Kodachromeless.

Film Photography & Darkroom discussion

Moderator: Keith Tapscott.

Keith Tapscott.
Posts: 506
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 8:58 am
Location: Plymouth, England.

Kodachromeless.

Postby Keith Tapscott. » Fri Mar 02, 2012 5:24 pm



Ornello
Posts: 833
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Re: Kodachromeless.

Postby Ornello » Fri Mar 02, 2012 10:09 pm

Kodak is run by idiots and has been for decades. They can go to hell as far as I am concerned, and the sooner the better.

(SPIT!)

Let Ilford and Fuji take over.

I have no need for Kodak whatsoever. I have been trying to buy and use slide film recently, without much success.

For decades to come Kodak will be discussed in business classes as a classical example of ineptitude and stupidity.

Ornello
Posts: 833
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Re: Kodachromeless.

Postby Ornello » Tue Mar 06, 2012 12:16 pm

Kodak could never decide whether to throw its weight fully behind Ektachrome or Kodachrome, which led to the firm not developing either line's full potential. Despite the numerous types of Ektachrome, none was targeted specifically to the burgeoning nature photography market, a niche that Fuji saw and exploited to the hilt.

Kodak's profiles of their customers were inadequate, inaccurate, and outdated. Kodak had a new 100-speed Ektachrome seemingly every week, while Kodachrome 25 and 64 went unchanged (at least not officially improved) for decades. Customers were confused by all the varieties of Ektachrome films, none of which was unequivocally superior to Fuji's evolving E-6 line. It was not clear to many customers how they compared to Kodachrome or why both lines even existed, for that matter. With the exception of Kodachrome 200, there was nothing new in Kodachrome for decades. Not that there had to be, but it may have been possible to come out with a 50 or perhaps even 100-speed Kodachrome with the fine grain of a ISO 25 material using the T-grain technology. I used some K64 pro on a trip to Italy in 1995, and it looked better than I remember back in the 1970s. I had not used K64 very much at all, favoring the 25 ISO material.

I remember in the mid-1990s there were so many Ektachromes, amateur and professional, that it was impossible to make an intelligent choice. EPR, EPN, EPP, etc. etc. etc. They had no idea how to 'brand' their films with cute names such as Astia, Velvia, and Provia, the way Fuji was doing.

Fuji sought out and courted influential nature and commercial photographers, who extolled the Fuji film line in countless articles and books. Kodak's response was to sit on their hands.

Incomprehensible.

Keith Tapscott.
Posts: 506
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 8:58 am
Location: Plymouth, England.

Re: Kodachromeless.

Postby Keith Tapscott. » Tue Mar 06, 2012 1:20 pm

Ornello wrote:Kodak could never decide whether to throw its weight fully behind Ektachrome or Kodachrome, which led to the firm not developing either line's full potential. Despite the numerous types of Ektachrome, none was targeted specifically to the burgeoning nature photography market, a niche that Fuji saw and exploited to the hilt.

Kodak's profiles of their customers were inadequate, inaccurate, and outdated. Kodak had a new 100-speed Ektachrome seemingly every week, while Kodachrome 25 and 64 went unchanged (at least not officially improved) for decades. Customers were confused by all the varieties of Ektachrome films, none of which was unequivocally superior to Fuji's evolving E-6 line. It was not clear to many customers how they compared to Kodachrome or why both lines even existed, for that matter. With the exception of Kodachrome 200, there was nothing new in Kodachrome for decades. Not that there had to be, but it may have been possible to come out with a 50 or perhaps even 100-speed Kodachrome with the fine grain of a ISO 25 material using the T-grain technology. I used some K64 pro on a trip to Italy in 1995, and it looked better than I remember back in the 1970s. I had not used K64 very much at all, favoring the 25 ISO material.

I remember in the mid-1990s there were so many Ektachromes, amateur and professional, that it was impossible to make an intelligent choice. EPR, EPN, EPP, etc. etc. etc. They had no idea how to 'brand' their films with cute names such as Astia, Velvia, and Provia, the way Fuji was doing.

Fuji sought out and courted influential nature and commercial photographers, who extolled the Fuji film line in countless articles and books. Kodak's response was to sit on their hands.

Incomprehensible.
Kodak's marketing over the years is strange indeed. Fuji have a fine range of films such as Provia 100F in their colour reversal range, Reala colour negative film which is their sharpest film and 100 Acros which is a very strong challenger for Kodak's 100TMX B&W film.

Kodak's Portra films are very fine colour film products, but it seems they left things a little too late.

http://www2.fujifilm.co.uk/professional/

Ornello
Posts: 833
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Re: Kodachromeless.

Postby Ornello » Tue Mar 06, 2012 1:46 pm

I have used some of the Kodak Porta 400 and find it very good. It was designed for scanning and that's all that I will be doing with it. I have a roll of Porta 160 and expect it to be even finer-grained.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/ornello/57 ... hotostream

I have used a little of the Acros and found it to be excellent, but closer to EI 64. At that rating it is excellent, and far easier to deal with than Ilford Pan-F Plus (which comes in around EI 32-40). I cannot see any meaningful difference in graininess or sharpness; the Acros seems to have better green sensitivity and greater latitude, as well as about 2/3 stop more speed than Pan-F Plus, for which I see no need. Acros is just as sharp, just as fine-grained, is faster, has more latitude, has better color sensitization, and develops slower than Pan-F Plus.

Don't you love this one?

"highly complex product formulation and manufacturing processes"

well DUH!

Ornello
Posts: 833
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Re: Kodachromeless.

Postby Ornello » Tue Mar 06, 2012 6:59 pm

Well, just what, exactly, is Kodak going to sell? People want to deal with companies that offer broad lines. By continuing to trim their lines, Kodak does not help themselves. Synergy lost when you do that.

Keith Tapscott.
Posts: 506
Joined: Tue Jan 17, 2006 8:58 am
Location: Plymouth, England.

Re: Kodachromeless.

Postby Keith Tapscott. » Fri Mar 09, 2012 2:29 pm

Kodak will also be increasing the price of their films in the UK.

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/ne ... ml?aff=rss

Ornello
Posts: 833
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 9:49 am

Re: Kodachromeless.

Postby Ornello » Fri Mar 09, 2012 6:13 pm

Keith Tapscott. wrote:Kodak will also be increasing the price of their films in the UK.

http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/ne ... ml?aff=rss
Silver is very high right now. Petroleum too. It takes energy, chemicals, and silver to make film.


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest