Slide projectors and reversal film news

On the business page of todays Rochester Democrat and Chronicle, it

was announced that EK had discontinued the production of all slide

projectors due to the decline in sales of reversal films.

 

After 67 years of production, the last slide projector rolled off the

lines earlier this year, but the last one went out the door to a

small party at KP. Atendees included many old timers from the

reversal film and projector work force.

 

This demise was attributed to the loss of reversal sales to digital,

the growth of negative film sales, and the decline in customers who

wanted to use projectors to view their pictures, preferring to get

color prints instead.

 

Support and repairs for slide projectors will continue for a

reasonable period, according to an EK spokesperson.

 

Well, the article says it all. But, expect to see more like this one

soon.

 

Regards.

 

Ron Mowrey

A sad day indeed. People will pay thousands for a digital projector which has at most 1 megapixel of resolution, and terrible colour rendition in the reds. On the other hand, they eagerly abandon a good, reliable system that I prefer to use when giving presentations. Good thing these slide projectors last a long time.<p>Every time I think I'm going to use some print film, I end up regretting it because the lab (Qualex or Wal-Mart) screws up the printing. I have better results from the Kodak PhotoCDs, which seem to have better color fidelity. The last Qualex howler was some B&W prints that came out showing that the enlarger was out of focus! I didn't know if it was me or them, but after looking at the negatives using a 10X loupe, I concluded that I do know how to focus after all.<p>Such mishaps have caused me to use a digital camera when I want prints.<p>Most of the time, I'd much rather have slides. They look beautiful when projected on the large screen (the way I prefer to look at my pictures). I have a Leitz Pradovit and Kodak Ektagraphic IIIa model. Sorry Rowland, but the Leitz gives a better image - it's brighter, has more even illumination, doesn't have an obvious yellow cast in the highlights, and has a better autofocus system. Even so, I picked up the Kodak because it was such a steal - $40 or something. I picked up Schneider and Golden Navitar perspective control lenses for the Kodak for under $30 each. Anyway, the entire package cost around $100 at most, and it is great at that price.<p>With slides, if the exposure is wrong, or the color balance is wrong, or the focus is off, then there is no-one to blame but myself.<p>As for B&W, I may go back and do my own darkroom work, but nowadays I have fun putting them through dr5 to come out as B&W slides. Some of the most detailed ones come from Tech Pan (alas, another victim of faster is better, quality be damned).<p>In the future, when all my bulk rolls of Tech Pan have been developed, Velvia 50 is history, and E100G is out of production (along with K64), then I'll take up pen and ink drawing.

<I>then I'll take up pen and ink drawing.</i><P>Why not do us a favor and start now?<P>All to easy to hook my 10D directly up to my 65" Pioneer and have a slide show live in a living room for all to see. Colors are more accurate than slide film that's projected with a tungsten bulb as well. I don't know of many people in the electronic publishing industry that use projectors and slide film for color matching, but they sure use a lot of digital reference. Perhaps you could lecture them on how your Leica projectors are right and they are wrong. It's really sad when the whole point of sharing photographs by projecting film is simply to show off your camera optics. Really sad.<P>I used to get a bang out of family reunions and seeing all those old chromes projected on a screen in a blackened room with a trapezoid screen because Unlce Dan couldn't quite align the projector properly. Now we watch them on anybody's TV in the living room a few hours after I take them, and I make copies for everybody who wants them. Yeah, I realize you can't project the resolution with a digital projector or even a Hi-Def TV as optically with film. You want to know what? Nobody who's watched those slide shows over the years could give a royal F either.

Just curious. Scott, but how do you look at all your old slides? Surely you're not going to scan them all?

 

I still see slide projectors for sale here in Australia, and in fact bought one myself (thought I'd better, before they went off the market). But it was a Leica, not a Kodak. Here in Australia the Kodaks were almost exclusively for professional use. Rightly or wrongly, a German consumer product will always outsell a US one even if it costs more. IMO, rightly.

Scott, why don't you do us a favor and grow up? If you hate film so much, then why are you posting in a film forum? I don't know of many people who have color profiled their home TVs to be a reference monitor. Anyone who wants to look at my TV would rather watch a movie or show. Nobody asks to look at digital pictures on that screen. If yours relatives do, then you're either extraordinarily gifted with your digital vision. Or, you're really imposing upon your relatives and they don't want to hurt your feelings by revealing to you that you're an impossibly conceited bore.<p>As far as projection goes, I have a projection table which allows me to project at the correct screen height to prevent any keystoning. When I give a presentation, I take the care to make sure that the projector and screen are properly aligned for correct geometry. Our eyes and brain do have the ability to perform an auto white balance. Digital projectors produce a rather bluish image deficient in red - if that's your color reference, then great for you. Images from my 3MP digital camera do very well there, as long as I stick to powerpoint text slides most of the time and few color images.<p>If I happen to like my old fashioned tungsten halogen bulb continuous spectrum light source slide projector, how does that impact upon you? You keep showing stuff on TV, and I'll keep showing my stuff on slides. It's a free world. As long as I can communicate my message, I'm well paid in lecture fees, and I've kept my costs low. I've already stated that the entire Kodak carousel projector and lenses was under $100. I've never seen a $100 TV with impressive color fidelity.<p>I've already started on the pen and ink, by the way.

I think there's a psychological component in all this. There's something about the glow of light coming out of a slide projector in a darkened room that is seductive, like sitting in front of a warm fireplace. Digital images viewed on a glass tv screen, I'll leave that for the work place.

Oh, I missed the tungsten bit. I thought projector filaments went to quartz 30 or 40 years ago.

Good things in life really do not last long.

 

Nothing gives me more pleasure than watching my slides projected on a screen. I too use an old Kodak Carousal projector (S-AV 1030) to project my slides and love it. Had bought this used for about $170. Wonder what was the year of manufacture. I like the convenience of obtaining prints from spectacular slides following the digital process. But as far as viewing is concerned, nothing matches slide projections in a dark room filled with lovers of photography.

I truly enjoy projecting my slides for an audience, and no matter who I show slides too, someone invariably makes the comment, "I can't believe how sharp and colorful these slides are." I bought my Kodak Carousel 4600 about 2 years ago from B and H, and couldn't be happier. I don't own a projection tv, so getting a similarly large picture from digital isn't possible for me at this time. I do own a Sony WEGA 36" Hi-Def Direct View set, and direct view is still considered the very best for sharpness and color in tv's over projection tv's. Maybe when the technology catches up with digital projection, and my budget will allow, I will switch to digital projection.

IMHO EK's decline in slide film sale had more to do with them not having rationalize their product line and having no decent product to speak of.

 

Talk to most Slide shooter today and they will be talking Fuji, EK's film is not bad, just not good enough when facing competetion. now what does that article say - growth of negative film sales - now does that sound some drum to the digital zealots

Franka;

 

Please note that both Fuji and EK have suffered similar declines in reversal film sales.

 

Ron Mowrey

True about the slide projection benefits.

 

Nothing is as beautiful as projected slide. Sometimes not even the original scene :)

 

Cheers

Sad to hear. What's equally sad is alot of today's new photographers have never seen, viewed or shot slide film. The general public, even less. They all bugger it of to "film = expensive". Ever since the chance I had to see my slides under a 10x loupe on a lightbox, the experience was a minor adrenaline rush - I knew nothing will come close. Ok maybe a lightjet or cibachrome print.

 

I too was a digital convert, before I accidently got a roll of Sensia 100. Now my 5 mega digital camera is basically only for web usage, with Velvia/100VS/XP2 as my camera's food source.

 

Alvin

The discontinuation of slide projectors was announced at least 2 or more months ago.

 

I managed two photo stores. Slide projectors were NEVER big sellers. We usually only kept Ektagraphics in stock as we mostly sold to professional users, and the difference in price between a Carousel and an Ektagraphic model wasn't that great for amateur users.

 

If we sold one projector a month (outside of industrial sales) that was really doing good. If we sold 4 at Christmas, that was a good year. In professional sales, if we sold 50 a year, that was a good year. We sold state wide, so that count includes state bids as well as local sales.

 

Since the advent of relatively inexpensive digital projectors, the industrial uses for slide projectors today are about zero. No surprise to me that Kodak is discontinuing a money losing product line.

When they come out with a TV or projector that can show bright 4' images at the

resolution of my slide projector, I'll go digital. Until then film RULES! :)

 

Has anyone here shot much of the Agfa Scala? (B&W slide film). I burned through about

10 rills a few years back but haven't touched it since then. Is it still around?

This news, which received a sad/humorous piece in the Wash Post Style section

yesterday, saddens me. I have been thinking of adding a digital SLR to my

equipment at some time, but this news gives me the sense that I will almost be forced

to do so as it will get increasingly difficult to get commercial support for film, rather

than because of the advantages of dgital for some types of photography. Until now,

I've been lazy.

 

The support needed for slides is relatively little (a film maker, some decent lab

available by car or mail, and a manufacturer making a projector), so I guess this

medium will continue for some time (unlike 8mm movie film, for example). But that

said, I wonder why Kodak made this decision. Even if the slide film market shrinks,

they must be able to make some money at it, especially if they stop doing research

for new films. Companies do make money in small markets. And if they're set up to

make projectors anyway and can sell even a few, why stop making them? If nothing

else, this step sends their customers a message that film is obsolete and will hasten

their loss of market. Kodak hasn't, IMHO, been great at its other areas of business,

so they seem to be hastening their own death as a company. Seems odd, but then

I'm not an MBA.

 

I trust that Fuji (and perhaps also Kodak) will continue to make E6 film for years to

come, that some quality labs will continue to do a good job at developing it, and that

some projectors will continue to be available (if not just on E-bay). With regard to the

latter, anyone have opinions on the best alternative maker of projectors if one wants

a new one?