The B&W dream that will never be

By the way if anyone does write or call them, please let me know or post on the forums here. I'd like to keep a tally of people to see how many have contacted Kodak on this. The more the better. Also post their response if possible.

Scott;

 

Regarding Polaroid, I have no confirmation whatsoever except 'myth' that the Polaroid product is an exact EK formula. EK did manufacture B&W Polaroid film for them for a while before Polaroid built their new plant, but they used Polaroid formulas for the materials AFAIK. These were originally developed by Edwin Land and then reproduced under contract by EK.

 

Even so, Polariod, if it had an EK formula, might feel itself under different constraints with regard to product manufacture and formula restrictions.

 

Then, you have to consider that Polaroid developed a very competent research labs themselves, and had a lot of emulsion chemists there. That being said, even if a formula started out as an EK emulsion, I doubt that it would remain one for very long, especially being as primitive as these old emulsions were.

 

Now, as far as films being discontinued, consider these facts. Film is perishable, the starting raw emulsion is very perishable. It keeps about like jello does in your refrigerator and then turns to smelly soup.

 

If sales drop below a certain level, a lot of coated product has to be recalled because it went out of date on the dealers shelves. Due to lack of orders, a lot goes to recycle right from the EK warehouse. In addition, the leftover emulsion for the next coating batch spoils because the next scheduled production run is cancelled. In the final analysis, money is lost on the product and it has to be cancelled entirely.

 

Even though I too miss some of those old products, they cannot be made due to environmental issues. They would be very costly to re-engineer and modernize, and the market is too small to warrant the costs. Now, you can counter and say that Efke, Ilford, and etc are managing to produce 'old' products, but remmeber that a lot of EK capital is going into digital but that is not true for Efke and Ilford. Even so, look what happened to Ilford, Agfa, and Ferrania to name 3. The film industry is in tough shape right now with big declines in sales. I understand all of your feelings. I have them myself. But, reality is right in the face of all of the managers at EK and I see what they are going through as well. (And don't make comments about Ilford making digital products - yes they do, and they are damn fine and I use them myself, but EK is a full service digital mfgr, and Ilford is not and that is a true distinction.)

 

You can argue this forever, but there are realities that EK executives have to face. They don't always make the decisions that you want, but lets face it guys, the market for color is huge out there with color negative at the top of the list. Reversal color has fallen to almost nil and B&W is a little dot over the 'i' in 'nil', so it is in there somewhere, but not very big. Efke and Ilford don't produce color, but EK is running 24/7 to meet all film commitments world-wide. Same with Fuji. So some companies have B&W as their bread and butter, but at EK it is just another product.

 

Now, you may like Efke and other off brand B&W films because they have the old fashioned look and feel, but I have been seeing a lot of negative comments on these films due to curl, swell and softness not to mention other defects, so no company is 'home free' in producing a consumer friendly film of any type. They just do the best they can. So, before you trot off and buy some off brand film, look at the comments here on PN regarding problems.

 

Myself? I'll stick with EK, Fuji, and Ilford for my products.

 

Ron Mowrey

I can live with the product not returning to stay just as long as they would be willing to allow one special order run to be made which would satisfy the needs of all who would be in on it. If it costs so much, see if we have enough people on board to cover it. Maybe get J&C Photo in on the deal. They could sell the film that is made off that one run. Now how much would have to be re-engineered- hard to say. But factor that into the costs. If they made the Aero film, they must have some idea of how to fix the old Pan X formula without costs getting to high. But if we absolutely have no chance at all to plead our case in the face of digital, then I'd question what good writing/ calling Kodak would do.

PS: Anyone rich enough to have a million dollars burning in their pocket? MAybe that will cover the engineering costs :P

Scott;

 

I don't want to discourage you from writing or calling. I'm just saying that it might be difficult if not impossible.

 

Giving it a try won't cost anything. And you are right about the Aero film. That might be a way to get your foot in the door. Remember that they probably never made that in Canada and so those guys might answer differently than Rochester.

 

Ron Mowrey

I think it would be smart for allowing non made films to be open to special runs. If someone needs a batch of Kodachrome 25 made up, pay the fee and get it done. Store the amount in the freezers of all who buy it. If they could pay the initial cost of updating the Pan X film for todays production, allow it for special order runs, and keep the option open in the future to make more runs when the demand for it is called on again. That would help pay for the R&D to update it for that first run. And Kodak wouldn't be stuck with expiring chemicals because they'd only stock up on what's needed for that one run. Now how many rolls of 35m or 120 one run would do I have no clue. I'm sure after everyone has gotten the amount they paid for, J&C Photo could aquire the remaining amount and sell it as a special limited item while stock remains. If it sells well, ask for and pay Kodak to do another run when the stock runs out. Keep repeating as neccessary.

 

I'm going to mention the Aero film and Ebay pricing and mail the letter with the picture I did to Kodak in the US. I think dealing with them here in Canada will be a waste of time. It is the US the makes the film.

PS. As with the above contact info- do you still recommend sending it to James B. or David K.?

Scott;

 

Probably David K. would be better.

 

I think you underestimate the costs even if they were willing to make it.

 

I gave you figures to help you calculate the approximate yield of a run.

 

Ron Mowrey

<I>I would also like to take the opportuinity to voice my extreme distaste for the T-Max line of films. They're terrible!</i></p>I'll join that club. If I want the 'Tmax look' I'll shoot Tri-X and under-expose. Some of the images I see posted on photo.net from the TMX films shot under over-cast skies are the most tonally wretched images I've ever seen. <P>What Kodak has been a victim of is 'voodo cost cutting'. Basically a new CEO will tell his divisions to eliminate products making a low profit, which mathematically makes the books look better becuase higher profit margin materials, say Max 200/400/800 print film now look better economically to produce. In the long this erodes your product and customer base, much like a restraunt eliminating everything off their menu save for the few that have the lowest food costs. Whatever happend to good ol' cash flow and greed I say.<P>While I have sympathy for slow speed 35 B/W film fanatics, I don't have much practical empathy. You should have been more realistic and switced to a larger format long ago, and when it comes to the digital domain I'll still take to scanning low speed slide films and desaturating.

Lots of the old time films cannot be made due to EPA rules....

 

So perhaps one should look at lucky in china?

Assuming some of the vintage films are "EPA friendly," EK could easily make one batch per year. For example (IIRC), their EIR color infrared film is made once a year in late October, (most likely) to facilitate easy shipping.

 

As for the outdated film goiung into the recycle bin, the manager responsible for the forecasting should have been fired. When I was a co-op engineer at Scott Paper Co. back in 81-82 plant production was actually scheduled by the marketing department at HQ... No wonder in the ~15 years of the early 70's to mid 80's their market share was cut in half from the 41% to 20% range.

 

Over the last decade and half, "Just-In-Time" has been the rallying cry of manufacturers in many an industry, cutting inventories throughout the supply chain: This means smaller, not larger production runs with fast changeover, to react to fast-changing markets.

Dan;

 

You failed to get the point. JIT only works in a relatively stable market. It fails when the market is undergoing a huge change and you have a perishable product. Paper towels don't perish. Bad analogy.

 

The film market has undergone huge unpredictable swings in the last 10 years. For example, right now reversal film sales are on a huge downturn (Kodachrome for example - and the sales drop preceeded the closing of the processing plants), while single use camera sales and negative film sales have gone up about the same amount. No one could have predicted that.

 

In fact, due to the use of scanners, I would have predicted the opposite myself, as reversal film is more popular with semi-digital people (those who shoot conventional - scan then print digital).

 

In fact, I'll throw you a small factoid. A lot of newbie photographers who either went from conventional to digital or started in digital are switching to conventional. The reason is that these early starters are finding out how painful it is to lose your pictures when your aging CDs or computers start failing. Yes, the early users are seeing their pictures being lost and rather than learn to backup, they are switching back and they go to throw away cameras with negative film.

 

So, the situation is not as simple as it might seem to you.

 

Ron Mowrey

I've written a letter for Kodak but it seems to me that the contacts listed here, which are Corporate Media contacts, may not be the most effective people to reach.

 

With that in mind, I just called Kodak to ask them who would be the right people to write. They wouldn't really give me more appropriate addresses, but they did mark me down as someone else who wanted Pan-X, and explained the company line on why it was discontinued (that they'd tried making more and more limited runs to keep it around, etc etc), and that they would notify the higher-ups that I'd requested it, and they suggested that I use Tech Pan... ironic, since that's also been discontinued.

 

From this web site:

 

http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQuerier.jhtml?pq-path=2569&pq-locale=en_US&gpcid=0900688a8022de3e#bu

 

I think Michael McDougall, the Director, Products & Services, WW Public Relations, Digital and Film Services might be a better contact than the ones suggested above. Anyone have any ideas on the most effective people at Kodak to write?

You could try duplicate letters to several people just to make sure. I'm also unsure of who exactly to write to. Who did you talk to on the phone to Kodak to have your name put down as wanting this film? I'd be interested in also getting my name put down. Usually the customer service rep guys I talk to don't have a clue half the time I mention stuff to them.

I called the 800 242 2424 number and got the B&W section. I mentioned about seeing if a special run could be ordered and he basically said once its discontinued- that's it. "Even if you had a million dollars they would not produce it" he said. I asked if I could have a contact of someone to talk or write to to voice wanting this film to come back and he said "You've got it". No mention of putting my name down on a list to request it return. So I'm not sure who you were talking to, but it seems I got different people.

I called that same number, but the guy I talked to made basically the same implication -- that yes, they would not have discontinued the film if it had any feasibility to even be sold once a year, and it would never be remanufactured again. But he told me every time someone asks for Pan-X or any other discontinued film that they listen, take the request seriously, mark down that person's request and forward it on, and he asked me what I use it for and why... he was really nice.

 

He didn't give me a name and number for someone to contact about Pan-X, though... who'd you get?

He never mentioned about forwarding my request or marking my name down for it. I didn't get the guys name- it was who ever answered the B&W film dept at the time. All he said was once its gone its gone. No explanation of that they tried to keep it around. I asked who I could write a letter to and he wouldn't even give me info for that as if it won't make a difference. I thought Kodak wanted our thoughts. I did mention the Aero film and he had me transfered to that department, but no one was there to answer. He did say that films that are in production there is a $10,000 minimum order.

Which Aero film are you talking about? Sorry, I'm a bit new to all this -- I'm falling in love with silver halide film at the wrong time, apparently ;)

 

My friendly conversationalist suggested I try Technical Pan. I pointed out it was ironic he suggest I try another film that Kodak has chosen to stop making, and he was forced to laugh. They do, apparently, still have stocks of it, and are still selling it dealers.

Its the more red sensitive Aerial film used for plane shots of the ground. It cuts through haze. Apparently its supposed to have more silver content as well possibly on an Estar base??

Wasn't ESTAR base not being available one of the reasons Technical Pan was discontinued? One NYC store lists 8x10, 4x5, 35mm bulk and 35mm rolls as being presently available. No mention of 120.

 

Robert Johnson

Here is a copy of an email I got from someone. It goes as follows:

 

"Scott,

 

I have been reading your posts on Photo.net in reference to Panatomic-X

and I have seen where some people are wanting to write a letter to

Kodak

to request a restart of the line. I hate to throw water on the fire but

that is simply not going to happen.

I am a professional Forensic Photographer and recently spoke with Kodak

about the discontinuation of T-PAN film, one of my workhorse films. The

conversation continued on about a lot of my old favorite films

including

Ektapan (E-pan), Contrast Process Ortho (CPO) and Panatomic_X (Pan-X).

I spoke with a technician at Kodak and he explained that the film is made

on large rolls then cut down to sheet or small roll size. The film is

then stored in a huge salt mine in New York state to help reduce low

level gamma radiation exposure, it is then distributed from there.

 

Because so much film is made during a production run, years will go by

before a new run is considered. As time goes by technology changes and

the old substrates are no longer available.

It appears the biggest problem is actually environmental laws and EPA

restrictions. In the case of Panatomic-X, this film uses Cesium and is

now a restricted chemical and no longer permitted in the waste stream

in

any amount. Additionally it has been so long since a Pan-X run has been

done all of the coating machinery has been disassemble or destroyed.

 

With the focus on digital and streamlining film stocks to profitable

lines, the old films have no chance of a comeback from Kodak. It would

simply be way to expensive to re-engineer an old film look using all

new

chemicals, a new substrate and building a new coating process. Sorry.

 

Enjoy what is left."

Here is a reply from another on that email:

 

"The old film could be coated on today's machines. The

old film could probably be coated on modern support.

It is probably the EPA rule on Cadmium (or if he is

right, Cesium) and the lack of certain organic

chemicals that are no longer available."

Scott;

 

See my post in the B&W forum about my predictions for 2055.

 

Ron Mowrey

My prediction for 2055- only B&W will survive since color will be too expensive to make. Here is a pic of some late boxed 35mm Pan X (hey at least I can look at pretty pics of it if I can't buy new stuff). Ebay has become a good source of buying this film, though very expensive. I just bought 5 boxes dated early 90s, cold stored, and even tested in '99. It worked out to a little over $10 US a roll. Wow even Kodak never charged that much for B&W film. And they don't think there's a market for this with the prices people now have to pay to get it. Sheesh.

<blockquote><i>The film market has undergone huge unpredictable swings in the last 10 years. For example, right now reversal film sales are on a huge downturn (<b>Kodachrome for example - and the sales drop preceeded the closing of the processing plants</b>), while single use camera sales and negative film sales have gone up about the same amount. <b>No one could have predicted that.</b></i></blockquote>

<p>

I could have predicted it.

<p>

In fact, I <i>did</I> predict it!

<p>

Chicken entrails? Tea leaves? Rocket science?

<p>

Nope.

<p>

I just looked at what they promote.

<p>

They sell what they promote. They don't sell what they don't promote.

<p>

The theory you promulgate would only work in a vacuum, in which either <i>no</I> promotion occurs, or, a universe in which promotion has no effect.

<p>

Kodak marketing effectively orphaned Kodachrome. Usage dropped. Golly.