Ektar 100 In 120 Rolls

Discussion in 'Film and Processing' started by 25asa, Jan 23, 2009.

  1. I called Kodak the other day and was talking to him about the new Ektar 100 film. Anyway he told me he hears at least once a day, if not more, that he gets requests for people to get Kodak to produce this new film in 120 rolls. So maybe if more of you on here phoned Kodak and put in a request as well, Kodak might seriously consider making 120 rolls of this film. If they see enough demand for it, they'll make it.
     
  2. Just goes to show that film isn't dead.
     
  3. Personally, I think Ektar shows that film for photography is pretty much dead.
    I doubt there's a big enough photographic film market to justify unique development, so Ektar borrows cine film tech. The fact that it's as good as it is shows how neglected photographic film has been for several years now.
    Give them aother 5 years and I bet we won't even see the token "tweaking" of cine film designs to make them run better in C-41, we'll start seeing labs being forced to deal with "pure" cine film. Maybe another 5 years, and we'll hit a point where digital takes over the movie industry, and it's goodbye to color film in all industries.
     
  4. Now, I think they're still making film in very wide rolls and cutting it down to size, so theoretically, until that final death of color film, it should be possible to get Kodak to cut it to 120 in addition to 35mm. Manufacturers frequently don't appreciate that certain product lines might not be profitable in their own right, but their presence in your portfolio increases the sales of other, profitable lines. I'd suggest mentioning in your letter that 120 Ektar will keep you from taking all your film business, 35mm and 120, to the guys with green boxes. Mention this in a friendly way...
    I did that at my favorite grocery store. I pointed out to one manager that the reason he wasn't seeing me often in his store any more is that they no longer carried "Butterkasse", my favorite cheese, and the lack of said cheese was making me take $500/month in business over to a different store. Now they always have it. They might not have much, but they always have a pound or two...
    Now, before I point out more obvious parallels between film and cheese, I'm out of here.
    ;)
     
  5. Ektar 100 in 120 size would be a different master roll. The 120 film base is thinner that 135 film base. Also, the anti-halation treatment if often different in 120 films. So they would have to do an entire coating run for 120, which is a big expense. If it sells well enough in 135, they might consider it. But they did 120 on Ultra Color 100 and 400, and it wasn't selling enough to justify the expense.
    Kodak has been migrating technology from their Eastman cine films to consumer films for a long time. They sell a lot of cine film, and the customers are far less price-sensitive than still-camera film buyers. Still, it takes considerable extra effort to make a cine film into a still camera film, you need to put in much more shelf life, and more latent image stability. (Cine camera film is used really fresh, and processed the same day.)
    That said, Kodak film R&D is at best a quarter of what it was 5 years ago. But they are still smart people. But they know they need to pick their targets. They did new T-MAX 400. They could have also made a new T-MAX 100, but they decided making it even better wasn't going to pay the way it did for 400.
    What may be good is that Fuji appears to be more stagnant than Kodak in film product development. This means that Kodak isn't having to play in the saturation/contrast war with Fuji anymore in consumer films, and can invest in pro films. (Look how many generations of Gold 100, 200, and 400 there have been. Some of them are at generation 8, 9, or 10. I think that's going to change a lot less in the future.)
     
  6. I don't use 120 film but I will give them a call for you tomm. to let them know that I think they should offer it in 120.
     
  7. Now, if each of us calls them several times, using a different voice each time....
    Hey, what number were you calling? Post it, I'll dial it. First up, I'll use my basso profundo.
     
  8. I will also give them a call it seems like my supply of 120 Ultracolor 100 is down to 10 rolls.
    I have migrated to shooting mostely 120/220 recently and I am sure happy I can get B&W and Color Positive in it still but for Color Negative there sure is nothing like a Nice High saturation for some things. The 160VC Porta is nice but it is no Ektar or Ultra.
     
  9. This brings up something interesting that I am curious about. I can certainly appreciate that R&D is expensive and also that a film run can be as well. However, once you have a formulation for a film, shouldn't it be relatively easy to modify it for a different format and do a master roll? I can see changes that need to be made like John mentioned, but I would think they would be relatively straight forward, IE not requiring additional R&D to complete, or at least minimal. I guess I don't see the hold up on producing film in different formats other then an issue or lack of sales. I can see them not doing it if they think they will not be able to sell it or sell it within the expiry time of the film.
    Also is there anyway to produce smaller master rolls then the thousands, and thousands of feet long rolls they produce now? Or does creating small masters increase the bottom line cost way to much to be worth while. I am just thinking of things like Kodachrome since I'd imagine there a plenty of people would would love to keep buying and using it, even if the demand isn't worth producing a master every year or three that can produce say 20,000 rolls of film, but what about producing a master that can produce 1,000 rolls of film and roll one out as demand requires? Just wondering and asking as I don't have much knowledge of what it actually takes to produce film.
     
  10. Looks like the plant in Europe that Rollei is using is producing on a smaller scale and doing it nicely same for Foma and Efke/Adox. You have a point. Could this be another Americian Automaker Union think big problem? My local computer store had a problem they were paying too much rent and after thought the Land Lord cut their space in 1/2 they have just as much business if note more and the display is smaller it just takes a day to get the stuff they stock across town from a warehouse. and the 1/2 that they gave up was used to expand the business next door.
    An answer to every problem is just build a wall or think smaller.
    Larry
     
  11. There's no need to invest much in film R&D. Film is a mature product and there are already a lot of excellent choices. I just want companies to continue to manufacture.
     
  12. Scott what # did you call and who did you speak too if I may ask.
    Larry
     
  13. John is correct that 120 film is normally coated on a thinner support. There was an exception. Kodachrome 64 in 120 format was coated on the exact same support as the 35mm film. The thicker support means that if a roll is not wound tightly in the camera, it may not be within the flanges and will get some edge fog. This is not ideal, but it is possible. It worked for most people who used K-64 in 120 format.
     
  14. Maybe we must adjust and all on the same base I know I adjustuted my one Kiev 60s by using a take up reel that was thicker by using a lap of tape around it I called it my fat roll even if it went the other way a thinner reel. But it could work.. adjust and overcome.
     
  15. so Ektar borrows cine film tech.​
    That's a misunderstanding.
     
  16. Ektar is NOT movie film.
    Kodak said they used technology that was developed for their movie film to make Ektar.
    Kodak did NOT say Ektar is movie film.

    For example:
    Say Goodyear invented a new rubber for tires.
    They first used this rubber on their truck tires.
    Then decided to also use it in sports car tires.
    That does NOT mean that their sports car ties ARE truck tires.
     
  17. Look; All it takes for Kodak to make Ektar 100 in 120 is just plain money; if many hundreds of folks would just paypal Kodak a 100 grand each; they could make a master 120 roll. Since there is no return on investment for them on a master 120 roll; if we bail out and inject cash they can prop up negative return projects!
     
  18. Brian and Steve are correct. The connection between Ektar and movie film is indirect. Color negative film at Kodak generally led the technology drive ahead of movie film -- not the other way around.
     
  19. Ektar 100 uses some silver halide emulsions from motion picture films, but the chemistry is pretty much the same as Portra films.
    Historically, still color negative had more money and led the technology developement. There have always been exceptions. Layered sensitizing dyes and two electron sensitizers first appeared in motion picture films. Now motion picture is still a growing market that is sensitive to quality improvements. They will likely lead technology development in the future. This is a good thing for still film photographers. We would be worse off without it.
     
  20. Kodak's number is 1800-242-2424 and it is option 19 for Kodak Professional which is the people you will want to talk to Ektar about.
     
  21. i think youn have too much hope and optomizm.
    I wish you well. as any new film is a move in the right direction.
    all I want is panatomic-x. it is roumered that it is the negative in polaroid 55 p/n
    it would be easy for kodak to make some panatomic-x
    I think the kodak folks are looking the wrong way and need to think differently.
    there is money to be made in the film camera field if marketed right.
    what could be more " obsolete" than B&W, yet there are companies making it,. if not in the usa.
     
  22. Brian and Steve are correct. The connection between Ektar and movie film is indirect.​
    The connection is very direct. What part of Kodak paid for the most expensive parts of Ektar. If it weren't for what the cine film business spent on Ektar, the photographic film business would not have been able to fund it.
    QED
     
  23. Look; All it takes for Kodak to make Ektar 100 in 120 is just plain money; if many hundreds of folks would just paypal Kodak a 100 grand each; they could make a master 120 roll. Since there is no return on investment for them on a master 120 roll; if we bail out and inject cash they can prop up negative return projects!​
    This is brilliant. Who'se got an extra 100K sitting around?
     
  24. "Steve Smith [​IMG] , Jan 24, 2009; 10:55 a.m.
    so Ektar borrows cine film tech.​
    That's a misunderstanding."
    It most definitely is a misunderstanding. Joseph repeats it constantly....but it doesn't make it correct. Kind of like saying a chainsaw comes from Formula One race car technology because both use petroleum products to run. Kind of a stretch. It's been pointed out before....but some people keep stubbornly repeating it.
     
  25. Lets all send e-mail to Obama that part of his stimulus package should include 10 million to Kodak to bring Ektar 100 to 120 and 220 format. Compared to most of what's in the stimulus package, I think that would be one of the better expenditures.
     
  26. JW
    "Give them aother 5 years and I bet we won't even see the token "tweaking" of cine film designs to make them run better in C-41, we'll start seeing labs being forced to deal with "pure" cine film. Maybe another 5 years, and we'll hit a point where digital takes over the movie industry, and it's goodbye to color film in all industries"


    Firstly Ektar uses some technologies from Kodaks Vision line, which is very different from saying this is vision film 'adapted for C-41' just like Teflon™ has a variety of uses from clothes to non stick pans– same substance different application.
    Consumer film is very different from cine film, it is unlikely that labs will be 'forced' to deal with cine film as that film has much lower CI because it is designed to be duplicated onto high contrast projection (transmissive) dupe stock. Cine film makes a poor medium for print (reflective) output (draw yourself a quadrant tone reproduction diagram to see the problems) because of its very low contrast.
    Secondly if digital takes over the movie business completely (very doubtful) that will not necessarily signal an end to all colour film, it is possible that small runs of colour film can be made just for stills, film although not as profitable as 10 years ago is still a profit making medium for many manufacturers including Kodak.
     
  27. JW
    Personally, I think Ektar shows that film for photography is pretty much dead.... Ektar borrows cine film tech.
    All digital cameras borrow computers tech. A digi cam, same as all modern computers, is implementing binary digits theory to represent all numbers and data (That’s why they are called “digital”, but there’re only two digits involved: 0 and 1). In technical term it means: signal off and signal on. This theory was introduced in mid 30’s last century. But electric signal has been found somewhere in 18th century. The difference between modern computers and that introduced 70 yrs ago is only the speed of data processing and algorithms. And a lot of toys, of course.
    Having said that, may I suggest that the digital photography was dead even before it’s born since it implements quite outdated tech? I guess most digital shooters just don’t care where this dummy digital tech came from (or just don’t know – lack of elementary education). As long as they enjoy playing those toys they are fine.
    Joseph, I admire your expertise in grocery shopping and cheese selections. I also may reveal some knowledge is this field and explain you why I prefer to invest my money to buying good quality sausage and not to digital cameras. But on this forum we’re discussing photography issues, not grocery.
    Personally I don’t care where the Ektar borrows its tech. As much as it delivers the result I want, this film works for me. The Ektar is the replacement for 100UC as far as i see. I don’t remember we ever had 100UC in 120 format.
     
  28. Roman,
    Once upon a time.....there was 100UC in 120 format. (Also, 400UC.) I got the images to prove it. Seriously...it wasn't too many years ago when UC was in 120 format. When the newer version of Portra VC came out, Kodak discontinued UC in 120 format, claiming that the new VC was very close to UC.
     
  29. [​IMG] [​IMG]
    http://www.ultrafineonline.com/koulco220pro.html
     
  30. Larry, this is 400UC on the picture, not 100UC…
    Yes, alright, I guess I’m wrong. Sorry for making wrong assumption. But I really didn’t know that Kodak UC line is used by professionals much.
    Benny, it’s very interesting what you said about VC vs UC. I’m not using much C-41, but if I need to shoot neg the 400VC and 400UC are my favorite. Definitely there’re some similarities but they are different as well. It’s like Velvia 100 and Velvia 100F. So far Fuji keeps both of them in any possible formats. And I really like to see Ektar in 400 speed.
     
  31. 100 and 400 were made. Just no 100 left except on ebay.
     
  32. Firstly Ektar uses some technologies from Kodaks Vision line, which is very different from saying this is vision film 'adapted for C-41' just like Teflon™ has a variety of uses from clothes to non stick pans– same substance different application.​
    Thank you for making my case so well.
    The cine business funded Kodak's "Vision" line. You wouldn't have a photographic version without the cine version. And that's rather similar to Teflon. Visions required a lot of funding. Although Teflon was discovered by accident, technology for large scale production and forming it into tubing and insulating tape was fantastically expensive. At first this was funded by the US military, because it turned out to be incredibly useful in uranium refining plants, missile guidance systems, amunition, armor, etc. After being cleared for civilian use, DuPont put big money into industrial applications, from Teflon pipe tape to the outrageously expensive wiring in my burner ignitor...
    There would be no Teflon cookware or stain fighting clothing without the big military and industrial customers.

    Consumer film is very different from cine film,​
    Only by the standards of optical printing. How many color labs still do that?
    it is unlikely that labs will be 'forced' to deal with cine film as that film has much lower CI because it is designed to be duplicated onto high contrast projection (transmissive) dupe stock. Cine film makes a poor medium for print (reflective) output (draw yourself a quadrant tone reproduction diagram to see the problems) because of its very low contrast.​
    Thank you for making my point for me, again. If you can draw a curve for it, a digital lab can compensate for it. So, based on your argument, having separate films for photo and cine use is a totally obsolete concept.
    Man, you don't need me. Your own examples demolish your arguments.
     
  33. Follow the money. not the people I never attacked you I know how it goes i am just enjoying the ride as long as I am a passenger. I can't be in the Drivers seat for this one nor was Ansel Adams.
     
  34. JW
    "The cine business funded Kodak's "Vision" line. You wouldn't have a photographic version without the cine version"
    Yes but that doesn't mean they are the SAME product dopes it?
    Just like I can't fry eggs on a Gore Tex jacket even though they both use Teflon- sheesh man
    JW
    "Man, you don't need me. Your own examples demolish your arguments"
    What a silly argument you have Joe.
    If you think labs are going to be 'forced to use cine film' explain this:
    A lab having a reduced amount of film suddenly has to re-equip in order to process this film?
    You are forgetting that cine film is radically different from consumer stock, it has a backing that must be removed in an alkaline wash, to do that you need to process the film in a continuos leader film processor which is fine for 35mm but what about 120 and sheet films? Would you expect a lab to get rid of their D&D machines and re-equip to process a smaller market of cine films?
    "So, based on your argument, having separate films for photo and cine use is a totally obsolete concept".
    No that' obviously false. cine film and consumer film although using similar technologies are not interchangeable for general use.
    You seem to be mis understanding how digital labs work, machines like the Frontier could not be reconfigured to print cine film, neither could a digital Lab the target material (your print paper) would need to be re-formulated to a higher gamma, you couldn't 'just apply a curve' when printing through a minilab.
    You could do this if youy scanned each individual neg and output on ink-jets through photoshop but that would be more expensive and time consuming.
    Your arguments don't make economic sense, the amount of investment would not be worth it.
    Just because something has a synergetic relationship doesn't mean it is an equivalent.
    Don't expect your cine film everywhere in five years to happen
     
  35. Many months ago I read that a company is selling Ektar movie film in 36 exp. rolls for still pictures. They also process it, since the processing is different (can't take it to Costco!). I can't find my notes but I am curious following all the discussion about the two existing Ektars: Has anyone read of comparison tests with these two films?
    Also, I would request that when people call Kodak, please ask that they make it available in 220 as well as 120. My camera will take either, and I would really like to get it in 220.
     
  36. Follow Up: I just checked on the Ektar movie film. It was sold and processed by A&I. They had it for about 2 years and dropped it due to lack of sales. Processing was ECN-2. It was actually Kodak 50D and Fuji F-64D that I was interested in. Other higher speed films were also offered.
     
  37. I have seen short ends of the 50D for sale on the net I think 300 feet was the minimunm. Dales has a ENC processing line also.
     
  38. "I can't find my notes but I am curious following all the discussion about the two existing Ektars"
    There is only one Ektar and that is a consumer film, as far as I know (a call to Kodak reps confirm this) there is no Ektar cine film. Kodaks cine film neg is called Vision and has been since 1996. Before 96 they were called EXR but never Ektar.
    The current Ektar uses some technologies from cine film but is NOT cine film a product related to but not the same as.
     
  39. If anyone wants to shoot movie film Dale Labs spools up Kodak movie film (not sure exactly what) and sells it with their name on it. I have a roll in front of my that I want to try just to see what it can do and it says that it uses the CNK-4/ECP-2 process. I guess this was a big think with the Seattle Film Works a while back. You can order this film from them for about $3 per roll........
     
  40. I guess this is getting WAY off the topic now, but I just noticed that you guys started talking about movie film. I just wanted to point out that you can still easily order 8mm, Super-8, and 16mm movie film. You'll have to order it, but if you do a search on Google, you will find a lot of places where you can order movie film online.

    I have a collection of vintage 8mm cameras, and I shoot with them sometimes just as a hobby. Dwayne's Photo sells and develops movie film.
    I'm sure everyone knows the website for Dwayne's Photo. Just go to the site and then click on the Order Forms tab on the top of the screen. Then go to Movie Film and then Movie Film For Sale.
    http://www.dwaynesphoto.com/
    There is also another place I found, in Hollywood, California, called Spectra Film and Video.

    http://www.spectrafilmandvideo.com/Film.html
    But just do a search on Google and you'll find plenty of other places too.
     
  41. ...Okay wait a minute. I just checked out that link for that Dale Labs place, and I don't know if I'm using that calculator and order form right...but it looks like they're charging $15 to process 1 roll of color film, with 1 set of 3X5 prints! Are they serious?! $15?!

    That's insane! I can get movie film developed for less than that. I don't think Dwayne's Photo or any other place I have ever seen charges that much. Not even for slide film.
     
  42. Chris that is a fair price when you consider what is being offered, you do understand that this is cine film? and that film is processed in a special machine, probably printed on a printer that has been converted/adapted to print that film. It might even be printed by hand.
    They sure aren't using a C41 mini-lab and a Frontier.
    What we need isn't cine film- that would be too problematic. Ektar uses a technology from Kodaks Vision line of films called 2 electron sensitisation which has the potential of doubling the photographic speed because two electrons are injected per absorbed photon.
    This is an emulsion technology that uses electron-rich carboxylate molecules to prevent re-combination of photolytic silver in the latent image making the image formation process more efficient.
    The process described above is the most important emulsion advance since the introduction of the 'T' grain and one which Kodak is sure to implement across many emulsions, we should be happy that Kodak Research is still pushing the envelope in what is probably films 'twilight years'
    At least films will become faster and or less grainy to catch what is left of the twilight ;-)
     
  43. Mark, on that link to Dale Labs, it only says "send us your color 35mm film." It does not say anything about any kind of special cine film. From what is on that form, it looks like that is the price for developing a standard C-41 color film.
    So I still have to ask, why are their prices so high? If it is hand printed or if they have some sort of special processing service, I guess I would understand that...but it does NOT say anything about that on that page. It just says send 35mm color film for developing and prints.
     
  44. I emailed Kodak, inspired by this discussion. I asked if they planned on making it in different ISOs or making it in 120. There reply is this
    Hello Dan,

    We have not heard of plans to make Ektar in 120 format or expanded ISOs. I have forwarded your request on to the appropriate people though. The more requests, the better chance of it happening.

    Regards,
    Kodak​
    I emailed the wrong department of course. Maybe I should write a letter too.
    Dan
     
  45. Chris I have to admit I didn't read the link but understood from a previous post Dale processed ECN2.
    There can be lots of reasons for films costing more than 'normal" minilab prices, I think in this case it sounds like they might be printing optically, 3"x5" is an old size offered before 4"x6" became the norm. I remember my first minilab in the early mid 80's (a Copal) did 3"x5" when we bought the Noritsu 33% bigger 4"x6" were the standard.
    The last prints we offered that were 3x5 were printed optically on a Agfa 30MC each frame being tested and individually graded using a test mask.
    Give them a ring, if they are printing optically or grading by hand that could explain the price
     
  46. Chris just looking round their site
    http://www.dalelabs.com/frontpagelink_whydalelabs.html
     
  47. Given that Kodak doesn't sell directly to end users for still camera film, might it not be better to lobby the people that we buy from and get them to leverage their actual buying power?
    I mean, if Adorama called Kodak and said "if you did a run of Ektar 100 in 120, we would buy n cases the first year" that would carry some weight!
     
  48. I sold my last 120 kit a couple of weeks ago. I felt quite sad because I had it since the early 90's and used it a lot. On the other hand in recent years I wasn't using it at all.
    In the days that i did use medium format a lot I was sending transparencies to magazines and they would reproduce directly from the slide which provided sublime reproduction quality. Today, I am using digital all the time because editorial staff want images ready to use and the repro quality in magazines today are often so poor medium format is a waste anyway.
    However, I think I sold the gear mainly because I feel that days are numbered for film. When Hollywood goes 100% digital then I really can't see Kodak making 35mm film far less 120mm. Maybe Fuji will continue but at some point the traditionalist photographer must die out leaving the youth who are weaned on digital capture.
    So I think I made the right decision because although I was sentimental about my medium format gear it really wasn't providing much pleasure locked away in a cupboard.
     
  49. If you are looking for Dale's re spooled movie film....It is sold under the name of "Dale Professional Film".
     
  50. Kodak just released Ektar in 120:
    http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/ektar/ektarIndex.jhtml?pq-path=13319/1230/13328
     
  51. Hello,
    slightly off topic, but regarding to Kodak Vision emultions, for motion picture, there are some remarkables emultions such as the Vision2 50D (5201 code for 35mm) as well as the Vision2 250D (5205) and Vision3 500T......
    A Vision3 250D (5207) might appear on the market soon.
     
  52. Vision2 100T (5212) is also impressive. They have very wide exposure latitude. It would be great to see a tungsten negative film stock on 120 and 135, that could inspirate on those high quality MP emultions
     

Share This Page