What makers of film might need from us...

[Dan_KR64]

I can not imagine how Kodak must feel reading some of the threads full of bitching and complaining, people saying they want films like Kodachrome, Plus-X, High Speed Infrared and E6 back when we still have outstanding varieties like TMY, Ektar and Portra…..and the constant dissection of the restructuring.

And you DO know who Kodak is, do you not? Kodak is not so much the top executives, the shareholders and certainly not Mr. Perez. Who Kodak is are the people who are hard working, passionate about the products and proud of the brand that is Kodak. Who Kodak is are the people like Audrey Jonckheer who are still trying to help film find a way forward…besides buying the film, are you helping?

There is something else we are not doing…something besides websites like Flickr, APUG, etc. Something besides buying and using film that is not being done and it kept me up until 5AM this morning…it is troubling me..

Here is the trouble…

If Kodak were to stop selling film and no one took it over, I think it would be very, very bad for film in general. Here is why: Public Perception based on internet hype. For example, when Kodachrome disappeared, I can not tell you how many people thought that Kodak was no longer making any film and some even thought that meant no film left at all. That's right, one film's disappearance well publicized caused an tsunami of misconception by the general public. The same thing has happened with the C-11 filing by Kodak and all the news that has followed….this is a bad, BAD pattern folks. Because what ever potential numbers in growth that even niche film use there might be with the artistic resurgence of the medium, the growing perception that film is history is hampering a potential market segment that might otherwise give film a try.

This is not just Kodak's problem, it is Ilford's, Fuji's, Efke's problem and it is OUR problem. As much as I want to see Kodak get really creative in how they market to the potential film user, I think we are missing something really, reeeeally important as the film user. We say we use film, post images, fill our freezers, we do a lot, but we do it for us first, not to help out our film making companies, the ones who depend on us not only to use the product, but get the word out.

But I really do feel like we are missing the so called boat that Kodak has been said to have missed too…I am not sure what it is, but I am determined to figure it out.

Maybe it might have to do with crowd sourcing of an ad campaign that is not from the makers of film, but the users of it...something like that can go viral real quick...I think it is something like this that needs to happen, honestly...

[mopar_guy]

Too true. Sometimes I really don't pay much attention to internet forums in general because of the negative vibe. I do really enjoy using Kodak's films.

Dave

[KR4myF2AS]

A nice capture of the collective anxieties of the analogue community, Dan! As you have made quite clear, the future of our favoured medium rests ultimately on the shoulders of each of us or, more correctly, upon our collective efforts. Given the speed with which (mis)information travels, it is readily apparent that buying and using film and supplies, and showing, selling and posting the results of our efforts is manifestly inadequate to the task of ensuring a future for analogue photography. In the ultimate irony, recourse to a sustained crowd-sourcing effort via the Internet may prove to be - if done honestly, imaginatively and creatively - film photography's saving grace. Therein, I offer up a few thoughts on a video/collection of video shorts for that purpose.

Any video compiled for this end should:

1. Show the diverse demographic of the analogue community. A bias toward the young risks having said effort dismissed as some sort of "Hipster" trend and not taken seriously. Conversely, the presence of two many over-40s runs the risk of having the effort written off as the tirade of a bunch of malcontent neo-Luddites;
2. Place front-and-center the question of why folks shoot film, what particular films people shoot and why, as well as show some examples of work using particular films;
3. NOT favour the products of one film manufacturer over those of others at the risk of looking like the effort was underwritten by the Kodak, Ilford, Fujifilm, et al.;
4. Make clear the issue of why diminishing film options are a cause for concern for artists;
5. Make clear the manifold virtues of film photography;
6. Discuss the issue of hybrid photography with an emphasis on how analogue and digital capture can (and should) be seen as compatible media and not as an either/or proposition, that the two mediums can be constituent parts of an artist's "tool-box" ;
6. Be forthright about the "new reality" of securing supplies and processing (for analogue capture) in the digital age. i.e. NYC/ Chicago/LA Superstores (the B&H, Adoramas, Calumets, etc of the world who continue to offer a great selection of film and supplies) and the mail-order labs that most likely represent the future of lab services (i.e. Dwayne's...'nuff said); AND
7.That contrary to all the rumours, misinformation and b******t that some may have read on the Internet, that film is still enjoying wide usage and is still being manufactured by the good folks at Kodak, Ilford, Fujifilm and a host of smaller films.


My suggestion would be for a series of short fast-paced vignettes each giving consideration to the issues mentioned above, perhaps edited together showing two, three or for "compilations" together. Collect enough submissions to keep boredom at bay (and keep the campaign fresh).

[nzoomed]

Im once more enjoying the use of film again, and hope to get my first E-6 ektachrome elitechrome 100 processed (im saving my e100g for now)
I was even happy with the rather grainy images i shot with kodak royal gold in my XA3 camera, i cant wait to see the results with ektachrome!
AS for me, digital photography will always be my main method of photography, but for when i want something special, i will use film, i take both cameras with me now, so i can shoot digital and analog, ive tried all the photoshop plugins etc, and you still cant 100% replicate film. Not to say that there's nothing wrong with digital, it just doesnt have the same effect as film, just another way of doing the same job of producing a photo i guess. I think there is and should always be aniche market with film, and i hope that the film manufacturers understand and promote this, i would have never imagined myself getting back into film photography, its years since ive shot C41 film, and ive never used reversal film ever. Its something exciting for me, and i hope that others do the same and start experimenting with the stuff.

[3Dhillary]

The fact that Kodak suggested Ektar as a substitute for its discontinued Ektachrome shows that the company misses the point.

I shoot stereo SLIDES with vintage cameras. I have no need for any color negative film, let alone Ektar. Now I understand that while I'm not alone, we are a very small minority, and such businesses require a certain volume to be profitable. This is why I don't bitch and moan about it. But for the company to think that all film shooters use it for scanning makes it as myopic as those consumers who are seduced by all things digital in the first place.

I've not found a better medium than slides for viewing 3-D...so far. So I will continue to support any company which makes film I can use. I purchased probably my last brick of Ektachrome, and if there is no more to buy after this is gone, I'll switch to Fuji if Provia is still available. I loved Kodachrome, and really do like the current Ektachrome, but I see no reason to support a company out of any kind of nostalgia. If it no longer offers what I can use, then I have no more use for it.

No whining, no tears. Kodak management feels it is taking care of its interests. I am merely taking care of my own.

[Chris Sweetman]

Hi Dan

I know who Kodak are. They are a company that is not providing my need for slide film. I do not care for print film because the digital photography process replaced this format for me many years ago.

OK when my only digital camera was a Canon G2 I did use an OM1 with a Zuiko 200mm telephoto lens. This was due to the fact I needed that reach to take photos at Lego's Mini-land. Having tried using the G2 on previous occasions and not getting the photos I wanted I went for the print film/OM route.

The reason I selected print film was because I wanted to scan the prints on my only scanner - a flat bed one without a slide scanning feature.

Yes I do miss using my Olympus OM system. However, in the past 96% of the time the camera bodies were loaded with slide film . Why? When I bought my first OM camera I loaded it with KR64 and was duly impressed with the brilliance of colour. I was hooked. The only time print film was used was to record family occasions.

So I agree with what 3Dhillary states. She hits the nail on the head. Nothing can replace a slide. But print film can be readily replaced with digital capture.

With results I obtained with print film I wasn't usually impressed. Firstly, costs of the film, processing and printing, secondly the lack of quality and consistency, thirdly prints fade horribly even after a short time and finally storage is a problem!

Now I feel using film has a cost that I am not prepared to cover. For example an average E6 film (what's left of them) costs around £9. Then add costs of around £7.50 for processing and mounting. Access to processing has diminished over the past few years with virtually no one in my locality offering slide processing. So costs of posting films off is another factor to include.

Chris

[ZoneV]

The question is, how?

I will ponder this question next week while I'm off.

[ZoneV]

Originally Posted by ZoneV

The question is, how?

I will ponder this question next week while I'm off.

Ok, it's about 15 minutes later, and I have what I think is a good idea already. I'll brainstorm on the details of the concept next week.

Actually, the entire thing basically just flashed before my eyes. I pretty much have it down now except for the really fine details. Thing is, I can't execute this thing on my own...I don't have enough time. I need lots of help.

Contact me the week of August 12th if you'd like to hear my idea. I'll basically be landscaping the entire week, so I'll have a lot of time to think in more detail.

[KR4myF2AS]

A bit off topic here, but perhaps a bit of good news for analogue shooters from Eastman Kodak: http://motion.kodak.com/motion/About...0036/index.htm

To cut to the chase, Eastman Kodak has announced that the company will retain its film manufacturing capabilities (motion picture as well as consumer) after the company restructures. No mention in the press release whether EK's existing consumer film portfolio will continue in its present form or if future offerings will be reduced or expanded. I would think it safe to assume that, as an earlier communication from the company indicated, future film offerings by EK will be subject to market volumes. So...get shooting folks! (Now if only the Great Yellow Father would be so kind as to reconsider the decision to delete E100G and E100VS from the EK consumer film portfolio...)

[sdkodachrome]

Originally Posted by KR4myF2AS

So...get shooting folks! (Now if only the Great Yellow Father would be so kind as to reconsider the decision to delete E100G and E100VS from the EK consumer film portfolio...)

Shooting film is different than buying film. Due to their deciision to delete E100G and E100VS, I (and others here) have already bought up oodles of those films, enough to last us quite a while (in my case, likely several years). So while I'll be certainly be shooting Kodak film, and getting it developed at Dwayne's (which I think uses Kodak's chemicals), it'll all be film that's already bought and filling my freezer to the brim. Thus I can't buy any more film for several years (unless I come up with a need for something other than 100 speed color reversal film, which is all I've shot since Kodachrome went away).

So unless they look backwards at the discontinuation-time increase in reversal film buying (which, as we would have expected, made store stocks of E100G, especially, last not as long as Kodak had predicted), Kodak will have no market info from those of us who are into reversal films. Even if we haven't changed brands (yet?), we already did our Kodak purchases by now presumably (for as much as we could afford and/or our freezers had space for!).

How (else) can Kodak use market info to judge the demand for their reversal film, once they've discontinued it? You can't market info from something you don't sell!