If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak kills Ektachromes
On 2012-03-01 21:01:48 -0800, Scammed Public said:
http://www.kodak.com/global/en/profe...salIndex.jhtml Aah! A new Rich persona & nom de Newsgroup. Yup! It is sad to see the erosion of the film market. It is even sadder to consider that this might have bee one of the last potentially salvageable Kodak assets. -- Regards, Savageduck |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak kills Ektachromes
Savageduck writes:
On 2012-03-01 21:01:48 -0800, Scammed Public said: http://www.kodak.com/global/en/profe...salIndex.jhtml Aah! A new Rich persona & nom de Newsgroup. Yup! It is sad to see the erosion of the film market. It is even sadder to consider that this might have bee one of the last potentially salvageable Kodak assets. But there's clearly over-supply in the film market, and with no realistic prospect of demand growth, getting rid of some suppliers is necessary to let the remaining ones survive. -- David Dyer-Bennet, ; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak kills Ektachromes
On 2012-03-05 16:09:53 +0000, David Dyer-Bennet said:
Savageduck writes: On 2012-03-01 21:01:48 -0800, Scammed Public said: http://www.kodak.com/global/en/profe...salIndex.jhtml Aah! A new Rich persona & nom de Newsgroup. Yup! It is sad to see the erosion of the film market. It is even sadder to consider that this might have bee one of the last potentially salvageable Kodak assets. But there's clearly over-supply in the film market, and with no realistic prospect of demand growth, getting rid of some suppliers is necessary to let the remaining ones survive. But it was the two best that went. Kodachrome was magnificent film and the newer Ektachromes a close second, Fuji lovers notwithstanding. When the market thins out by losing its best players, something is wrong. Sorry, Velvia fans. -- Michael |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak kills Ektachromes
Michael wrote:
But it was the two best that went. Kodachrome was magnificent film and the newer Ektachromes a close second, Fuji lovers notwithstanding. When the market thins out by losing its best players, something is wrong. It all depends upon the market. Eventually someone will realize that Bayer sensor digital cameras are lacking something and there will be a move back to color film. Not on the scale it was say in the 1980's when everyone had a Japanese 35mm SLR. (You could get a Canon AE1-P for $105 at K-Mart), but hopefully enough that a small film manufacturer will make some really good film. It does not have to be Kodachrome with its many layers and long involved processing, with modern technology an "Ektachome" type film can be made close enough that no one would miss it. It never ceases to amaze me, how many wonderful photographs were taken with an ASA 10 film, 3 and 4 element lenses, no light meters and 1930's film technology. Geoff. -- Geoffrey S. Mendelson, N3OWJ/4X1GM My high blood pressure medicine reduces my midichlorian count. :-( |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak kills Ektachromes
On Tue, 06 Mar 2012 06:39:04 +0000, Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:
It never ceases to amaze me, how many wonderful photographs were taken with an ASA 10 film, 3 and 4 element lenses, no light meters and 1930's film technology. Many people still take great photos with plastic lenses, one aperture and two shutter speeds, tuning exposure with luck and ISO selection. Being there is a significant element of success... My F3 died yesterday[*], propelled to the tiled floor by an energetic dog. Not sure whether to replace it or abandon film at last. I'm in mourning. [*] All seems OK except the mirror seems to have come adrift on one side. Fixable? Cheers, -- Andrew |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak kills Ektachromes
Michael writes:
On 2012-03-05 16:09:53 +0000, David Dyer-Bennet said: Savageduck writes: On 2012-03-01 21:01:48 -0800, Scammed Public said: http://www.kodak.com/global/en/profe...salIndex.jhtml Aah! A new Rich persona & nom de Newsgroup. Yup! It is sad to see the erosion of the film market. It is even sadder to consider that this might have bee one of the last potentially salvageable Kodak assets. But there's clearly over-supply in the film market, and with no realistic prospect of demand growth, getting rid of some suppliers is necessary to let the remaining ones survive. But it was the two best that went. Kodachrome was magnificent film and the newer Ektachromes a close second, Fuji lovers notwithstanding. When the market thins out by losing its best players, something is wrong. The market decided 15 years ago that it preferred Fuji slide films. The fact that not everybody agreed doesn't change it. Also the Kodachrome processing was slow and uncertain, which ruled it out for professional use. Me, I've never really gotten over the 1960s and 70s Agfrachrome, with that lovely neutral tone. -- David Dyer-Bennet, ; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak kills Ektachromes
On 2012-03-06 16:03:32 +0000, David Dyer-Bennet said:
Michael writes: On 2012-03-05 16:09:53 +0000, David Dyer-Bennet said: Savageduck writes: On 2012-03-01 21:01:48 -0800, Scammed Public said: http://www.kodak.com/global/en/profe...salIndex.jhtml Aah! A new Rich persona & nom de Newsgroup. Yup! It is sad to see the erosion of the film market. It is even sadder to consider that this might have bee one of the last potentially salvageable Kodak assets. But there's clearly over-supply in the film market, and with no realistic prospect of demand growth, getting rid of some suppliers is necessary to let the remaining ones survive. But it was the two best that went. Kodachrome was magnificent film and the newer Ektachromes a close second, Fuji lovers notwithstanding. When the market thins out by losing its best players, something is wrong. The market decided 15 years ago that it preferred Fuji slide films. The fact that not everybody agreed doesn't change it. Also the Kodachrome processing was slow and uncertain, which ruled it out for professional use. Me, I've never really gotten over the 1960s and 70s Agfrachrome, with that lovely neutral tone. Kodachrome processing uncertain? Difficult and involved but uncertain? Kodak did it well even in the Kodalux era. So did Dwayne. In the end it was only Dwayne. Ruled out for professional use? Have you read the numerous tributes to Kodachrome written by the pros at the time of its demise? Remember the Afghan girl photo for National Geo? That was Kodachrome. -- Michael |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak kills Ektachromes
Bruce writes:
David Dyer-Bennet wrote: Me, I've never really gotten over the 1960s and 70s Agfrachrome, with that lovely neutral tone. Yes, me too. I adored the results I got Agfachrome CT18, which was a DIN 18 (ASA 50) slide film. The results were just slightly on the cool side so I used a 1A skylight filter most of the time. Yep, that's the one. I mostly exposed it at EI 64. I was never quite as impressed with its eventual successor, CT21 which seemed to lose quite a lot of saturation for a one stop advantage at DIN 21 (ASA 100). And I'd mostly moved on to Kodak films by then. We thought that ASA 50 was quite fast for slide film given that the market leader was ASA 25 Kodachrome II. Ektachrome offered a little more speed at ASA 64. High Speed High Speed Ektachrome offered ASA 160 but was grainy, contrasty and lacked saturation. I never did take to Kodachrome 64; just wasn't the same thing. Finally, there was GAF 500 (ASA 500) sold by 3M but made in Italy by Ansco with grain the size of pebbles and a truly hideous colour cast. Trying to remove the colour cast meant using colour correction filters that robbed too much light, rather negating the point of using the film, so it was best to leave it as it was and make a feature of it. Man, I'd forgotten that. I did use 3M 640T quite a bit -- hideous enough. I was always annoyed that with very few exceptions, high-speed color films were daylight balanced. I *never* needed high-speed color films in daylight, it was always under artificial illumination indoors, which then meant tungsten. I never did figure out who they thought the market was that needed ISO 1600 dayligyht film. -- David Dyer-Bennet, ; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak kills Ektachromes
Bruce wrote:
I never did figure out who they thought the market was that needed ISO 1600 daylight film. Me neither. Because daylight film shot under tungsten lighting produces a nice "warm" feeling, but tungsten film shot under daylight is unusable. Geoff. -- Geoffrey S. Mendelson, N3OWJ/4X1GM My high blood pressure medicine reduces my midichlorian count. :-( |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Kodak kills Ektachromes
Michael writes:
On 2012-03-06 16:03:32 +0000, David Dyer-Bennet said: Michael writes: On 2012-03-05 16:09:53 +0000, David Dyer-Bennet said: Savageduck writes: On 2012-03-01 21:01:48 -0800, Scammed Public said: http://www.kodak.com/global/en/profe...salIndex.jhtml Aah! A new Rich persona & nom de Newsgroup. Yup! It is sad to see the erosion of the film market. It is even sadder to consider that this might have bee one of the last potentially salvageable Kodak assets. But there's clearly over-supply in the film market, and with no realistic prospect of demand growth, getting rid of some suppliers is necessary to let the remaining ones survive. But it was the two best that went. Kodachrome was magnificent film and the newer Ektachromes a close second, Fuji lovers notwithstanding. When the market thins out by losing its best players, something is wrong. The market decided 15 years ago that it preferred Fuji slide films. The fact that not everybody agreed doesn't change it. Also the Kodachrome processing was slow and uncertain, which ruled it out for professional use. Me, I've never really gotten over the 1960s and 70s Agfrachrome, with that lovely neutral tone. Kodachrome processing uncertain? Difficult and involved but uncertain? Kodak did it well even in the Kodalux era. So did Dwayne. In the end it was only Dwayne. Ruled out for professional use? Have you read the numerous tributes to Kodachrome written by the pros at the time of its demise? Remember the Afghan girl photo for National Geo? That was Kodachrome. I've read a lot of professional photographers writing about how they gave it up because processing was slow and unreliable (by their standards). E-6 is 3-hour standard service in any big city (1-hour rush); K-14 was taking them over a week, and wasn't as reliable. -- David Dyer-Bennet, ; http://dd-b.net/ Snapshots: http://dd-b.net/dd-b/SnapshotAlbum/data/ Photos: http://dd-b.net/photography/gallery/ Dragaera: http://dragaera.info |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Kodak kills Kodachrome film after 74 years | Alfred Molon[_4_] | Digital Photography | 20 | June 29th 09 02:46 PM |
In-camera I.S. kills a cash-cow for companies with it | RichA | Digital SLR Cameras | 7 | October 6th 07 08:21 PM |
Gun control kills again | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 2 | April 25th 07 02:32 AM |
*** Sick Video Lawyer Kills Dog *** | [email protected] | Digital Photography | 1 | June 29th 06 07:27 PM |