|
Author
|
Topic: Forever Film : The Return of Kodachrome
|
Thomas Dafnides
Expert Film Handler
Posts: 247
From: St. Louis, Missouri USA
Registered: Dec 2009
|
posted March 22, 2012 10:43 PM
SMPTE presentation in Hollywood last night:
The subject was "The Technology and History of Film, presented by Beverly
Pasterczyk of Eastman Kodak Co." Ms. Pasterczyk is a chemist with film R
& D at Kodak, and she mentioned that Kodak Research is currently engaged in
the continuing design and implementation of new emulsions, such as the new
version of the Vision III product.
Regarding consumer films, she said that they are considering restructuring
a new approach aimed at producing these at a reasonable cost in much
smaller volumes than in the past. She said that new technology will
permit them to continue to produce these in "boutique quantities" using
single coating machines rather than the huge multiple coaters of the
past. She said that basically, as long as they had sufficient orders for
a minimum of a single master roll "54 inches (almost 1-1/2 meters) wide by
whatever length - no minimum stated", they would consider examining
production in terms of the economics involved. Future production would
primarily be on an "on demand" basis.
This would include the infrastructure for processing, probably at a single
lab, either in Rochester NY, or sub-contracted.
"On demand" could conceivably include any film that Kodak has ever
manufactured. Someone in the audience asked the inevitable question:
"Including Kodachrome?" Her answer: "Yes, including Kodachrome". She
added that while small runs of Kodachrome were unlikely, it was not out of
the question, since they have had numerous inquiries.
To the question "How could this be made possible?" her answer was
intriguing. "Volume is the answer. Consumer groups of large numbers of
individuals could petition for the return of a specific film. This would
include not only large companies, but also individuals banded together such
as camera clubs, especially those with a large enough base such that they
could collectively join on a national or even international basis.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hugh Thompson Scott
Film God
Posts: 3063
From: Gt. Clifton,Cumbria,England
Registered: Jan 2012
|
posted March 30, 2012 12:40 PM
I'm inclined to agree Allan,lets look at this realistically,Kodak had
all the infrastructure in place to deal with film developing,and
they pulled the plug on them.It doesn't make economic sense
to start from scratch,when all those skilled people have now gone.
Also to be fair,Kodak didn't exactly push the boat out on any
advertising on TV or anywhere else promoting S/8,no they sat on
their hands and let video steal a march on them.Before anyone says "Ah yes but video was cheaper and more convenient",let me add video wasn't cheap as all the equipment necessary to
make a video wasn't exactly cheap,indeed to carry it about was
no mean feat what with huge cameras and power packs to
contend with.Kodak hadn't allowed for the fact that "joe public"
already had the means to make and show his films,all he needed,in the UK at least was a faster returns service on the
developing side and a cheaper film stock,which if you advertise
you sell more,the more you sell,the cheaper you can make it.
Kodak,I have little sympathy for,remember we still have the
legacy of Eastman and those nice red tints,or should that read
prints.
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
Printer-friendly view of this topic
