kodachromeproject.com Forums  

Go Back   kodachromeproject.com Forums > Main Category > Kodachrome, The Film

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #21  
Old 06-22-2009, 07:03 AM
RichardE RichardE is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 272
RichardE is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan_KR64 View Post
Despite Kodachrome's phenomenal visual attributes, it is really hard to make the film and the cost of producing the chemistry is high as well. This is one of those things that is hard to understand unless you have been to Rochester, seen the operation and talked to the engineers and management at Kodak.

Trust me: This was a really tough decision on Kodak's part.
I don't doubt that is was a tough decision. But I don't believe that the best-known photo company in the world, with supposedly the largest analogue R&D staff and operation of any such company, suddenly finds it "really hard" to make their most iconic film, which they invented and have manufactured in plants in several countries for nearly 75 years.

The reason is "profit now", and the least effort which (they think) they can get away with to minimise damage to customer relations. Let's be honest.

(That excuse of "really hard, Daddy" is the one my grandson uses for his school homework. )
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 06-22-2009, 07:13 AM
RichardE RichardE is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 272
RichardE is on a distinguished road
Default

Good reply, Rich. I'm 63 too, so empathise with your thoughts!

When my stock of K64 is used, I've already a few Fuji Astia waiting in the freezer. Life hasn't ended while green boxes are around, it's worth a try.

And, while everyone's fiddling around with their PC's and printers, it's a great time to buy the s/h analogue equipment which you couldn't afford 20 years ago. I've just taken delivery of a mint Pentax zoom lens for $9, which was listed at over $500 in 1984.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
Originally Posted by rev66vette View Post
I thank the administrator for the PM he also sent...and I guess we all knew that in the general scheme of things, this was an eventuality that we would all have to deal with.

But I still can't get over the feeling that somehow, once again I have been screwed by technology...........I'm going to be 63 years old this year........and I guess that alone qualifies me for the "set-in-my-ways" attitude that I once held so much contempt for to people who have preceded me here on earth.

I'm still adamant in the fact that I will not go digital...not for any reason other than the timing of all this. I don't want to invest the time and effort at this stage in life to enter a new world of technology. Maybe twenty years ago or so, I'd be all sure-fired to buy new cameras, lenses, hard drives, lap-tops, scanners, printers, strobes, CD's, etc...but at this stage of the game, I just don't. I've often wondered what it would be like when we film shooters reach the "final end". Guess we're not far form it. I've got a good supply of Kodachrome on hand. The press releases say that Dwaynes will process Kodachrome until the "end of 2010"...I hope it goes beyond that for those of us who can continually "stretch in out"......

Ultimately, I guess I'll drop over to the Fuji end, where a few of my compatriots tell me the world isn't so bad.

But I'm hurt.......especially when I recall all the things that I've witnessed that evoke similar memories........leaded gas, real seltzer, Ronson lighters, phonographs and pressed records, hard-wired phones, CB/short-wave radio, IBM selectric typewriters, carbon paper, Accutron watches, on and on......

I share your pain.............

Regards and sympathies to all;

Rich Onorevole
Clifton, NJ
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 06-22-2009, 07:56 AM
analogue ∞'s Avatar
analogue ∞ analogue ∞ is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Ireland
Posts: 48
analogue ∞ is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rev66vette View Post
But I still can't get over the feeling that somehow, once again I have been screwed by technology... I'm still adamant in the fact that I will not go digital...
I'm with you on that. Much as I am going to hate moving to another film; digital, with me, only happenes by force!
Quote:
Originally Posted by rev66vette View Post
I've often wondered what it would be like when we film shooters reach the "final end". Guess we're not far form it.
I'd say we've got quite a few years left yet. I doubt film will ever completely go away.. not in the next 50 years anyway. It will end up kind of like vinyl records.. a small but solid niche.
Quote:
Originally Posted by rev66vette View Post
But I'm hurt.......especially when I recall all the things that I've witnessed that evoke similar memories........leaded gas, real seltzer, Ronson lighters, phonographs and pressed records, hard-wired phones, CB/short-wave radio, IBM selectric typewriters, carbon paper, Accutron watches, on and on......I share your pain.............
The thing that gets me the most is when the successor to these things is actually of inferior quality to what they are replacing. Nostalga isn't even the issue when you're talking about the newer product being technicly inferior to its predecessor. As I've said before, technology, in a way, is going backwards, mostly due to companies constantly trying to maximise their profits and cut costs at the expense of the quality of their products (in a general sense, I don't mean Kodak specifically).. but hence there won't be another film that will have the longevity of Kodachrome.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardE View Post
Ah well, when I've stocked up and used with my final Kodachrome, that's the end of my 50-years-worth of business with Kodak.
No hard feelings, but with Fuji for color, Ilford and the little companies for B&W, and endless sources for digital supplies, I don't need them now.
That's sort of how I feel at the moment. Except I haven't got a clue what film I'm going to use afterwards. I'll have to start looking around. The only option for true longevity now though is black and white.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 06-22-2009, 08:00 AM
budrichard budrichard is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 34
budrichard is on a distinguished road
Default

It's hard sometimes to see the future but in this case it was clearly inevitable as I Posted a few times. I purchased 100 rolls of K64 expired at $3/roll and that told me that Kodak was NOT selling all the K that was made. A company can't continue doing business like that in today's world. 50 years ago with accounting measures being primitive a company could hide the true costs of production and keep a product in production for various reasons. Today, it simply can't be done. The economics are SIMPLE and the result is that for every roll of K you shoot, Kodak loses money and is forcasted to continue to lose in the future. Once the decision is actually made Kodak has an economic liability if not immediately dissemenated but until the decision is actually finalized, the party word has to be, K stays in production which is why a few individuals feel misled.
Anyway, I started using Kodachrome in the early 1950's with a Contaflex SLR and have used it ever since. I have about 80 rolls left and they will be gone by 12/31/10 but I won't be having ANY type of party. At least I won't have to join the rush to purchase this is sure to bring about and the scalping on eBay!
Thanks for the information even though it certainly didn't brighten my Monday morning.-Dick
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 06-22-2009, 08:13 AM
RichardE RichardE is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 272
RichardE is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by analogue ∞ View Post
.
That's sort of how I feel at the moment. Except I haven't got a clue what film I'm going to use afterwards. I'll have to start looking around. The only option for true longevity now though is black and white.
Do have a try with Fuji Astia . I've not used much yet, (been too busy with K64), but on first impressions I find the reproduction of colors, particularly pastels and delicate colors, has some of the "wow" qualities of K64.(I wouldn't be surprised if "measured scientifically" the colors proved more accurate).
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 06-22-2009, 08:33 AM
analogue ∞'s Avatar
analogue ∞ analogue ∞ is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Ireland
Posts: 48
analogue ∞ is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by RichardE View Post
Do have a try with Fuji Astia . I've not used much yet, (been too busy with K64), but on first impressions I find the reproduction of colors, particularly pastels and delicate colors, has some of the "wow" qualities of K64.(I wouldn't be surprised if "measured scientifically" the colors proved more accurate).
I'll check it out for sure. I can see me getting a load of different types of film and seeing which one I like the best. I've always been somewhat intrigued by Ektachrome EPP - the colours look nice and colourful yet still pretty accurate, and the grain gives it an interesting look too. Some of the other Ektachromes seem pretty ok too. To be honest though, I've never really properly checked out the Fuji films, so I think it's definately time to give them a go; right now I feel Kodak have let me down.
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 06-22-2009, 08:41 AM
garyp's Avatar
garyp garyp is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 105
garyp is on a distinguished road
Default

Kinda irksome that Kodak didn't hesitate to use their tribute to Kodachrome as an ad for their newer films.
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 06-22-2009, 09:23 AM
Hellashot Hellashot is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 168
Hellashot is on a distinguished road
Default

This kind of makes sense now though I don't like it. In Shutterbug (I think) magazine this month, Kodak has a full page ad for Ektar: buy 3 rolls (35mm) get $5 mail in rebate and get registered for a $5000 trip to Disney. This must be their signaling their switch to Ektar to replace Kodachrome which they surely aren't equal.

Kodak please give a transparency E6 film of the color balance of Kodachrome. Negative film is too subject to physical damage than slide film.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 06-22-2009, 09:53 AM
uwphotoer's Avatar
uwphotoer uwphotoer is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Piedmont of NC
Posts: 156
uwphotoer is on a distinguished road
Default

I take my kodachrome out on boats for a weeks in the tropics under the worst of humidity, heat and sun. Sometimes the best storage I can get for the bulk I use is under the shade in a basket. I have never had much problem even with expired kodachrome. I have a slide my grandfather created in the late 30's of my mother and the colors look like they took it yesterday. And I know for 16 years that slide was stored in a metal shed in Mesa AZ. The cibachromes I print from the kodachrome I shoot looks incredible.

Show me another film that can do that and I will buy it now!
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 06-22-2009, 09:55 AM
nickrapak nickrapak is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 126
nickrapak is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by marcus View Post
I couldn't fall asleep, been up all night. Now this explains why.
That's SCARY! I couldn't fall asleep until 2:00 AM either!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:37 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.