"Mama, don't take my Kodachrome away"

Discussion in 'Photography' started by Gary Edstrom, Oct 9, 2008.

  1. Gary Edstrom

    Gary Edstrom Guest

    Taking away Kodachrome?
    Given the dominance of digital photography, the iconic film might be on
    its way out
    Monday, September 29, 2008 2:57 AM
    By Ben Dobbin

    ROCHESTER, N.Y. -- It is an elaborately crafted photographic film,
    extolled for its sharpness, vivid colors and archival durability. Yet
    die-hard fan Alex Webb is convinced that the digital age soon will take
    his Kodachrome away.

    Continued:

    http://www.dispatch.com/live/conten...-29-08_C12_UTBE9N9.html?type=rss&cat=&sid=101

    If the above link wraps-around, try the following:

    http://gbe.dynip.com/Link30.htm
     
    Gary Edstrom, Oct 9, 2008
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Gary Edstrom

    Chris H Guest

    The article notes that many other types of Kodak film are no longer
    produced and that Kodak is out of the film processing business. The
    days of film are truly numbered.

    It is a shame that whilst the cameras them selves can last many decades
    unexposed film has a finite shelf life and requires a a particular
    environment for "long" term storage.

    So those of us who do have a spare or back up 35mm camera may not be
    able to get film for it. Perhaps Kodak can be persuaded to do a run
    every 5 years as a special... mind you they will charge the earth for
    it.

    It is to be expected. My local pro camera shop used to have three
    fridges (like the upright beer/coke coolers in shops) full of film.
    Now it has 3 shelves in one fridge and those shelves aren't full of
    stock. So their stock of film is down by about 90%
     
    Chris H, Oct 9, 2008
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Gary Edstrom

    Noons Guest

    Chris H wrote,on my timestamp of 10/10/2008 12:48 AM:
    old news, by a second rate reporter looking
    to prop up audience. Never fails.

    Total nonsense, of course.
    First of all, Kodak released a new film at Photokina.
    Yes, that's right. But you never heard of it from
    the usual "digital only" so-called reporters.
    They also announced that film sales have actually
    increased, something unheard of for years.
    And Ilford and Fuji are selling theirs without the slightest
    problem. Fuji released a new film late last year as well.

    That's right. Did you notice as well the general
    idea with film is to actually USE it, not store it?

    Why? Because it runs out of validity if you don't
    get it?
    You don't have a clue what you talking
    about, do you?


    Your "local pro camera shop" is run by idiots.
    Mine, which has converted to digital ages ago
    and calls itself "Ted's Digital Cameras",
    is now stocking film again as well as darkroom
    and development chemicals. Just got a bottle
    of the new Ilfosol 3 developer last week.
    Not bad for a "dead" product...
     
    Noons, Oct 9, 2008
    #3
  4. Gary Edstrom

    Gary Edstrom Guest

    If Kodak decides to drop the line, maybe some 3rd party can obtain a
    license from Kodak to manufacture and process Kodachrome. Of course,
    the price, like any other specialty product such as vinyl LP's, would be
    high. But maybe there is a niche market for it out there.

    Gary
     
    Gary Edstrom, Oct 9, 2008
    #4
  5. Gary Edstrom

    Chris H Guest

    No, reality.
    I did but they have dropped many more than they have introduced.
    Do you have a reference for that?

    Yes. The point is that when (not "if") in the medium term film is no
    longer made for general use storing the last bulk purchase is not the
    same as storing other non-perishables.
    Not able to get film f rot eh camera and long term storage is not
    always possible.
    Good luck to them. However they are in a minority. I am sure you can
    still get glass plates somewhere too.
     
    Chris H, Oct 9, 2008
    #5
  6. Gary Edstrom

    Gary Edstrom Guest

    [snip]

    My, some people get pretty defensive when you walk about their pet
    product! Neither of us suggested that the film is going away anytime
    soon...just that it is becoming a 'niche market' product. Just like
    vinyl LPs, it will be available, but for a price. There is money to be
    made in niche market products for smaller companies!

    Gary
     
    Gary Edstrom, Oct 9, 2008
    #6
  7. Gary Edstrom

    Chris H Guest

    I am sure there will be a niche market for film just as there is a niche
    market for glass plate for cameras.

    What amuses me is the die hards who argue black is white that film is on
    the way back. I am sure that all the film companies have had a recent
    increase in sales. The probably do every summer. Yes Kodak introduced a
    new film but has also cut a dozen.

    The overall trend (plumet? ) is for film to disappear.

    It will get worse due to the current economic situation.

    For 90% of the world do you use a digital camera and take picture and
    get a few printed. That is the part that costs money , getting the
    specific prints you want printed

    OR

    Do you BUY film, then pay to get it developed and printed including the
    pictures you don't want.

    The majority of the enthusiast have also moved to digital as have nearly
    all the pro's so where is the economic argument for producing film.

    As noted in the article the do production runs of Kodachrome months
    apart when the stock runs out. Not continuous production as they used
    to. I do not think they will stop doing Kodachrome for some time. Not
    until the value of the land or office space the production plant is on
    become more cost effective for something else.

    If the runs are once a year that time can not be far off.
     
    Chris H, Oct 9, 2008
    #7
  8. Gary Edstrom

    Guest Guest

    Kodak has already announced that they will cease production of Kodachome.
    There currently only one lab in Kansas that processes it. Long live Velvia.
    Old Bob
     
    Guest, Oct 9, 2008
    #8
  9. Gary Edstrom

    Mark Thomas Guest

    Not ambiguous. Quite appropriate.
    When it is better for the intended purpose, of course.
    Sigh.
    A.straight.answer.is.not.easy.nor.short.and.like.Shiva.I.wouldn't.
    bother.providing.one.to.someone.who.can't.be.bothered.to.do.a.bit.of.
    work.themselves.or.outline.what.their.needs.are.

    When.would.you.choose.petrol.over.lpg.or.diesel?

    Give full reasons.
     
    Mark Thomas, Oct 10, 2008
    #9
  10. Gary Edstrom

    Peter Guest


    I was tempted to say if I had a film camera and no digital camera.

    Seriously, I think despite vast improvements in printer technology, to my
    eye silver BW
    produces richer tones.

    YMMV
     
    Peter, Oct 10, 2008
    #10
  11. Gary Edstrom

    Noons Guest

    Oh really? So I suppose Tri-x, all the Tmax films,
    all the Ektas, Provias, bwc400N and even Kodachrome 64
    available and for sale anywhere that stocks film is what?
    A figment?
    Your reality seems a bit vaporous....

    Read this: they inroduced a NEW FILM at Photokina.
    Got it, diddums?

    Yes, I do. Search Apug.

    Film is still made even for 8mm movies!
    Get real, the "pending doom" of no film only exists
    in your wishfull dreams of digital shill!


    Really? Which film can you "not get for the camera"?


    Yes. Get informed, before spouting off with
    the "film is dead" bull.
     
    Noons, Oct 10, 2008
    #11
  12. Gary Edstrom

    Noons Guest

    Really? Strange "niche", where folks can find it just about
    anywhere. Maybe not in your neck of the woods,
    but that defines YOU as the niche.
    If it was free, that would be news...
    Of course. Even the croatians are cashing in on film.
     
    Noons, Oct 10, 2008
    #12
  13. Gary Edstrom

    Noons Guest

    Don't be stupid! NO ONE argued it was on the way back.
    YOU argued it was GONE. It isn't, and what
    you said is a blank, clear LIE.
    And it got exposed.

    Got it?

    That is, once again, a lie.
    No it isn't. Sales of film have stabilised and have actually
    increased. What you are blindly repeating is 5 years
    old bull and not reflecting reality at all.

    For digital as well. Watch the bottom fall out of
    the p&s digital compacts.

    90% of the world does NOT have a computer to work with digital,
    you nong! Don't confuse your narrow-minded "world series"
    with the REAL world!


    If you do that, you are an absolute idiot and you do DESERVE
    to pay through your nose.

    The sales that keep happening, despite your theories.
    The article is completely incorrect. Kodak does productions runs
    for Kodachrome once a year.
    Another blatant lie: Kodak NEVER ran continuous production
    runs of Kodachrome. NEVER. The most they did was
    twice a year. Even at the peak of the product.


    Judging by the values of real estate of late, that will never happen.
     
    Noons, Oct 10, 2008
    #13
  14. Gary Edstrom

    Noons Guest


    everytime I wanted a 20MP sensor for the price of a roll of film.
     
    Noons, Oct 10, 2008
    #14
  15. Gary Edstrom

    Mark Thomas Guest

    I'll use Large Format film if I want the best resolution. (A small
    Digital SLR would probably give me the best 'racy' experience, though..)
    ???
    I'd choose digital if I wish to save (a little) money, and (repeating
    myself) where digital is more cost effective than petrol.

    Hope that was as useful as your answers were. (O:


    More seriously, in simple terms good digitals meet or exceed film *for
    most low-medium quality use*, ie the market that used to be occupied by
    35mm cameras, for good prints up to about 11"x8".

    However, digital cameras fall behind a bit in b&w, in terms of
    resolution and tonality.

    And if you like slides, good digital projection is *very* expensive and
    slide film/projectors runs rings around anything affordable in digital.

    And if you are wedding/portrait photographer, the soft,
    high-dynamic-range abilities of films like the Fuji NPx's are hard to match.

    And those films are getting harder to find..

    And there are lots of other related issues.

    For high-end use, ie upmarket weddings, large prints, etc film still
    occupies numerous niches, but it is even more complex and if you are in
    those markets you wouldn't be asking the question..

    It's.not.even.close.to.a.simple.question.
     
    Mark Thomas, Oct 10, 2008
    #15
  16. Gary Edstrom

    Gary Edstrom Guest

    Why does this need to degenerate into the endless film vs. digital
    debate? I never took a side in my original posting; I just re-posted an
    article that I found. If you want to use film, fine. I'm not stopping
    you. Just be prepared to pay a premium for it in the future.

    Gary
     
    Gary Edstrom, Oct 10, 2008
    #16
  17. Gary Edstrom

    Noons Guest

    It isn't. If you don't want it to go into that,
    then STOP posting incorrect statements.
    Which was pointed out as false and correct information
    provided.
    Why is it that when TRUTH is put forward about film,
    you digital-breaths get all defensive on the "let's not
    discuss film versus digital"?
    What is the problem you have with someone CLEARLY
    pointing out errors and "deliberate" mistakes?

    You got it. What's that got to do with the article in question
    and its incorrect and outright wrong statements?
    Another typical false blurt of the digital brigade. For your
    information, even at the peak of film I never paid less
    than I pay now for film! And the one I send away for
    development gets back in my hands FASTER than it
    ever did back in the 80s.
    So much for the "pending doom" argument...
    It's only been going on for 8 years, I wonder when that
    famous "film is dead" bull is gonna happen!
     
    Noons, Oct 10, 2008
    #17
  18. Gary Edstrom

    Ofnuts Guest

    Now the question is what else they keep in the fridge on the remaining
    shelves.... fresh Flash anynone?
     
    Ofnuts, Oct 10, 2008
    #18
  19. I would hope beer for the customers.
     
    Blinky the Shark, Oct 10, 2008
    #19
  20. Gary Edstrom

    Noons Guest

    Blinky the Shark wrote,on my timestamp of 11/10/2008 7:10 AM:

    NOW, we're tawkin'!
     
    Noons, Oct 11, 2008
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Similar Threads
There are no similar threads yet.
Loading...