How to nudge Kodachrome back into the consumer's eye

[mrb7]

I started this thread over on APUG (http://www.apug.org/forums/forum40/54504-how-nudge-kodachrome-back-into-comsumers-eye.html), and a lot of interesting comments came up, specifically some about getting the Holga crowd interested in quality rather than accidents. Here's what I wrote over there. Unfortunately that thread became a discussion about K-14 vs E-6 instead of a brainstorming session about how to get Kodachrome back in the public eye.

===
OK, let's all think out loud on this so I don't get accused of being crazy just talking to myself. I know this is only marginally helpful, but in another thread I mentioned this:

"I think not getting a "picture in hand" was more detrimental to Kodachrome in the consumer market over the decades than costs. Nowadays I know many people who drop off C-41 film and get a CD only, no prints, then use the digital order counter to get prints of exactly what they want (or just print them at home). So, on the surface, the idea of getting back slides in a box and a CD isn't very different than getting back negatives in a sleeve and a CD. What the consumer wants is the CD, and the medium is immaterial unless one can make a case for the quality of the images. If the consumer started using Kodachrome for the "special" events again the volume would go up dramatically."

Obviously to the average grandma and grandpa (that's my generation now, not the octogenarians) the difference between getting a CD with bunch of negatives you don't look at and getting a CD with a bunch of positives you actually can look at but probably won't is small. The cost differential is high, but the actual difference is a small envelope you don't open and small box you don't open. That is meaningless so long as the CD has what they want; pictures.

Also, obviously, the average Joe has no clue where to *BUY* Kodachrome these days. It's like trying to find specific ethnic food from the old country.

If Kodachrome was still the film of choice for "special occasions" to the point that Kodak marketed throw away cameras loaded with 27 shots of Kodachrome, it wouldn't cost so much money. I don't foresee that ever happening, but certainly there is a small possibility of driving the demand up just a little bit with the change in paradigm from getting back pictures to getting back CDs.

I dare say that the average person with the intelligence to get back and forth to work on city streets can be adequately instructed to diligently write "Process K-14 and scan to CD" in the special instructions box at Wal-mart to get superior pictures of Junior's graduation or little pumpkin's prom night. There are tons of pretty decent point and shoot 35mm cameras out there still. Of course they aren't going to spring for the extra expense all the time, but how do you make them aware and where do they go to buy that "special film" for those special occasions?

Thoughts anyone?

MB

[mrb7]

OK, I'm talking to my self so far, but here goes a couple of ideas.

Everybody needs to drag out Mom and Dad's, or Aunt Ethel's, or Sis's autoexposure/autofocus P&S, stick batteries in it to make sure it works, and give them one or two rolls of Kodachrome ALONG WITH INSTRUCTIONS about how to get it processed and make PRINTS from the CD at the kiosk.

Then somebody who understands the Holga crowd could trying throwing in a few fireballs. I don't really understand them well enough to know where to start with them, but they spend an inordinate amount of money on nothing that makes any sense to me. But it makes sense to them since they clearly vote with their dollars. We may as well try to get them to spend some of it on Kodachrome.

Somebody else come up with ideas and throw them out there, too. Anything that sells even one roll of film helps.

[Dan_KR64]

One of the best ways we can do it is by showing recent work that speaks of the film's unique characteristics and above all, the passion behind the using it.

In the next three weeks, I am going to launch a user gallery on this forum so we can do that.

It is so easy to refer to all the best and most iconic Kodachrome images from the last 70+ years, so lets show people what Kodachrome looks like now.

Photography is a visual thing. It is great to tell people about about a process like Kodachrome, but if someone who does not really know what it is about can look at an image and say: "Wow, that's Kodachrome?"

Then there is one more reason for them to try it.

[matt8314]

The way I see it, there are a few problems here. First of all, people are generally not even going for C41 with a CD these days. Too time consuming, and too expensive. These days, people are realizing that even a cheap digital (which, these days, is 8+MP) will give better shots than C41 shot on a point and shoot camera, and scanned. And that it only takes the cost of a few rolls of film and processing to pay for one of these cameras. Secondly, we all know about Kodachrome and exposure. Sometimes, it can be quite challenging to get it exactly right with even a good SLR. Point and shoot cameras certainly are not going to fare better here. And finally, from what I have seen, among MANY of those who actually DO shoot film (particularly younger folks), there seems to be a certain 'uncoolness' surrounding slide films of all types. Negative film is looked at as 'artsy'. But slide film is looked at as something for old folks. In fact, a car forum where I am also a member happens to have a photography forum. And someone recently asked about shooting film. When I suggested slide film, I actually got a couple of responses telling me that it is just a bad idea, and to ALWAYS shoot negative film.

[ZoneV]

I'd suggest getting a group going on Kodachrome. I recently introduced it to my photography club, and 7 young people are showing interest. We purchased some film at a good price (thanks, Dan!) and now some 18-22 year olds are going to start shooting Kodachrome for their first time!

The great thing is that you can still bring it to CVS. That is what makes it useable for so many people. Most people in my world don't like to be bothered having to package and send to Dwaynes, and can't afford it either.

[marke]

OK, I'm talking to my self so far, but here goes a couple of ideas.

Everybody needs to drag out Mom and Dad's, or Aunt Ethel's, or Sis's autoexposure/autofocus P&S, stick batteries in it to make sure it works, and give them one or two rolls of Kodachrome ALONG WITH INSTRUCTIONS about how to get it processed and make PRINTS from the CD at the kiosk.

mrb7, you just gave me a great idea! I have a Leica mini II that I'm going to load up with some Kodachrome 64 I just picked up and give it to my wife.

[JBA]

Secondly, we all know about Kodachrome and exposure. Sometimes, it can be quite challenging to get it exactly right with even a good SLR.

I always found Kodachrome extremely forgiving in terms of exposure. Certainly it's far easier to get right than Fujichrome Velvia 50, which has the narrowest exposure latitude of any film I've used. Kodachrome handles high-contrast situations better than any other film, IMO. Its huge dynamic range makes exposure intuitive, and from the time I began using Kodachrome 30 years ago, I became more adventurous in my experiments with lighting conditions because Kodachrome produces such an amazing range of tones. Kodachrome helped make me a better photographer because I was able to get it right at least most of the time, and this encouraged me to challenge myself.

[Brian Kim]

I don't know how to make more people buy and use Kodachrome.

But I have begun making prints, 6.5 x 9, and 8 x 12, slipping them into frames, and decorating my desk area. Today, I have three images, all Kodachrome, one old and two recent.

In my office of twenty, four or five have joked with me as to when I'm was going to post new pictures, so I just changed them. To me, I want people to enjoy printed images, and larger than wallet-sized. When they like the picture, the first thing I say is "It's Kodachrome." Ie. if it is, I use other films too. I've been changing pictures every week or two. Many times the pictures are not mine.

I'm still a flower child, and figure the first step is to create a basic knowledge, ie. printed pictures are different. And the second step is recognizing the variants in methodology, ie. Kodachrome for prints.

To me, a print is a real thing.
To me, prints from Kodachrome are a real thing done well.
At least sometimes, and these are the joy of photography.

The three prints I have displayed are -
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mix-plate/3321432189/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mix-plate/3273132013/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mix-plate/3216851007/
Click 'All Sizes'.