Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE: Kodak To Stop Making Kodachrome ( ! )

This is topic Kodak To Stop Making Kodachrome ( ! ) in forum Film-Yak at Film-Tech Forum ARCHIVE.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://ft-forum.com/ft/cgi-bin/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=005827

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 06-22-2009, 04:36 PM:

Kodak Retires Kodachrome Color Film After 74-Year Run
By Bloomberg News 7:25 AM PDT, June 22, 2009

(I seem to recall KODAK announced they were going to do this several years ago. It looks like "the end is near"-JC)

NoMoreKodachrome

Eastman Kodak Co., the photography pioneer whose Kodachrome
film inspired Paul Simon's 1973 hit of the same name, said it will retire the 74-year-old product this year after sales dwindled and most labs stopped processing it.

Revenue from Kodachrome represents "a fraction of one percent"
of Kodak's total sales of still-picture films, the company said today in a statement. Kodachrome became the world's first commercially successful color film in 1935, Kodak said.

The Rochester, New York-based company has seen its profitable
film business "evaporate" as digital cameras gained dominance,
Chief Executive Officer Antonio Perez said earlier this year.
The company lost $4.53 billion in market value in 2008 as it
struggled to show investors it had a place in the new technology.

"The majority of today's photographers have voiced their preference to capture images with newer technology -- both film and digital," said Mary Jane Hellyar, Kodak's outgoing president of the film, photofinishing and entertainment group. Kodak derives 70 percent of its revenue from commercial and consumer digital businesses, the company said in the statement.

Photofinishing labs that process Kodachrome film have dwindled
to one worldwide, Dwayne's Photo in Parsons, Kansas, Kodak said.
The lab will offer processing for the film through 2010, and Kodak estimates Kodachrome film supplies will last until "early fall" of this year, according to the statement.

"I love to take a photograph," Paul Simon sang in "Kodachrome,"
which reached second place in 1973 on Billboard's Hot 100 list.
"So mama don't take my Kodachrome away."

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 06-22-2009, 06:05 PM:

Gee, I thought I mentioned here someplace that film is obsolete. Why is this such a surprise?? Having just one lab capable of processing Kodachrome someplace in OZ doesn't help the situation any at all. And after all they only made one batch of the stuff a year... An identical situation some day will happen to film based motion pictures...

Mark

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-22-2009, 06:30 PM:

I remember taking rolls of film to the local pharmacy to be developed back in the day...they used a processor in Billings, but if we had pics we really cared about and didn't mind an extra wait, we would have them sent direct to Kodak for processing - they would look noticably better.

Posted by John Wilson (Member # 269) on 06-22-2009, 07:09 PM:

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
Gee, I thought I mentioned here someplace that film is obsolete.

I've searched all the forums Mark and can't find you mentioning anything of the sort anywhere.

[Big Grin]

Posted by Jeremy Jorgenson (Member # 2989) on 06-22-2009, 08:38 PM:

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
Why is this such a surprise??

I didn't detect any "surprise" in Jim's post...

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 06-23-2009, 07:13 AM:

Kodachrome being a unique product that only Kodak made and only a special process could develop. Unfortunately, it was definitely the best color reversal process ever. In fact, I think it was the most magical film of all time. Look at something shot on Kodachrome...it will look as good today as it did whenever it was shot. Its colors were great too.

However, who is shooting on reversal films today...one of their chief benefits was storage (slides)...that market is all digital.

Steve

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 06-23-2009, 09:55 AM:

quote: John Wilson
I've searched all the forums Mark and can't find you mentioning anything of the sort anywhere.

I definately stated that several hundred times somewhere in the digital threads... Brad probably deleted them all...

I liked two lines in the Kodak Press Release of which Jim's link goes to the shortened version... I read a much longer version on some other news site:

70% of the company's revenue is now from digital...

Said they would continue to make film as long as it was feesable(I read that as long as it is profitable)

Now that 30% represents film and other Kodak products and film is probably half or a little less of that 30%. What ever it is today its a pretty small amount of their biz. Not much life left for it at the present pace of technology and the high cost of keeping and operating those coating facilities...

quote: Steve Guttag
However, who is shooting on reversal films today

Quite a few people still do including your's truely. Not to end up playing boreing slide shows for the neighbors though... more with the intent of ending up hanging on the wall via Ilfochrome and other large print processes...

quote: Steve Guttag
I think it was the most magical film of all time.

I would agree with that line as it pertains to Kodachrome 25... 25 WAS THE ONLY magical Kodachronme in my book but all thats been available for some years now is Kodachrome 64. I never cared much for the latter and never used it. Fuji still has Velvia reversal and that is a very close approximation of Kodachrome 25(its reds being almost identical) and to boot it is ASA 50. All is not lost in photo land yet but when Velvia disapprears thats all for me folks!

Mark

Posted by Jim Cassedy (Member # 4115) on 06-23-2009, 10:09 AM:

quote: Steve Guttag
Look at something shot on Kodachrome...it will look as good today as it did whenever it was shot.

A couple of years ago, when I was visiting my folks who live
in a retirement community I was asked by a neighbor of theirs
who had heard I was some sort of "projector guy" if I could
take a look at an old slide projector he had and get it working.

The problem turned out to be relatively minor and I was then
railroaded into sitting through several trays of Kodachrome
slides this guy had taken on a camping trip with some army
buddies in 1947 when they all got home from the war.
(WWII for those of you who graduated from a CA public school)

My intial impluse to feign a coronary attack to escape was
quickly mitigated when I realized not only was the guy a
decent photographer, but by my amazment at seeing some
of the best colors on screen since the demise of IB Tech!

The brilliance and saturation on these 60+ year old
images was nothing short of breathtaking, even though
they'd spent at least the last decade stored in a hot
closet in a Phoenix apartment.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-23-2009, 01:13 PM:

As noted in another thread I'm busy scanning a bunch of my dad's old color slides, most of which are on Kodachrome film. They look spectacular even though many are nearly 50 years old. I've got a couple of boxes that he shot during the Korean War - haven't gotten to those yet but the couple I've looked at still look great too.

Posted by Claude S. Ayakawa (Member # 1401) on 06-23-2009, 02:21 PM:

National Public Radio devoted some time yesterday with a news story announcing Kodak's decision to cease production of Kodachrome film. They also had National Geographic photographer Steve McCurry talk about the famous 1984 cover portrait of a Afghan girl he had photographed with Kodachrome film.

Kodachrome was introduced in 1935 and I first used the film when I was still in high school back in the later part of the fifties when the film speed was ASA 12. When I seriously began using the film when I was a student at the Brooks Institute of Photography in Santa Barbara, the ASA was still 12. I still have almost all of my Kodachrome slides and they still display it's very vibrant colors. I am very proud to say that I had the opportunity to process Kodachrome film when I worked at a Eastman Kodak processing laboratory in Honolulu for almost a year before opening my studio in 1965. Kodachrome is very much like the Technicolor three strip motion picture inhibition process. Unlike the motion picture process that used three strips of film during principle photography with red/blue/green filters and the dye transfer process using yellow/cyan/magenta dyes, Kodachrome film had the YCM dyes added to the film's emulsion during processing.

-Claude

Posted by Hillary Charles (Member # 769) on 06-23-2009, 06:36 PM:

quote: Mark Gulbrandsen
Quite a few people still do including your's truely. Not to end up playing boreing slide shows for the neighbors though... more with the intent of ending up hanging on the wall via Ilfochrome and other large print processes...

Mark, I can't imagine a show of your slides being boring at all, but an Ilfochrome print of a Velvia slide is incredible! [thumbsup]

Some might say that Kodachrome lost its magic when it went to 25 ASA from 12, but I still like what's left for now, with a roll of KR64 perpetually in one of the stereo cameras. Too bad this will be the last Christmas I get to record in Kodachrome. [Frown]

Posted by David Buckley (Member # 2600) on 06-25-2009, 07:06 AM:

quote: Steve Guttag
Kodachrome being a unique product that only Kodak made and only a special process could develop. Unfortunately, it was definitely the best color reversal process ever. In fact, I think it was the most magical film of all time.

It was only in the USA that you had local processing capability; for the rest of the world you needed to send the film to Kodak for processing. I believe that Kodak had to free up processing in the USA due to anti-trust laws. Processing (outside the USA) was "free", as in it was included in the price of the film. You posted the film to Kodak and Kodak posted back your slides. There was a big processing lab in Switzerland that did it all.

Kodak gave up processing Kodachrome a few years ago, directing everyone to Dwaynes. In many European countries the Kodak dropbox probably still works, and certainly a few years back Kodak forward the film to Dwaynes at their expense.

Kodak in the USA had a certification process for labs, which probably involved money changing hands, and some labs being certified, which Kodak (of course) recommended you use. In some sort of last laugh irony, I seem to remember a story that Dwaynes was never a certified lab...

My slides only go back to the sixties, but they are still pristine, just like everyone elses.

Posted by Jack Theakston (Member # 4484) on 06-25-2009, 12:18 PM:

This is actually rather good news, as most photographers who liked to use Kodachrome felt that Kodak wasn't going to do another batch, and that last year's would have been the last one without any fanfare. At least there's notice.

Keep those slides dark and cool, though. Just because the dyes are more permanent doesn't mean they're fade-resistant. Leave one on the window long enough and you'll see what I mean.

Posted by James Westbrook (Member # 3690) on 06-25-2009, 02:51 PM:

I don't believe Paul Simon will take this news well when he finds out.

Posted by Gordon McLeod (Member # 33) on 06-25-2009, 03:14 PM:

In Canada Kodachrome was only processed by Kodak

Posted by Jeff Stricker (Member # 224) on 06-27-2009, 10:13 AM:

Recently saw some Kodachrome slides shot in the '30's. Still looks like they were shot yesterday. Will they continue to make Ektachrome, since its developing process is quite simple?

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 06-27-2009, 11:54 AM:

Jeff, I don't see any future for film to speak of except revival showings on some quaint old dusty equipment down the road. Technology is moving all too quickly to ensure that it doesn't last for ever.

Kodak should have sold the process to the Chineese so it could live on for at least another while... but I bet that Kodak was loosing money making it even once a year.

Mark

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 06-27-2009, 12:14 PM:

One thing digital can't duplicate is, you can't hold a CD or a hard drive up to the light and see what picture you've got! [Big Grin]

Posted by Mark Gulbrandsen (Member # 72) on 06-28-2009, 05:38 PM:

quote:
One thing digital can't duplicate is, you can't hold a CD or a hard drive up to the light and see what picture you've got!

No, but you can look at a shit load of thumbnails on one screen and if a few happen to be upside down or backwords you just click a button to fix it you don't have to risk touching the original...

Posted by Stephen Furley (Member # 1277) on 06-28-2009, 06:32 PM:

quote:
One thing digital can't duplicate is, you can't hold a CD or a hard drive up to the light and see what picture you've got! [Big Grin]

This is actually an important point; many historically important films have been found in unexpected places. Even if it's in a format that's been dead for a hundred years you can at least look at it, and see what you've got, and if it's something important then you might be able to persuade somebody to put up the money to preserve and copy it. Even if it is in a strange format, making a gate with registration pins, and manually re-photographing it frame by frame isn't too difficult.

With some long-obsolete digital media, holding files in some long-obsolete format it may well be possible to construct equipment to read it if the original no longer exists, though not as easy as it is with film, but you would have to do this, and find the money to do it, just to find out what's on the media, and whether it's restorable. You would have to spend the money just to find out that the content is unreadable, or of no interest, or already exists in a better form elsewhere.

People who find old reels of film often offer them to archives; people in future who find old digital media, and have no idea what's on them, are more likely to throw them away.

Posted by System Notices (Member # 2357) on 12-29-2010, 03:49 PM:

It has been 548 days since the last post.

Posted by Hillary Charles (Member # 769) on 12-29-2010, 03:49 PM:

Tomorrow is the last day Dwayne's is accepting Kodachrome for processing. It has to be in by 12 noon.

There was a great segment about it on CBS Sunday Morning.

The only thing I found wrong was when they said that Steve McCurry took the follow-up photo of the Afghan woman in Kodachrome. According to another video on YT (ironically entitled, "Change is Good") he said that the original was taken in Kodachrome, but the follow-up was shot with Ektrachrome.

Other than that, a well-done segment.

Posted by Steve Guttag (Member # 268) on 12-30-2010, 07:04 PM:

RIP Kodachrome...probably the best film ever on so many points. Talk about a product that must have had some sort of divine intervention.

Oddly enough, I don't think anything out there today, digital or film can compare to it when it comes to the final product and just how long it will last.

This is (or should be) a very sad day...how much of the world has been recorded on Kodachrome and there really isn't a worthy successor to it.

-Steve

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 12-30-2010, 08:22 PM:

My last roll arrived at Dwayne's on 12/29 (per Fedex). I suspect that they are probably swamped this week with last-minute orders from people like me. Their turnaround time is usually about a week, but I would not be surprised if it took at least 2-3x that long for this order.

Posted by Mike Blakesley (Member # 26) on 12-30-2010, 09:38 PM:

In honor of Kodachrome, I offer this Kodachrome shot taken by my dad in the early 1960s on the Yellowstone River at Forsyth, MT.

Posted by Scott Norwood (Member # 30) on 12-30-2010, 09:48 PM:

Good idea, Mike.

Here is a Kodachrome shot of my grandmother. I took this one in October of 2010; it was processed at Dwayne's. I don't know why she is laughing.

She just turned 90 this week! At the party, I showed a bunch of old family slides, many of which were Kodachromes.

Posted by Brad Miller (Member # 2) on 01-01-2011, 10:38 PM:

Hitler gets the news

Posted by Hillary Charles (Member # 769) on 01-01-2011, 11:25 PM:

Mark, the Chinese may be working on it. I sold a few rolls of Kodachrome 25 earlier last year to someone in China, and heard the same story from someone else. SOMETHING is going on...

And I apologize if this has been posted elsewhere, but this has been making the rounds on the interwebs, and it's worth including these stunning Kodachrome images of America, 1939-1943 in this thread. The film captured history. Now it is history.