Survey - Kodachrome Revival Price Point?

[Roger Cole]

Look at (there was a url link here which no longer exists) and you will quickly realize that it won't cost 50 million US$ to create and operate a small scale K14 processing line. (there was a url link here which no longer exists) that he would teach anyone showing up in his lab for a year.

This is nothing like private space travel, an expedition to the top of Mt. Everest or to the north pole, both in terms of of cost and in terms of personal risk involved. Unlike the other examples given here, Kodachrome seems to lack committed people to make it happen.

There is nothing like Everest and the only thing remotely like the north pole is the south pole. The differences between Kodachrome and existing, readily available and affordable E6 products just aren't worth the costs and effort.

 

[Rudeofus]

There is nothing like Everest and the only thing remotely like the north pole is the south pole. The differences between Kodachrome and existing, readily available and affordable E6 products just aren't worth the costs and effort.

My posting implied this and you stated it: while many would like to see Kodachrome back in its old glory, it doesn't seem to be that much superior to currently available products that anyone would go out of his/her way to make it happen. There is a market for (there was a url link here which no longer exists), but not for US$ 2000 Kodachrome slides ...

 

[PKM-25]

There seems to be this tendency to say that Kodachrome was not any better if not as good as many current products or the ones that replaced it in broad terms. While that may be true for the mainstream happy-snapper, it was not true of everyone. Kodachrome film had a very narrow window of seeing it's stunning potential met that few could actually impart. In terms of recent imagery, one such photographer is Alex Webb. The way he took light, tone and color and paired it with Kodachrome film even in modern times simply left most photographers in the dust.....actual photographers, not photo enthusiasts.

I am pretty confident in saying that those who claim they got better results from other films were simply not up to the task of using Kodachrome, it took another level of talent entirely to fully realize this film's potential. I would choose it over any other color film available if it were still around, it demanded my absolute best.

 

[StoneNYC]

My posting implied this and you stated it: while many would like to see Kodachrome back in its old glory, it doesn't seem to be that much superior to currently available products that anyone would go out of his/her way to make it happen. There is a market for (there was a url link here which no longer exists), but not for US$ 2000 Kodachrome slides ...

Superior is relative, I love Velvia's over saturation, and I love Kodachrome skin tones because it gives a look that's unique, it's by no means accurate or "superior" just what I appreciate.

 

[StoneNYC]

There seems to be this tendency to say that Kodachrome was not any better if not as good as many current products or the ones that replaced it in broad terms. While that may be true for the mainstream happy-snapper, it was not true of everyone. Kodachrome film had a very narrow window of seeing it's stunning potential met that few could actually impart. In terms of recent imagery, one such photographer is Alex Webb. The way he took light, tone and color and paired it with Kodachrome film even in modern times simply left most photographers in the dust.....actual photographers, not photo enthusiasts.

I am pretty confident in saying that those who claim they got better results from other films were simply not up to the task of using Kodachrome, it took another level of talent entirely to fully realize this film's potential. I would choose it over any other color film available if it were still around, it demanded my absolute best.

+1

 

[Rudeofus]

I am pretty confident in saying that those who claim they got better results from other films were simply not up to the task of using Kodachrome, it took another level of talent entirely to fully realize this film's potential. I would choose it over any other color film available if it were still around, it demanded my absolute best.

I did not make any statement about whether I would rather use Kodachrome or not, and in fact I have never, in my whole life, shot as much as a single roll of Kodachrome, so who would I be to judge its artistic merits? What I can say, and I say that from pure observation of others, and with utmost certainty after reading so many threads, is that nobody is willing to put real money and effort towards using this particular artistic medium.

As stated before, artists are willing to pay US$ 6000 and more for a single color print, but won't pay the same amount for Kodachrome's color palette. Offer that amount of money for a roll of Kodachrome developed to specs, commit to 100+ rolls per year (alone or with others), and labs will beat down your front door to do it for you even on weekends and holidays if needed.

As they say in my engineering world: don't clap hands, throw money!

 

[PKM-25]

As stated before, artists are willing to pay US$ 6000 and more for a single color print, but won't pay the same amount for Kodachrome's color palette. Offer that amount of money for a roll of Kodachrome developed to specs, commit to 100+ rolls per year (alone or with others), and labs will beat down your front door to do it for you even on weekends and holidays if needed.

I don't think this is at all accurate and is actually pretty typical of web-rhetoric. Firstly, you do not know every artist and many of the ones who actually have this kind of cash are not to be found on internet forums. Secondly, labs won't be beating down anyone's door regardless of price because it is next to impossible to recreate the same level of quality in re-making Kodachrome film and supplying the needed chemistry to the labs that are willing.

I was willing to pay another *person* $250 a roll to finish a small part of a bigger project on the film that did not gain enough traction before the processing ended...if you want a hint of what that was, watch the film "Tim's Vermeer"...I bet he got the idea from my pursuits and Hollywood inquires. And in a 5 year period, I paid several tens of thousands of dollars to use and process the film. I would pay top dollar to a real lab to soup my existing film if the chance ever arises. But I am not going to risk thousands of dollars on some experiment when it could go towards funding other projects or bodies of work that are a sure bet.

It's not that people will not put up the cash, it is that the film and the means to process it to be a piece of actual "Kodachrome" film are dead and gone.

It's unreal how not into actual picture making people are, it's better to just keep on beating the same dead horses of lost materials instead of producing mind blowing photographs that will help companies like Ilford, Kodak and even Fuji continue to sell great existing products.

Kodachrome film and processing as we knew it is *never* coming back, at any price.

 

[Truzi]

Superior is relative, I love Velvia's over saturation, and I love Kodachrome skin tones because it gives a look that's unique, it's by no means accurate or "superior" just what I appreciate.

Well said.

 

[MartinP]

. . . . .

It's unreal how not into actual picture making people are, it's better to just keep on beating the same dead horses of lost materials instead of producing mind blowing photographs that will help companies like Ilford, Kodak and even Fuji continue to sell great existing products.

. . . . .

That's about it really. What more can one say?

Regarding archival-ness of colour materials, using black-and-white materials and making negatives of the colour medium at it's sparkling new 'best-ever' quality, through printing separation filters is the genuine way ahead there. In doing so, you separate the recording of the image from the future reproduction of it, using whatever (possibly unknown, or unknowable) future technology is available. For example, those century old Russian colour pictures are actually b+w negs and that is why they are still so dazzlingly reproducible with current technology.

 

[Prof_Pixel]

Kodachrome.

Ecclesiastes 3 says it all: "There is a time for everything, and a season for every activity under heaven: a time to be born and a time to die ...."

 

[Photo Engineer]

Superior is relative, I love Velvia's over saturation, and I love Kodachrome skin tones because it gives a look that's unique, it's by no means accurate or "superior" just what I appreciate.

I've commented on this before too.

The average customer does not want true color, they want exaggerated color!

PE

 

[RattyMouse]

I've commented on this before too.

The average customer does not want true color, they want exaggerated color!

PE

PE is spot on here! He knows his color!

 

[Rudeofus]

And in a 5 year period, I paid several tens of thousands of dollars to use and process the film. I would pay top dollar to a real lab to soup my existing film if the chance ever arises. But I am not going to risk thousands of dollars on some experiment when it could go towards funding other projects or bodies of work that are a sure bet.

You make this sound a lot like "whatever sells" has replaced "whatever it takes" now. Am I reading this correctly?

It's not that people will not put up the cash, it is that the film and the means to process it to be a piece of actual "Kodachrome" film are dead and gone.

This whole "it was the greatest thing on earth but now it's gone and will never come back!" will sure help sell remaining artwork at inflated prices, at least as long as nobody asks "why did they allow it to disappear anyway?".

 

[benjiboy]

Kodachrome isn't coming back at any price, this whole thread is an exercise in futility.

 

[BrianShaw]

... but like a fly you continue to be drawn to the rotting corpse.

 

[Truzi]

I'd really like to see Kodak Gold in 100 again.

 

[StoneNYC]

I'd really like to see Kodak Gold in 100 again.

Why?... Do you enjoy grainy fuzzy green spots all over your images?

 

[Truzi]

LOL. Never had those issues. I figured, if we can wax poetic about an unavailable film, why not add Gold 100 - mostly being sarcastic, considering how these Kodachrome threads typically go.
That said, I liked Gold 100 for snapshots and vacations.

 

[StoneNYC]

LOL. Never had those issues. I figured, if we can wax poetic about an unavailable film, why not add Gold 100 - mostly being sarcastic, considering how these Kodachrome threads typically go.
That said, I liked Gold 100 for snapshots and vacations.

Oh then I'll lament the passing of Agfa Negative Ultra-K

And ORWO Color UT16 (transparency) film.

Why not

 

[Sarath]

30 dollars, I think we should request Kodak to give a revival thought.

 

[MartinP]

30 dollars, I think we should request Kodak to give a revival thought.

How will you process it? The machinery has all been scrapped (build from scratch?) and the chemicals are no longer made (tiny custom orders from an organics lab = $M). There is a fair bit of the 'old' film out there still - even two rolls on my souvenir shelf - so better to approach it from the point of view of a developing service for the existing rolls. Most likely few people would be interested at several thousand dollars/euros etc. per roll, especially seeing very few at even $40 in the poll.

Isn't it more practical to protect and nurture E6 transparencies? After all there is still some infrastructure left for those materials.

 

[pdeeh]

One billion dollars

 

[BrianShaw]

Two crowns, four shillings, and a tuppence.

 

[Arklatexian]

What people say they will buy in market research surveys and what they will actually buy Steve when the product is put on the the market are two different things ( read The Hidden Persuaders by Vance Packard ) so I hope you aren't going to base any important business decisions on this survey.
All these internet posts by people bemoaning the demise of Kodachrome if they had to "put their money where their mouth is" and pay what the current commercial cost would be would be a different story.

My question in all of this is: "which Kodachrome are you talking about"? I might would spend a little extra for a return to ASA-10 Kodachrome but not to any later ones. The ones Kodak came out with after ASA-10 had more realistic color than the beautiful colors that ASA-10 rendered. I don't know about where you live but around here, except in early Spring, the colors are downrught dull and when shooting slides of them, they needed all the help they could get. ........Regards!

 

[Stephen Frizza]

what is his price ?

I worked out how much it would cost me on a material level, not factoring in the cost of my time and foolishly asked people here if they would pay it. I did so more to make the point that it has no commercial future. Without automation and a guarantee of high throughput the capital required to commenc makes no sense for any business to touch it with a ten foot barge pole.