?

How many rolls would you shoot?

  • <5 rolls/year

    Votes: 34 59.6%

  • 6-20rolls/year

    Votes: 15 26.3%

  • 21-50 rolls/year

    Votes: 4 7.0%

  • 51-100 rolls/year

    Votes: 3 5.3%

  • 100-250 rolls/year

    Votes: 1 1.8%

  • 250-500 rolls/year

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • 500+ rolls/year

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Total voters
    57

StoneNYC

Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2012
Messages
8,345
Location
Antarctica
Format
8x10 Format
Ken Nadvornick said:
Damned good point.

Ken
Click to expand...

I was thinking long and hard about this, but if my understanding is correct, the "5 and under's" of the world were really kodakchromes bread and butter, once that market dried up (went digital) Kodahrome was unsustainable....

You think the professional market was really supporting kodakchrome? No, I doubt it was... So the statement that the <5 were a "drop in the bucket" and unimportant... Well, that's foolish to think that way.
 

DannL.

Member
Joined
Oct 13, 2013
Messages
617
Format
Large Format
If someone else is paying for the film and processing.

But really, what's all this hoopla about Kodachrome? Back in the day when I used it, it was just slide film. You picked it up at the gas station or grocery store and stuck it in your camera to take some snaps. Did something happen that I may have missed? All my chromes still look like ordinary slides to me. Nothing magical to report.
 

BrianShaw

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
16,517
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format
StoneNYC said:
... So the statement that the <5 were a "drop in the bucket" and unimportant... Well, that's foolish to think that way.
Click to expand...

I agree with you about the pro market. When I was shooting slides pro we used E-6 to get quick processing turnaround from a local lab.

But: Right now there are 26 "5 and under" people, several of whom indicate that ZERO was their number. That's not much film being bought.

In fact, even if all the folks who committed to buying the film on this poll actually bought what they said they would... it still isn't much film being bought.

Back in the good ole days there were hundreds of thousands of "5 and under" people. That was a lot more film being bought.

I suppose they could look at this kind of venture as a loss leader... but I haven't a clue how they would make up the loss considering the small market today for film... and what might be a smaller market for film tomorrow.

But maybe lots of folks would come out of the woodworks; I'm sure the hipsters would love such an opportunity to go old school.
 

Ken Nadvornick

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2005
Messages
4,942
Location
Monroe, WA, USA
Format
Multi Format
(Psst... It's already been stated many times... see Ms. Pasterczyk... a prerequisite... the problem of micro-production would have already been solved beforehand... thus, hundreds of thousands would not be required... this is 30 years later... look at everyone else already doing it...)



Ken
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BrianShaw

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
16,517
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format
Oh... sorry... I forgot. So what's the number? Would 930 rolls per year do it... cause that's all the world seems to want (if everyone bought the maximum amount they indicated).
 

BrianShaw

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
16,517
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format
... and now that you mention it, where DID the time go? Thirty years ago feels like yesterday to me. Ah, the good old days...
 

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
I'll say again that National Geographic and its photographers were the worlds largest single customer for Kodachrome. They are all digital today.

PE
 

BrianShaw

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
16,517
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format
Photo Engineer said:
I'll say again that National Geographic and its photographers were the worlds largest single customer for Kodachrome. They are all digital today.

PE
Click to expand...

What about other magazines, like Life and Time and Arizona Highways; did they tend to shoot Kodachrome also?
 

Ken Nadvornick

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2005
Messages
4,942
Location
Monroe, WA, USA
Format
Multi Format
BrianShaw said:
Would 930 rolls per year do it... cause that's all the world seems to want...
Click to expand...

The world? The entire world? Really? You're really saying that?

BrianShaw said:
Thirty years ago feels like yesterday to me. Ah, the good old days...
Click to expand...

This appears to be the crux of the problem with quite a few here.

"Jim, it's dead..."

You guys really are entertaining. Not very discerning. But entertaining.



Ken
 
Last edited by a moderator:

StoneNYC

Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2012
Messages
8,345
Location
Antarctica
Format
8x10 Format

There's still a lot of Kodachrome left... I would bet if they started a processing place, they would get lots of film, but not that many people buying new film...

900 rolls might be all that are bought ...
 

MattKing

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
52,873
Location
Delta, BC Canada
Format
Medium Format
BrianShaw said:
What about other magazines, like Life and Time and Arizona Highways; did they tend to shoot Kodachrome also?
Click to expand...

I don't know, but I do know that in addition to using the largest amount of Kodachrome, National Geographic's in-house Kodachrome processing lab had some of the highest, if not the highest processing volumes.
 

Ken Nadvornick

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2005
Messages
4,942
Location
Monroe, WA, USA
Format
Multi Format
StoneNYC said:
I would bet if they started a processing place, they would get lots of film...
Click to expand...

Careful... This could be construed as the definition of boutique-level demand. Don't let 'em hear ya' say that too loud. Do you need my Secret Service guys?



(You do realize that if you selected carefully from voters in this poll, there is a combination of only 7 individuals who together could use 900 rolls in less than 17 months all by themselves?)



Ken
 
Last edited by a moderator:

StoneNYC

Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2012
Messages
8,345
Location
Antarctica
Format
8x10 Format

Yes, I also thought at first you were a stock guy, now I know you're a government analyst or code monkey/breaker... Hmm maybe I should stop before I get sent to Guantanamo ...
 

Ken Nadvornick

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2005
Messages
4,942
Location
Monroe, WA, USA
Format
Multi Format
Every morning The Man sits down in the Oval Office and reviews transcripts of everything you said or wrote or thought the previous day...

Ken
 

StoneNYC

Member
Joined
Aug 5, 2012
Messages
8,345
Location
Antarctica
Format
8x10 Format
Ken Nadvornick said:
Every morning The Man sits down in the Oval Office and reviews transcripts of everything you said or wrote or thought the previous day...

Ken
Click to expand...

Is he part of the Ministry of Peace (Minipax), Ministry of Love (Miniluv), or the Ministry of Truth (Minitrue)?

:munch:
 

BrianShaw

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
16,517
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format
StoneNYC said:
... I would bet ...
Click to expand...

How's your luck in Vegas (or any of the myriad native American casinos)? Hit any jackpots lately? Allow me for a moment to be the devil's advocate, a mean-spirited suit-wearing nay-sayer: One might crap out if they took that bet. But only the man (metaphorically speaking, in reality it could be a human of either gender) who dares to try will know for sure. Who will that be? :confused:
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BrianShaw

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
16,517
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format
Ken Nadvornick said:
... (You do realize that if you selected carefully from voters in this poll, there is a combination of only 7 individuals who together could use 900 rolls in less than 17 months all by themselves?)
Click to expand...

... and at $45 per roll processing (average of the two most popular price points in the 'what would you pay' survey) that would be a whopping $40K per year total receipts. Imagine what would be left to feed a family after paying taxes, insurance, materials, equipment/R&D depreciation, etc etc etc.
 

Photo Engineer

Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
29,018
Location
Rochester, NY
Format
Multi Format
If I scaled down to a 4" machine, and coated 1000 ft of Kodacrhome, it would make about 400 rolls of either 20 or 36 exposure. That one run would take about 1 month of prep and testing and would have to pay for all of the people involved and the chemicals involved. So, 3000 ft would supply about 1200 rolls and do the job many times over for those who signed up. The 3000 ft would take 3x as long overall as it probably would need 3 coating sessions. If all went well, the actual coating time would be about 1 hour for each 1000 ft.

So, let some bright guy figure pay for a month for about 25 people, facilities and chemistry to come up with a film cost.

Now, for the process you need to make 3 couplers and CD6. This needs 4 bench chemists and would take about 1 month each plus chemicals and hazmat conditions and waste disposal. Figure that in.

Lets assume that the process machine exists, so what you need then is a group of lab techs to mix the chemistry and then run the machine while keeping it in control. Figure this into the process costs.

Try it sometime. Exercises like this were not uncommon as casual discussion at EK. In fact, we had to calculate the amount of emulsion per square foot all the time. It was one of our earliest exercises.

It aint cheap even on a small scale. You just make less.

PE
 

BrianShaw

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
16,517
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format
The difference, of course, between your casual EK discussions and these discussions is that EK knows well the cost model. Thanks for shedding additional light on the topic. I find it intellectually interesting (and a good reason for being a bit of a skeptic on reviving dormant/extinct technologies).
 

Ken Nadvornick

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2005
Messages
4,942
Location
Monroe, WA, USA
Format
Multi Format
Photo Engineer said:
If I scaled down to a 4" machine, and coated 1000 ft of Kodacrhome...
Click to expand...

Thanks for this, PE. Very interesting. According to that earlier unconfirmed report, EK may actually be trying something like this at some level? Not necessarily for Kodachome, but for all of their film lines. And if they are or were, you may still have the contacts to know about it, right?

In any case, these numbers well illustrate how impressive the efforts by Ferrania may turn out to be with their new, boutique-level E-6 and C-41 efforts. And the efforts by all of the other already-updated companies as well. My hope is that EK/EA won't allow themselves to be passed by in these crucial manufacturing transformations.

It's an honest statement by me that every single Kodak product I have stopped using over the years has been because Kodak discontinued it. Not because I chose to walk away from it. That's a devastating observation. And I'd speculate I'm not alone. Anything that EK/EA could do to reverse that trend would be welcomed by me, and possibly crucial to them.

[Edit: Thinking about it because I really do try to be honest, Tri-X may be the single exception. Plus-X and Tri-X were my two b&w users for most of my life, and Tri-X is still available. I now use HP5+ in its place. But all of the other films and papers over the years, I think so.]

Ken
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BrianShaw

Member
Joined
Nov 30, 2005
Messages
16,517
Location
La-la-land
Format
Multi Format

Ken is not alone. Same with me, and ever time I go through a short period of mourning.
 

BradleyK

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2011
Messages
946
Location
Burnaby, BC
Format
Multi Format

+1.
 

Dismayed

Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2011
Messages
438
Location
Boston
Format
Med. Format RF
Kodachrome is dead. The OP needs to accept that fact.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…