Jump to content




Photo

Further Kodak discontinuation rumors


  • Please log in to reply
12 replies to this topic

#1 Jean-Louis Seguin

Jean-Louis Seguin
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 650 posts
  • Other
  • Montreal, Canada

Posted 31 August 2014 - 08:48 AM

I've been following an interesting discussion on the Frameworks mailing list:

https://mailman-mail...ust/014485.html

Jean-Louis
  • 0




#2 Robert Houllahan

Robert Houllahan
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1511 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Providence R.I.

Posted 31 August 2014 - 11:42 AM

Tri-X is basically the Film gateway drug Kodak would be very stupid to eliminate it, but it seems that they want to eliminate all B&W stock from that email. Maybe this is an opportunity for Orwo to step in and take that over. We have developed both the UN54 and UN74 as reversal and they look good and I would imagine that it is just a formulation change for them to make a HiCon stock.


  • 0

#3 David Cunningham

David Cunningham
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 976 posts
  • Cinematographer

Posted 31 August 2014 - 02:03 PM

I hope. Don't read that correctly and they are eliminating 100ft loads of Vision3 50D in 16mm. I would cry almost as much as the loss of ektachrome. Why would they do that? That puts a major burden on all of is that still regularly use our bolex or keystone or other home movie/proam cameras!
  • 0

#4 Kenny N Suleimanagich

Kenny N Suleimanagich
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 843 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York

Posted 31 August 2014 - 02:40 PM

I can live with the discontinuation of 100’, it’s very easy to spool down (albeit annoying, but not impossible). What I am dreading is '22 being gone altogether for 16mm.  Double-X never looked great in 16mm grain but I don’t think it can be replaced but an Orwo stock. 


  • 0

#5 Josh Gladstone

Josh Gladstone
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 309 posts
  • Editor
  • Hollywood

Posted 31 August 2014 - 04:49 PM

Well I hope this isn't true...
  • 0

#6 Robert Houllahan

Robert Houllahan
  • Sustaining Members
  • 1511 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Providence R.I.

Posted 31 August 2014 - 05:19 PM

I hope this isn't true either but I also don't see any reason why the Orwo stocks could not be direct replacements for Plus-X and Double-X Kodak films.


  • 0

#7 Bill DiPietra

Bill DiPietra
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2264 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York City

Posted 31 August 2014 - 07:19 PM

Eliminating popular stocks such as 7222 and 7203 would leave them with hardly any 16mm motion picture film catalog.  They might as well just call it a wrap right there.

 

I hate to say it, but I anticipated sometihng like this once I heard that NFL Films went to digital...


  • 0

#8 Jean-Louis Seguin

Jean-Louis Seguin
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 650 posts
  • Other
  • Montreal, Canada

Posted 31 August 2014 - 08:29 PM

Only the 100 foot loads of 7203 were mentioned.
Of course, it's still only rumors at this point.

Jean-Louis
  • 0

#9 cole t parzenn

cole t parzenn
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 287 posts
  • Other

Posted 01 September 2014 - 02:35 PM

Tri-X is basically the Film gateway drug Kodak would be very stupid to eliminate it

 

Better stock up, then! :/


  • 0

#10 steve waschka

steve waschka
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 204 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Indian Harbour Beach, FL

Posted 01 September 2014 - 10:48 PM

If wittner cinetec and orwo can continue they will prob fill some voids. However I have to agree with Bill. When I read the switch to the Amira I almost put all my 16mm gear on ebay. Its got an expiration date on it I'm afraid. I dont know the what percentage of kodaks production was consumed by NFL films but I'll bet it stung when the reps took them out of the sales funnel. Somebodys comm check took a hit. Whats irritating is I just started to use the stuff again. But I'm not sure all the pros who actually can make a difference are going to come full circle on this one. Vinyl survived. I hope film does as well. But I won't be shocked if it doesn't. It's sad. We'll save an owl but let a film company tank. Course I think its a lot cheaper to save an owl.


  • 0

#11 Anthony Schilling

Anthony Schilling
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 992 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • Portland, OR

Posted 02 September 2014 - 12:10 AM

NFL Films makes up a sizable chunk of usage but what's the point of scrapping 16mm all together as long as they are making film? Kodak says they sell film to a variety of segments like fine art, commercial, amature, wedding films ect...World wide all that still makes up for a customer base that isn't worth upsetting. And i'm sure that base is using more than $14,000 worth, which is the minimum amount for a special order. And look at super 8. You see a commercial here and there that uses it, but world wide it's mainly used by a loyal customer base of armatures and artists that they don't want to piss off. Super 8 requires carts and loading where 16mm requires little effort and cost to cut and perf from the film they are already making. They know that a lot of people were upset by Kodachrome and Ektachrome getting the ax, but the production of it became unfeasible. Also, I really doubt that they will make any major decisions on axing more film until they start subsidizing the production of it with flat screen film production starting in 2015. For now they plan on spinning off motion picture film on the side in smaller quantities while the giant machine stays busy churning out the tech film. 


  • 0

#12 Bill DiPietra

Bill DiPietra
  • Sustaining Members
  • 2264 posts
  • Cinematographer
  • New York City

Posted 02 September 2014 - 09:52 AM

If wittner cinetec and orwo can continue they will prob fill some voids. However I have to agree with Bill. When I read the switch to the Amira I almost put all my 16mm gear on ebay.

 

 

I wouldn't go that far, but I'm also not making any big investments in any medium until I see what stage Kodak, Ferrania and all digital technologies are at early next year.


  • 0

#13 steve waschka

steve waschka
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 204 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Indian Harbour Beach, FL

Posted 02 September 2014 - 04:14 PM

 

I wouldn't go that far, but I'm also not making any big investments in any medium until I see what stage Kodak, Ferrania and all digital technologies are at early next year.

Agree. I'm still able to get away with SD for my modest projects. {I have really good SD gear]. So for me to do higher res shoots its more affordable  [attainable] to run film as I can cash roll film costs and pull it out of a draw after the fact. Buying an alexa or red [and all the rest of the workflow to manage it] would require a massive business loan for me. Can't be done. I'm a manufacturer's agent first. I shoot to augment my services and their effectiveness.


  • 0


Tai Audio

The Slider

CineLab

Rig Wheels Passport

Willys Widgets

Paralinx LLC

Visual Products

Zylight

Glidecam

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Ritter Battery

Technodolly

rebotnix Technologies

Abel Cine

Pro 8mm

CineTape

Aerial Filmworks

Willys Widgets

Glidecam

CineLab

The Slider

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Visual Products

Technodolly

Paralinx LLC

rebotnix Technologies

CineTape

Ritter Battery

Aerial Filmworks

Rig Wheels Passport

Tai Audio

Abel Cine

Pro 8mm

Zylight