Kodak Killing slide film?

Discussion in 'Film and Processing' started by randall_pukalo, Feb 19, 2011.

  1. Looks like Kodak is slowly hiding slide away in their website. As posters on Apug and Flickr noted, it is no longer shown as an available film type under consumer films. In Professional Films, it is in there, but it is buried away now. The open links to their slide films that existed just a few months back have disappeared.
  2. Blame Fuji for having E-6 films that outsell Kodak's.
    Consumers haven't bought slide film for years. Just serious amateurs and professionals, and both of them are going digital or Velvia 50.
  3. I haven't used any Kodak sensitized products since the 1950s, when they refused to correct the color shift in Ektachrome.
    (I lied... I did shoot a lot of Kodachrome, but that's the only exception.)
    Fuji works just fine.
    - Leigh
  4. F Kodak? Don't you mean E (Eastman) Kodak. It would be considered good form to communicate accurately and appropriately in a public forum with your colleagues.
  5. They have discontinued some slide films in the last couple years. On the other hand, it's featured prominently on their page for professional film products. Click on Product information and then Professional films and there it is along with color neg and B&W.
  6. Slide film? What the heck is slide film?
  7. Tim,
    Both "Shop Now"'s are empty.
  8. I have edited the thread title. Most anything can be said without swearing about it. We're all smart guys here.
  9. Kodak has never sold it's full line of products on the Shop Now links. THEY ARE NOT AN ACCURATE INDICATOR OF WHICH MATERIALS ARE STILL MADE AND SOLD.
    The slide webpages were recently updated to indicate the very recent discontinuance of the E200. Both E100G and E100VS are still listed as currently produced. That front page I linked too is also very recent and new - in the last month or so. Now, I can't guarantee that E100G and E100VS will be around forever, but the official stance from Kodak seems to be that they are 'current' still. By 'official', I mean the information that Kodak is releasing to the public. Who knows what goes on in the back office.
  10. I think that Kodak would be happy if they could exit analogue photographic products altogether. From seemingly reliable information on other forums, it appears that they no longer have small-scale coating facilities, and that even the demand for movie films is decreasing rapidly with digital projection and 3D.
    I'm not optimistic that even the basic consumer ColorMax-type stuff in 35mm or disposable cameras will continue in the longer term, as smartphones continue to improve their photo-taking capabilities. Let's hope that Fuji can continue color film economically...and at least Ilford and the smaller makers seem safe.
  11. **"Louis Meluso [​IMG][​IMG], Feb 20, 2011; 09:29 a.m.
    F Kodak? Don't you mean E (Eastman) Kodak. It would be considered good form to communicate accurately and appropriately in a public forum with your colleagues." **
    When Kodak dropped Ektar/RG 25 I thought "Eff Kodak". When Kodak dropped Kodachrome 25 I thought "Eff Kodak". When Kodak dropped Techpan I thought "Eff Kodak". When Kodak dropped EPN I thought "Eff Kodak". Especially when Kodak dropped the last Kodachrome I thought "Eff Kodak".
    Is F Kodak like Eff Kodak? I know, putting the period inside the quote marks would be considered good form.
  12. Kodak is trying to keep their doors open. If a film is losing financially then they need to stop production. It would make no since to intentionally lose money. If the film market is dead then they should move on to something else that has a better market out there. The people I work with do not seem to care about anything except what they can find in the electronic gadgets they carry around. Maybe they should make good phones so that folks can live out their lives squinting at little Kodak Phones. I do not know what they should do actually. I do intend to continue buying Kodak products. Currently I am shooting the BW400CN and the new Portra 400. Both excellent films.
  13. i once wrote a very poignant email to Kodak's customer service link about their lack of a functional website for finding information on film. At the same time i wrote an email to B&H's customer service complaining of their new wesbite design (not a big deal, i just preferred the older version...perhaps im just used to the new version now). Kodak was less than cordial in their response, basically told me off for not being able to use their website - to contact retailers about the availability of the film they manufacture. I suspect that they do still produce ektachrome, but are too bone-headed to say so on their website. B&H, on the other hand was very polite in their response and showed that they cared what i had to say, asked followup questions, etc.
    However, having now gone back to the main kodak website for the first time since i made my complaint, it does seem to be significantly better - with the exception of slide film not being listed at all. At least now you can get some info on film before spending a significant amount of time to find it. Its definitely still has a long way to go, though.
  14. I just pointed out the link to Kodak's professional film page, where slide film is featured.
    If you ever need to find the film page for Kodak, just type in:
    That's it. If you want B&W products (which are easy to find from the above link), type in:
  15. Thank you Josh for changing the title, and apologies to all. I should have refrained from such a comment. But honestly, that was my gut reaction when I checked out their website after seeing the other posts. They HAVE changed it, subtly and quietly. I guess that is what bothered me most. If they were doing a major overhaul of their site, changing the layout/look/etc., I would understand. But instead they have simply begun quietly removing the links to slide film. For example, it is no longer shown at all under Consumer Films. Not too many weeks ago, the Elite Chrome slide films were prominently displayed there. Now, they are buried away as a small text link under Other Color Transparency Films. Surely they are set to be axed next. Doing things in this way just strikes me as a bit devious, like they are trying to rewrite history. "What, you are looking for Slide Film, surely son you must be mistaken, there is no such thing as Slide Film. Oh, you must mean Ektar, ahhh, come right this way, we have exactly what you are looking for...."

    At least with Kodachrome they were open about it, and although I was sad to see it go, it did not bother me as these quiet revisions do. At least be open, and give people reasonable advance notice - and I dont mean announcing in February that EC200 is discontinued with stocks only expected to last until March.
  16. I am surprised to read about Kodak giving up on slide films especially as it was recently said that film sales were on the up. I think it may have even been on their own website. After speed reading the article I was both pleased and surprised, but did not note more about the article before moving on to something else. Conflicting reports but I do wonder if the little yellow box if going to disappear any time soon. Ektachrome used to be my film of choice, but now it is Agfa when I can find it, failing that Fuji.
  17. Narrow coating machines are still in use for experiments. Kodak never did have production quality small scale coating machines. When we shot pictures on narrow experimental coatings, we had to look around the spots, streaks, comets, and non-uniformities. In theory, a narrow coating machine could be designed that could produce thousands (rather than millions) of rolls of film for something like $25 per roll. The emulsion, dispersion, and support production facilities would also need to be downsized.
    I'm a fan of film and the most satisfying part of my career was designing new films products and the processes to produce them. But, if I got a job offer tomorrow designing new small scale facilities for future film products, I'd...
    OK, I'd consider it, but I'd make sure my salary was guaranteed for at least 5 years. I wouldn't be putting my money into the company stock.
  18. At least have a proper look at Kodak's website before you start flinging the mud around - I found slide film in about 30 seconds without having to use a direct URL. I went to the main Kodak site, clicked on the link at the top right for all products, then chose Pro Photographers link and there it was.
  19. "F Kodak? Don't you mean E (Eastman) Kodak."
    Professor Louis there is such thing as typos.
  20. "F Kodak? Don't you mean E (Eastman) Kodak."
    Professor Louis there is such thing as typos.​
    For f***'s sake! ;-}
    See posts by Josh R of Feb 20, 2011; 12:34 p.m., Art T of Feb 20, 2011; 01:35 p.m., and Randall P of Feb 20, 2011; 07:00 p.m.
  21. It's hard to say who has discontinued and deemphasized-to-extinction more films and format-availabilities in recent years, Kodak or Fuji. Maybe I notice Fuji doing it more because I used to use more Fuji films, in more formats, than Kodak films.
    But the fact that both of the two remaining film giants are d&d'ing at about the same pace suggests to me at least that neither company is consistently more unreasonable than the other.
  22. To me it looks like Fuji is discontinuing more films, but then again, I don't shoot slide. Kodak's slide offerings really have taken a beating. On the other hand, we've still got a full line up of color neg from Kodak (Ektar, Portra 160/400/800), and a full line up of B&W (for the most part) with the 3 T-Maxs, Plus-X, and Tri-X.
    While Kodak has cut some films, we've gotten 1 new film (Ektar) and many revisions in the last 3-4 years (TMY-2, Portra 160, Portra 400, 400NC-2 and 3, 400VC-2 and 3, 160VC-2, 160NC-2, and Portra 800-3). It was only in late 2006 that the full Portra lineup got upgraded to the -2 versions, and about a year later that 400NC and 400VC went to version 3. And here we are with yet a newer version of both 400 and 160.
    Fuji only has 400H in pro color neg (maybe 160 something is available, but details are murky), and their B&W is down to Acros and Neopan 400, with only Acros available in 120 I think. I'm unaware if any of their films have been revised in the last 3 or 4 years; I think 400X is relatively new (and great!).
    On the cinema side, both Fuji and Kodak have released some new films in the last couple years. Vision3 500T, 250D, and 200T from Kodak, while Fuji has come out with Vivid 250D, 500T, and 160T.
    Surely, things are looking very rough for Kodak, but it is somewhat promising that they've continued to adjust and improve their color neg films (and TMY!) instead of just letting their lineup wither on the vine like it appears they are doing with their E6 films.
  23. ted_marcus|1

    ted_marcus|1 Ted R. Marcus

    Nothing to do with slide film, but I'm still not sure whether Kodak still makes negative film in the 110 format. It seems to have quietly disappeared from their Web site sometime in 2009, but there was no discontinuation notice. After I noticed this absence in 2009, I e-mailed Kodak's customer service and received what looked like a boilerplate text that said it was still made. But nobody seemed to be selling it. The page on B&H's Web site still existed the last time I checked at the end of last year, but it said "no longer available." As best as I can tell, Kodak's 110 film disappeared in 2009. But they never bothered to inform anyone, including whoever provides their customer service.
    So I'm not surprised to see that Kodak is using the same "vaporization" approach to killing off slide films.
  24. I just looked at their website and not a single reversal 35mm film is present. Fuji, on the other hand, has many choices, all the traditional products from Sensia to Velvia.
  25. S. Usary. I think this was already posted on this thread. Look at the following link for Kodak's reversal films. You'll find E100G and E100VS, as well as a link to the Elite Chrome equivalents. Granted, it's only 2 (or 4 films), but they still are on the website.
    It may be that film and digital really could use each other at end, as it can sometimes be the small appreciable factors of a product which become overlooked with mistargeting for it's marketing appeal to the masses. It wasn't untill recently that it occured to me on how Kodak might had missed on a grand opportunity with improving the sales for reversal and print films with not developing and applying them to be used in making backup copies of digital images. While the technology is now available with specialty services in having a digital image copied in an Ektachrome slide, (not sure about negatives) it is still a specialty service and remains fairly expensive. Perhaps making it more a readily and affordable option for the average and proffessinal consumer at one-hour- photo and mail in labs in having copies of their digital images printed with reversal films or into negatives on print films would draw more sales with films. It would at least offer a more tangeable means for creating archival backups of digital images should somehow the data from the original image become lost or the means for it being read become obsolete.

    I know how the subject on the ahcivalability of digital usually draws a stir, but it seems to me that digital media still fails in being FULLY trustworthy for it's survivability over the long term. Not the data itself, but by which means the data can be read and seen years from now. How can it matter that a dvd or cd can out weather half a century if it can't be readily seen when found. I wonder how many images on CD or DVD of possible historical significance, will be trashed because at the time who ever was cleaning out the attic couldn't easily and readily review what was on them while he was in a hurry to clean it out.

    And even if the images were printed on an inkjet. Is anyone really looking forward to the future gerations being left to possibly relying on the resolution of an inkjet of which might become the only surviving copy of some the best images of our time? Not mentioning the likelyhood of some getting heavily soiled and littered with decades of insect and rat droppings.
  27. Let's face it folks - the digital interests will not tolerate a world where film exists - like big oil will not tolerate a world where electric powered cars exist. Simple.
  28. I don't know how anyone could argue that slide film isn't hidden on the Kodak website - click on 'Kodak store' and 'Film' and all you find is links to print film products. Sure doesn't seem like they want any new customers to find their E-6 film.
  29. Jim - the store isn't a good place to find what products are still being sold. They've never carried a full line up there. It's a shame that it's feature so prominently on the Kodak page. The more accurate place to look for Kodak film products is:
  30. **"Tim Gray , Feb 24, 2011; 11:06 a.m.
    Jim - the store isn't a good place to find what products are still being sold. They've never carried a full line up there. It's a shame that it's feature so prominently on the Kodak page. The more accurate place to look for Kodak film products is:
    If you only sing to the choir, how are you going to maximize your congregation? You have to know the secret password to find their product line-up? Typical of the management decisions made by the empty suits at the top. Gosh-a-roney...I wonder why Kodak is a big corporate loser??.......................
  31. The slide films are on the professional site, not the consumer site. That makes sense to me, as I can't see the granny who takes her camera to the camera store because she can't load film in it herself, going and buying slide film.
    Kodak needs us to go buy film from them, not sit around here complaining.
  32. I agree. It's poor placement. It is what it is though. The link is in the top right, 'all products -> pro photographer'.
  33. It seems now perhaps something
    strange has been going on after all. The police in
    Rochester have reportedly unearthed yet another
    shallow pit full of unexposed Ektachromes
    near the Kodak plant. It's a bit too early to know for
    sure, but apparently they had all been burried
    while they were still alive! Kodak has so far refused
    to make comment. Hhmmnn...very strange.
  34. Ha. Thanks for the laugh Charles!
  35. I don't know if Kodak is really 'killing' slide film. They have reduced their film emulsions substantially, not because they want to kill that business part, but to focus on the most profitable products. Be honest - any pro around here who ever used a 200 ASA slide film? Either 100 or 400. So, today you still get the E 100 G in different formats, even in 8x10".
    Fuji offers many more types to choose from, but their largest format is 4x5".
    I just checked my distributor's web site for slide film:
    Professional slide films
    • FUJI Astia 100F
    • FUJI Provia 100 F
    • FUJI T 64
    • FUJI Velvia 100 "F"
    • FUJI Velvia 100
    • FUJI Velvia 50
    • KODAK E 100G
    • KODAK E 100VS
    Amateur slide films
    • AGFAPHOTO CT precisa 100
    • FUJI Sensia 100
    • KODAK Elitechrome 100
    • KODAK Elitechrome Professional 200
    • KODAK Elitechrome Extra Color 100
    Compared to available sensor brands this is a very large range of media for capturing. Not to mention the even larger range for negative film.
    IMHO we have to face a reduced offer, but hey, for years I have been shooting Fuji Provia 100F almost exclusively in 35mm, MF and LF, just substituted it with Kodak EliteChrome 100 for 35mm last year.
    That means I've limited myself to a certain emulsion to keep the workflows identical, knowing the behavior in different light situations. At least for me there is no reason to complain. I had a choice but never used it.
    My hats off to Kodak that they still cut film for the LF shooters!
  36. a few noob questions:
    specifically why is kodak ceasing slide film production, but maintaining print film production -- it is my understanding that professionals prefer slides?
    the preceding post lists Professional slide films and Amateur slide films -- what is the difference? as an amateur, why would i not want to shoot the professional film?
  37. Neil, yes, professionals prefer slide film. The whole ad industry used slide film until they switched to digital. Negative or print film had been used by the masses, because the C41 development could be handled in small local shops, for the E6 development you needed a considerably more precise and controllable process.
    Amateur slide film used to be cheaper, because the emulsions could be 'mixed', that means Kodak and Fuji could sell emulsions from different 'runs' or 'batches' in the factory. The pros used to buy specific lots with identical emulsion numbers from one single 'run' or 'batch' to avoid color shifts - a critical point before the age of scanning and easy post processing with filters.
    You can shoot pro films. However, the world has changed a lot since my last post almost one and a half year ago:
    Professional slide films
    • FUJI Provia 100 F
    • FUJI Provia 400 X
    • FUJI Velvia 100 F
    • FUJI Velvia 100
    • FUJI Velvia 50
    Amateur slide films
    • AGFAPHOTO CT precisa 100 (which actually is a re-branded FUJI Provia 100 F)
    You might find some Kodak slide films today in some shops, but Kodak has discontinued slide film production for still imaging. The market was too small, though they still made profit with film. But as you know, the Kodak management decided to focus on weird new topics which never had been their core competence...
    BTW, pro slide filme are considerably more expensive. In Europe you have to pay twice as much for a FUJI Provia 100 F as for the AGFAPHOTO CT precisa 100 (the re-branded Provia 100 F).
    So today we face a monopoly regarding slide film. FUJI is the big player. As soon as Kodak ceased to produce slide film, FUJI raised the prices for their films.
    And the E6 labs continue dying... In Europe are just a few labs left, that means we have to mail in our films for development. Not a big problem, but nobody knows how long these few E6 labs will survive.
    It all boils down to one critical point: The labs. Even if you can buy slide film, without a lab they are worthless (**if** you don't want to invest into your own development).
  38. mike dixon

    mike dixon Moderator

    "Negative or print film had been used by the masses, because the C41 development could be handled in small local shops, for the E6 development you needed a considerably more precise and controllable process."

    E6 doesn't require a more precise or controllable process than C41; E6 processing used to be widely available in local pro shops. Negative film was used more by "the masses" because most people preferred to have prints to show their friends and put in albums.
  39. James G. Dainis

    James G. Dainis Moderator

    I fell for that "Use slide film; that is what the pros use" when I first became interested in photography. After my wife bewailed the fact that she had a hard time seeing them with a slide viewer and had nothing to put in albums, I bought a Vivitar slide printer using Polaroid film. Then it dawned on me - since I wanted prints why not eliminate the middle man of slides and just use print film? So, I did. Back in those days, editors and pre-press were set up for slides so that is why pros had to use it. Now editors want digital files and are set up for that. Should we tell people to use digital because that is what the pros use? I don't think so.
  40. Just received from Fujifilm Europe the information that they will raise their prices for film by 20%.
    A short moment later I received from my distributor the information that Kodak will raise the prices for film by 10%.
    Time for a smart competitor to jump in and offer an alternative to fill the niche with the demand.

Share This Page