For Sale YouTube Interview: "Making KODAK Film" by Shanebrook

[laser]

If you are interested in an insider's view of how photographic film is designed and manufactured you will find this book to be interesting. Buyers of the book have provided very positive feedback to me and posts on Phototrio.

I have had two editions and sold thousands of books. Since sales continue to be strong I had more books printed. I used the same printer and the quality is equal to the previous twelve printings. I am keeping the price the same despite the increase in paper and printing cost.

www.makingKODAKfilm.com

Questions: makingKODAKfilm@yahoo.com

 

🛡️ Classifieds Safety Reminder: Please stay safe when buying and selling. Scams via hacked accounts are on the rise globally.

Best Practices: Always use a verified payment method with buyer protection (avoid "PayPal Friends & Family"). Services like Escrow.com are highly secure. Be suspicious of random unsolicited contact via Private Message. If you see suspicious behavior, please use the Report link on the post immediately.

[laser]

YouTube Interview for your amusement:

 

[Peter Chem]

Enjoyed watching this immensely Robert! I found the discussion of Technical Pan starting at 18:30 especially enlightening since I never assumed it involved much custom equipment beyond custom nozzles.

 

[Helge]

I liked this too:
https://www.mikeeckman.com/2021/10/episode-8-making-kodak-film-with-robert-shanebrook/

 

[Helge]

Am I alone in thinking the interviewer is pretty irritating? He has this constant ever so slightly aloof, detached, teasing air about him.

How does Tech Pan stack up against CMS 20 II?

I'm perplexed by what I sense is the internally shared story about how digital took over. I've heard similar from Ronald Andrews.
The basic idea seems to be that it was inevitable and that hardware never makes money.
Both of which is obviously false as a general assumption, but might nevertheless still be true for Kodak, for reasons I don't get.
Everybody could see the writing on the wall after tape wiped 8mm out overnight. Kodak managed to make good magnetic material afterwards, like disc and tape, but it was never the same.
Kodak had huge investments in sensors and low level algorithms, but never went all in on a good competitive digital camera (though they had a huge marketshare with cameras with their logo on it, I suspect it was rebranded OEM from various Asian manufacturers).

It reminds me of Xerox PARC and IBMs early revolutionary progressive inroads, into fundamental technology, and then letting themselves get overwhelmed by competition.
That could have been warning too to Kodak.

Is it really that impossible to turn a big ship around‽
Apple proved it could be done.

A healthy strong digital Kodak would also have meant a stronger film part today, as an important side business

And about still film not making money: Fujifilm seems to be making money. Very good money if you include Instax. And even if you don't include that golden calf, there are still reports that films net worth, is actually better than their digital cameras by now.

 

[MultiFormat Shooter]

@laser, thanks for posting the link. I have the second edition of Making Kodak Film, and it's great!

 

[laser]

Am I alone in thinking the interviewer is pretty irritating? He has this constant ever so slightly aloof, detached, teasing air about him.

How does Tech Pan stack up against CMS 20 II?

I'm perplexed by what I sense is the internally shared story about how digital took over. I've heard similar from Ronald Andrews.
The basic idea seems to be that it was inevitable and that hardware never makes money.
Both of which is obviously false as a general assumption, but might nevertheless still be true for Kodak, for reasons I don't get.
Everybody could see the writing on the wall after tape wiped 8mm out overnight. Kodak managed to make good magnetic material afterwards, like disc and tape, but it was never the same.
Kodak had huge investments in sensors and low level algorithms, but never went all in on a good competitive digital camera (though they had a huge marketshare with cameras with their logo on it, I suspect it was rebranded OEM from various Asian manufacturers).

It reminds me of Xerox PARC and IBMs early revolutionary progressive inroads, into fundamental technology, and then letting themselves get overwhelmed by competition.
That could have been warning too to Kodak.

Is it really that impossible to turn a big ship around‽
Apple proved it could be done.

A healthy strong digital Kodak would also have meant a stronger film part today, as an important side business

And about still film not making money: Fujifilm seems to be making money. Very good money if you include Instax. And even if you don't include that golden calf, there are still reports that films net worth, is actually better than their digital cameras by now.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

Am I alone in thinking the interviewer is pretty irritating? He has this constant ever so slightly aloof, detached, teasing air about him.

How does Tech Pan stack up against CMS 20 II?

I'm perplexed by what I sense is the internally shared story about how digital took over. I've heard similar from Ronald Andrews.
The basic idea seems to be that it was inevitable and that hardware never makes money.
Both of which is obviously false as a general assumption, but might nevertheless still be true for Kodak, for reasons I don't get.
Everybody could see the writing on the wall after tape wiped 8mm out overnight. Kodak managed to make good magnetic material afterwards, like disc and tape, but it was never the same.
Kodak had huge investments in sensors and low level algorithms, but never went all in on a good competitive digital camera (though they had a huge marketshare with cameras with their logo on it, I suspect it was rebranded OEM from various Asian manufacturers).

It reminds me of Xerox PARC and IBMs early revolutionary progressive inroads, into fundamental technology, and then letting themselves get overwhelmed by competition.
That could have been warning too to Kodak.

Is it really that impossible to turn a big ship around‽
Apple proved it could be done.

A healthy strong digital Kodak would also have meant a stronger film part today, as an important side business

And about still film not making money: Fujifilm seems to be making money. Very good money if you include Instax. And even if you don't include that golden calf, there are still reports that films net worth, is actually better than their digital cameras by now.

He reminded me of George Costanza. I liked the bit about Tech Pan. I wish HIE had been mentioned. I couldn't help feeling a bit worried about the future of film, though, as long as it's used in the motion picture industry, still films will be supported. Hopefully, the younger directors will use film sometimes.

 

[Helge]

He reminded me of George Costanza. I liked the bit about Tech Pan. I wish HIE had been mentioned. I couldn't help feeling a bit worried about the future of film, though, as long as it's used in the motion picture industry, still films will be supported. Hopefully, the younger directors will use film sometimes.

HIE or IR was not mentioned. because Kodaks coaters process control is based on infrared light. That was mentioned in the podcast I linked above. That doesn't rule out that Kodak could have others do the coating like Fuji does with ACROS. Or others could do IR film. Aviphot is quite good as IR film though. Better than its reputation.

Kodak would be wise in putting a lot more resources into proselytizing for motion picture film. Not tomorrow when its too late, but now! Not brand it as a quaint "authentic" alternative to digital, but as the definitive and best capture medium. And prove it.

 

[Helge]

From a business perspective it will not be wise. The world doesn't care about dead trees or projectors, and nobody ever produced a non-shit film scanner, certainly not today. How would that proof look like then?

Certainly A optimal scan can be produced, if a not of a whole reel. then at least some frames.
That would prove film as a recording medium. It would show the flexibility and future proofing of film.
That paper/demonstration/video/demo etc. (hopefully all) would include 35mm, 65mm and 16mm.
As is now, Kodak is resting on laurels and running on fumes. That situation is not tenable over the next ten years.
They need to be way more aggressive and proactive, than they seem to be now.

 

[lantau]

Quite a few interesting things were mentioned. Like the known (inside Kodak) eventual inevitability of the end of (colour) film. Motion Picture negative film being the only thing keeping the lights on. I guess it is similar at Fuji. Instax keeps the coaters running. What worries me is the statement that zero cinema print film is being made. Or at least virtually zero being used. I'm not sure what @laser really tried to say there. I think Kodak is still selling it. But are they going to make it once remaining stocks are sold?

It is a little relevant to me, because I intend to try printing ECN2 film to print film. Eventually I have bought a few 135/36 rolls of ECP2 film from someone on eBay for experiments. But if it worked and I wanted more I could run into yet another discontinuation of a film stock. I could buy a 2000ft roll, now. But my film freezer is full as it is, and it couldn't accommodate such a big diameter roll, anyway.

The other thing was about slide film/Ektachrome. @laser was amazed that they pulled it off, as was I. When they were working it, I certainly didn't blame them for the one year delay. I expected it, and longer, and was still amazed they had a finished product after only one extra year. I would assume that they have only very few researchers/engineers left. Again, amazing they could do it. I never tried it, tough. I have plenty of Fuji, and because of Velvia I consider Fujichromes more important than Ektrachrome.

What is sad, are his remarks about higher speed slide films: 200 and 400 slide films weren't very good. Ektachrome, I assume. That means that the chance is NIL that Kodak can make a higher speed Ektachrome, now. I have stocks of Fuji Provia 400X left. Mostly 120, but also some 135. That film is amazing. Very fine grain, beautiful images. But chances are slim that Fuji would ever resurrect it and Kodak probably doesn't have the capabilities to make something that will even approach it.

 

[Tom Kershaw]

Fuji Provia 400X

Fuji Provia 400X must be one of the most advanced stills photography film ever made.

 

[laser]

Through the years Kodak and Fuji films leap-frogged each other with improvements. At any point in time the image quality of 100 speed reversal films were always superior to faster color reversal films. Unless they were really light starved discriminating shooters use 100 speed reversal films rather than faster films.

My comment is that the continued availability of still film is dependent on motion picture film and the ability of the people that are making it.
I am assuming that there is little MP print film made since the demand is very small. Try to find a theater that has a new release on film. There is a big difference between camera motion picture film and MP print film. MP camera film is similar to still camera film. MP print is a simple, slow, 3-sensitized layers coating that sells for a very low price. MP camera film (Aug 2021) sells for 5.5X (yes 550%) more than MP print film.

I hope Kodak can continue to make film "forever".

Bob Shanebrook

 

[Helge]

Through the years Kodak and Fuji films leap-frogged each other with improvements. At any point in time the image quality of 100 speed reversal films were always superior to faster color reversal films. Unless they were really light starved discriminating shooters use 100 speed reversal films rather than faster films.

My comment is that the continued availability of still film is dependent on motion picture film and the ability of the people that are making it.
I am assuming that there is little MP print film made since the demand is very small. Try to find a theater that has a new release on film. There is a big difference between camera motion picture film and MP print film. MP camera film is similar to still camera film. MP print is a simple, slow, 3-sensitized layers coating that sells for a very low price. MP camera film (Aug 2021) sells for 5.5X (yes 550%) more than MP print film.

I hope Kodak can continue to make film "forever".

Bob Shanebrook

In Denmark and especially Copenhagen I know of several cinemas that has projectors and regularly show real prints, some of them new films and two of them has equipment for 70mm.
While Denmark is not exactly a backwater and is a fairly rich country, it is on the other hand not of a size and of a general liberal mindset that would let such places exist just for a small niche and for the hell of it.
This bodes well it would seem.

 

[warden]

Through the years Kodak and Fuji films leap-frogged each other with improvements. At any point in time the image quality of 100 speed reversal films were always superior to faster color reversal films. Unless they were really light starved discriminating shooters use 100 speed reversal films rather than faster films.

My comment is that the continued availability of still film is dependent on motion picture film and the ability of the people that are making it.
I am assuming that there is little MP print film made since the demand is very small. Try to find a theater that has a new release on film. There is a big difference between camera motion picture film and MP print film. MP camera film is similar to still camera film. MP print is a simple, slow, 3-sensitized layers coating that sells for a very low price. MP camera film (Aug 2021) sells for 5.5X (yes 550%) more than MP print film.

I hope Kodak can continue to make film "forever".

Bob Shanebrook

Thanks for sharing your thoughts in this video, Bob. I learned a few things!

 

[lantau]

In Denmark and especially Copenhagen I know of several cinemas that has projectors and regularly show real prints, some of them new films and two of them has equipment for 70mm.
While Denmark is not exactly a backwater and is a fairly rich country, it is on the other hand not of a size and of a general liberal mindset that would let such places exist just for a small niche and for the hell of it.
This bodes well it would seem.

Lets hope. I guess the comment hit a raw nerve, because I was wondering about that already. But if the film is a relatively simple product, perhaps it will remain feasible to keep it in production for the number of prints still made.

The studios love digital, of course because it gives them even more control. That's ok with me, but it also prevents harmless little things like this: when I was a student and a friend was running the local cinema we did a private screening after all the official shows. I.e. after midnight. Just about six friends in the large theatre with a, then, quite new projector, Sony SDDS sound from discs, synchronised by laser pickup from the film. We were viewing L.A. Confidential, which was running at the time. An experience that money can't buy. Even if you buy a whole show for yourself, it's not quite the same as this one time opportunity as students.

 

[Lachlan Young]

@laser, what was special about the particular machine that was required for making Technical Pan's emulsion?

 

[mshchem]

Through the years Kodak and Fuji films leap-frogged each other with improvements. At any point in time the image quality of 100 speed reversal films were always superior to faster color reversal films. Unless they were really light starved discriminating shooters use 100 speed reversal films rather than faster films.

My comment is that the continued availability of still film is dependent on motion picture film and the ability of the people that are making it.
I am assuming that there is little MP print film made since the demand is very small. Try to find a theater that has a new release on film. There is a big difference between camera motion picture film and MP print film. MP camera film is similar to still camera film. MP print is a simple, slow, 3-sensitized layers coating that sells for a very low price. MP camera film (Aug 2021) sells for 5.5X (yes 550%) more than MP print film.

I hope Kodak can continue to make film "forever".

Bob Shanebrook

I have both of Bob's amazing books. Incredible story of high technology and manufacturing expertise. The generation to generation story of passing on knowledge is so telling.
Regarding the story of the Kodak surface camera. There's no one left that knows how to make film cameras. The instruments we use today are aging, rapidly, hard to consume film without a camera.
I'm hopeful for analog photography. It's a lot of fun, that may be what keeps it going

 

[mshchem]

In Denmark and especially Copenhagen I know of several cinemas that has projectors and regularly show real prints, some of them new films and two of them has equipment for 70mm.
While Denmark is not exactly a backwater and is a fairly rich country, it is on the other hand not of a size and of a general liberal mindset that would let such places exist just for a small niche and for the hell of it.
This bodes well it would seem.

The last 70mm prints that I know of were of "The Hateful Eight". Denmark is a wonderful place

 

[Helge]

The last 70mm prints that I know of were of "The Hateful Eight". Denmark is a wonderful place

Yeah it is. Mainly in the summer though. A good Danish summer, is incomparably the best climate on earth. Seventeen hour days, always close to the coast and nice and hot but not oven dry or smothering humid.

Tenet, Death on the Nile, Murder on the Orient Express, Apollo 11, Dunkirk and Joker (though not filmed on 65mm) was also released on 70mm. Of course Corona has put a damper on anything movie related during the last couple of years.

 

[mshchem]

Yeah it is. Mainly in the summer though. A good Danish summer, is incomparably the best climate on earth. Seventeen hour days, always close to the coast and nice and hot but not oven dry or smothering humid.

Tenet, Death on the Nile, Murder on the Orient Express, Apollo 11, Dunkirk and Joker (though not filmed on 65mm) was also released on 70mm. Of course Corona has put a damper on anything movie related during the last couple of years.

Next 70mm show, maybe I will fly over.
Darn Covid!

 

[fdonadio]

Am I alone in thinking the interviewer is pretty irritating?

No, you’re not. The guy is kind of annoying. But maybe it’s because he’s sitting right next to a legend and he’s clearly very excited, as I am sure I would be if I was in his place.

I’m glad I could see what Bob looks like and I really appreciate his humility. I would love to sit and hear stories about his good old times at Kodak. I’m sure I could just sit there and listen for hours.

I’m also glad I bought this great book, written by such a great guy.

 

[Helge]

He reminded me of George Costanza.

If we are talking a Seinfeld character, it should be Kenny Bania.

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

If we are talking a Seinfeld character, it should be Kenny Bania.

Perhaps a mix of the two? LOL

 

[laser]

@laser, what was special about the particular machine that was required for making Technical Pan's emulsion?

The formation of grain in making AgX is a very "delicate" mechanism. Several very smart people have spent their entire professional careers studying the crystal growth mechanism. They have attempted to explain all the factors to me but I don't pretend to have a full understanding. I understand the results but not how to get there. Tech Pan x415 is a very fine grain emulsion that has grains that are all about the same size. Several steps are taken to deliver the desired grain. This provided a versatile film that could be developed to a wide range of contrasts. We enjoyed formulating Technidol developers and working out the difficulties in providing 35mm, 120, and sheet film. Lots of challenges but enjoyable. Those were the good old days.