Jump to content


Photo

The Logic Of Kodak


  • Please log in to reply
17 replies to this topic

#1 Carl Weston

Carl Weston
  • Basic Members
  • PipPip
  • 46 posts
  • Camera Operator
  • New York City

Posted 05 August 2005 - 07:50 PM

What I don?t understand:

A small outfit like Pro8mm can repackage Kodak?s owns film (50D) and Kodak can?t do the same? They can use the same place they package Vision 2 in.
Aren't we talking about Kodak just printing new boxes that says Kodak 50D.

Just put the dam film in the little black cartridges and watch them sell them selves.
  • 0

#2 John Pytlak RIP

John Pytlak RIP

    (deceased)

  • Sustaining Members
  • 3499 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Rochester, NY 14650-1922

Posted 05 August 2005 - 08:34 PM

What I don?t understand:

A small outfit like Pro8mm can repackage Kodak?s owns film (50D) and Kodak can?t do the same? They can use the same place they package Vision 2 in.
Aren't we talking about Kodak just printing new boxes that says Kodak 50D.

Just put the dam film in the little black cartridges and watch them sell them selves.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


It's not that simple. As discussed here before, the real question is whether adding an additional VISION2 Color Negative Film to the Super-8 product line will add to the market, or cannibalize it. A wide roll of color negative film yields many thousands of Super-8 cartridges, so the production batches need to be quite large. Film is a perishable item, with a definite shelf life. If an added product just canibalizes sales of the other products in the line, inventories build and significant quantities of old product may need to be discarded. That waste just adds to cost. But if a new product significantly increases sales of Super-8 film, it will have a good business case. The mix of products being offered is constantly being re-evaluated, so the door is not closed to additional products or changing the mix.
  • 0

#3 Nate Downes

Nate Downes
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1638 posts
  • Florida, USA

Posted 05 August 2005 - 08:53 PM

Indeed, that's why I think Kodak chose to release V2 500T on Super8, a product with a definately attractive feature to get people to buy more film. I know that I'm very impressed with both of the V2 filmstocks, having gotten back my test runs recently, and am planning on shooting much MUCH more in the coming months.
  • 0

#4 Alessandro Machi

Alessandro Machi
  • Sustaining Members
  • 3318 posts
  • Other
  • California

Posted 05 August 2005 - 10:41 PM

Indeed, that's why I think Kodak chose to release V2 500T on Super8, a product with a definately attractive feature to get people to buy more film.  I know that I'm very impressed with both of the V2 filmstocks, having gotten back my test runs recently, and am planning on shooting much MUCH more in the coming months.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


The serious film shooter that eventually wants to shoot in 16mm and 35mm needs to practice on 200 and 500 moreso than on 50, however, having a nice low Super-8 ASA negative stock to balance out the 200 and 500 shouldn't take away sales from 200 and 500 since the 50 is meant to be used in primarily in daylight situations, the 200 and 500 in more adventurous locations.

I see the introduction of 50 ASA negative as possibly competing more with certain types of projects currently being shot in digital video specifically because the production needs a cleaner look mixed in with the grainier look.

I'll buy a 50 carts of 50 ASA negative, when Kodak is the one actually making it.
  • 0

#5 John Hyde

John Hyde
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 151 posts
  • Camera Operator

Posted 05 August 2005 - 11:09 PM

I'm in for 100 carts of Kodak made 50D! B)
  • 0

#6 John Pytlak RIP

John Pytlak RIP

    (deceased)

  • Sustaining Members
  • 3499 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Rochester, NY 14650-1922

Posted 06 August 2005 - 06:49 AM

I'm in for 100 carts of Kodak made 50D! cool.gif



I hear 100. Do I hear 200? Going once, going twice... ;) :lol:
  • 0

#7 John Adolfi

John Adolfi
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 342 posts
  • Producer
  • Fulton, N.Y.

Posted 06 August 2005 - 07:22 AM

I hear 100.  Do I hear 200?  Going once, going twice...  ;)  :lol:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Sold to the man pining for Kodachrome.
  • 0

#8 Nate Downes

Nate Downes
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1638 posts
  • Florida, USA

Posted 06 August 2005 - 08:05 AM

If you could get it for under $18 a roll, I'm in. 8)
  • 0

#9 A.Oliver

A.Oliver
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 348 posts
  • Other
  • Croydon UK

Posted 06 August 2005 - 04:36 PM

me interested in 50d, only after super 8 k40 bites the dust. Would use neg 8 and 16mm stock a lot more if i knew in 50years time the images will still be there. Put me down though for 50 cartridges of 50d. Andy

Edited by k25rip, 06 August 2005 - 04:38 PM.

  • 0

#10 Tim J Durham

Tim J Durham
  • Sustaining Members
  • 742 posts
  • Director
  • East Coast, Baby!

Posted 06 August 2005 - 04:55 PM

I hear 100.  Do I hear 200?  Going once, going twice...  ;)  :lol:

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Hi John,
Just wanted to point out that I think it's great that you come around here to discuss issues
related to Kodak products. You set an example for the rest of the industry who remain conspicuous in their abscense. Short of Panasonic (occasionally) and Zeiss, I can't think of any other companies with representation around here.

I don't shoot film (wish I did) but I certainly appreciate that you've recognized the value to your customers by making yourself available here. Sony? Is anybody out there??
  • 0

#11 Andrea Serafino

Andrea Serafino

    New

  • Basic Members
  • Pip
  • 7 posts
  • Film Loader
  • Milano, Italy

Posted 08 August 2005 - 06:40 AM

if it will be a 50d from kodak I would use it on vacation too! I'm going on holiday in France and I'll bring with me my last k40s....
sorry for my terrible english....

me interested in 50d, only after super 8 k40 bites the dust. Would use neg 8 and 16mm stock a lot more if i knew in 50years time the images will still be there. Put me down though for 50 cartridges of 50d. Andy

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


  • 0

#12 John Pytlak RIP

John Pytlak RIP

    (deceased)

  • Sustaining Members
  • 3499 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Rochester, NY 14650-1922

Posted 08 August 2005 - 11:10 AM

Hi John,
Just wanted to point out that I think it's great that you come around here to discuss issues
related to Kodak products. You set an example for the rest of the industry who remain conspicuous in their abscense. Short of Panasonic (occasionally) and Zeiss, I can't think of any other companies with representation around here.

I don't shoot film (wish I did) but I certainly appreciate that you've recognized the value to your customers by making yourself available here. Sony? Is anybody out there??

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


Thanks. Kodak does care about its customers, and wants to be sure they get the best results possible when using Kodak products and services.

Unfortunately, sometimes tough business decisions have to be made regarding a few "classic" products with a small but loyal following. Fortunately, the newer Kodak films often offer viable and even better alternatives.
  • 0

#13 A.Oliver

A.Oliver
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 348 posts
  • Other
  • Croydon UK

Posted 08 August 2005 - 01:23 PM

[QUOTE]
Unfortunately, sometimes tough business decisions have to be made regarding a few "classic" products with a small but loyal following. Fortunately, the newer Kodak films often offer viable and even better alternatives.

Classic products??? do you mean kodachrome???
In the super 8 format i see no better alternative being offerred, useable perhaps.

I would switch to neg tomorrow if i was given an assurance of the products archival qualities, last week i received back on tape some 16mm 7218, given the illumination and mixed lighting conditions the one light t/k was stunning, this is an amazing stock.
But in 50 years time the kodachrome images will have the last laugh.
  • 0

#14 John Pytlak RIP

John Pytlak RIP

    (deceased)

  • Sustaining Members
  • 3499 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Rochester, NY 14650-1922

Posted 08 August 2005 - 03:21 PM

[quote name='k25rip' date='Aug 8 2005, 02:23 PM']
[QUOTE]
Unfortunately, sometimes tough business decisions have to be made regarding a few "classic" products with a small but loyal following. Fortunately, the newer Kodak films often offer viable and even better alternatives.

Classic products??? do you mean kodachrome???
In the super 8 format i see no better alternative being offerred, useable perhaps.

I would switch to neg tomorrow if i was given an assurance of the products archival qualities, last week i received back on tape some 16mm 7218, given the illumination and mixed lighting conditions the one light t/k was stunning, this is an amazing stock.
But in 50 years time the kodachrome images will have the last laugh.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[/quote]

Have you seen the remastered original "Star Trek" series? -- pretty good for EASTMAN Color Negative dating back to the 1960's. B) There's lots of other film shows from decades ago that are looking very good on new DVD and syndicated release.

Even if stored improperly, most color negative film productions of decades ago are finding new life and quality with modern telecine technology. And if stored per SMPTE Recommended Practice RP131, very little correction/restoration is usually needed. You're giving up the "stunning quality" of modern color negative films for something that is rarely an issue with proper storage and modern transfer technology.
  • 0

#15 A.Oliver

A.Oliver
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 348 posts
  • Other
  • Croydon UK

Posted 08 August 2005 - 03:54 PM

true John, but at present i have a choice, in reasonable light to full sun, given the choice, kodachrome will always be my first choice, even if the stock is not the greatest for t/k ing. Luckily i am not giving up stunning quality as we still have k40 and i have a few rolls of k25 left too. BTW, also transferred at the same time two rolls of 7205, photographed on a dull evening two weeks ago at 8pm, around T2.8. this too gave staggering results. Thanks for the reply. Andy
  • 0

#16 Filip Plesha

Filip Plesha
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1267 posts
  • Other
  • Croatia

Posted 08 August 2005 - 04:17 PM

Have you seen the remastered original "Star Trek" series? -- pretty good for EASTMAN Color Negative dating back to the 1960's.  B)  There's lots of other film shows from decades ago that are looking very good on new DVD and syndicated release.

Even if stored improperly, most color negative film productions of decades ago are finding new life and quality with modern telecine technology.  And if stored per SMPTE Recommended Practice RP131, very little correction/restoration is usually needed.  You're giving up the "stunning quality" of modern color negative films for something that is rarely an issue with proper storage and modern transfer technology.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>



Most modern films look..well modern, kodachrome is an exeption, it is probably the only way to get a more classic look these days, because it reminds more of older negative and reversal films, than modern films do.
  • 0

#17 John Pytlak RIP

John Pytlak RIP

    (deceased)

  • Sustaining Members
  • 3499 posts
  • Industry Rep
  • Rochester, NY 14650-1922

Posted 08 August 2005 - 09:12 PM

Most modern films look..well modern, kodachrome is an exeption, it is probably the only way to get a more classic look these days, because it reminds more of older negative and reversal films, than modern films do.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>


But there is a practical and economic limit to how many "classic" films can be kept on the market for niche uses. And as the cost of DI continues to fall, more movies like "The Aviator" will take advantage of it to achieve classic "looks" with modern films.
  • 0

#18 Filip Plesha

Filip Plesha
  • Basic Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1267 posts
  • Other
  • Croatia

Posted 08 August 2005 - 09:42 PM

Aviator maybe matched the pallete of old films, but the new film still records tones differently than old films did, and that was never matched in aviator, it's tones still look smooth and modern. I don't think that is avoidable.

The thing that makes some films look "classic", "retro", or whatever people call it, is the same in BW and color, reversal, and negative.
Old BW and old color share something in the way tones are recorded that makes you snap your fingers and say: this must be from 60's
  • 0


Ritter Battery

Tai Audio

Technodolly

The Slider

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

CineTape

Opal

FJS International, LLC

Visual Products

Rig Wheels Passport

Paralinx LLC

Aerial Filmworks

rebotnix Technologies

Willys Widgets

Metropolis Post

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Wooden Camera

Glidecam

Abel Cine

CineLab

Tai Audio

Abel Cine

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Glidecam

Technodolly

Metropolis Post

Broadcast Solutions Inc

CineLab

Aerial Filmworks

Wooden Camera

Opal

Rig Wheels Passport

Media Blackout - Custom Cables and AKS

Visual Products

Willys Widgets

The Slider

rebotnix Technologies

CineTape

FJS International, LLC

Ritter Battery

Paralinx LLC