What is the next film size to go ? (duplicate post, 1st got trashed)

<p>(duplicate post, 1st got trashed)<br>

What will be the next film size to quit being made ? 120 ? 220 ? 35MM ? <br>

Before you ask <em>'what was the last' </em>,,here they are,,<br>

recent ones have been:<br>

116, 126, 127, 620, 828, disc, APS</p>

<p>You can still find 127, and with 620, it was really just the spool that went bye-bye. I think 220 is already being cut-back upon by the major manufacturers.</p>

<p>I suppose I'm not the only person wondering why you're wondering, or what <em>you</em> think about it, and why, and based on what perspective/information.</p>

<p>Last Kodak "consumer" film product will be a Kodak C-41 color negative film in 35mm. <br>

The next dramatic change will be the demise of E-6, which may also be when Fuji packs it in. I give it 3 to 5 years.<br>

220 might go before 120. On the other hand, I suspect Portra continues to sell reasonably well in both 220 and 120. The same master rolls make 120 and 220 (and nothing else) due to their very thin backing, so there's not really a large economic cost of 220. But, if dealers can't sell 220 film before it expires, it will get discontinued. Kodak gives modest refunds to dealers on unsold film, and they can't afford to have that happen much. Also, if the 220 packaging machine wears out, Kodak won't replace it. (Ilford's 220 machine wore out, and they could not justify replacing it.)<br>

Of course, APS could go "poof" at any time, since that's also a unique master roll, due to the magnetic layer added. If they can't sell those rolls before they expire, they will stop making them.</p>

<p>Google 828/620. Both available thru B&H photo. $12.00 a shot. 828 is T.O.S. :)</p>

<p>I'm personally betting, that however long or not E-6 film is sold, that C-41 film will outlast it in the marketplace.</p>

<p>Given problems with projection, scanning, and narrow tolerance in exposure, why do you think E-6 will outlast C-41? Nowadays we project with a digital rig or show it on a monitor screen, so why wouldn't people take advantage of the fine grain C-41 films instead of Ektachrome or something like it?</p>

<p>Now if Kodachrome 25 were still available, that might be another story, but none of the existing E-6 chemistry excites me personally (although that roll of <a href="../classic-cameras-forum/00X4HR">Tso-100</a> was sort of interesting).</p>

<p>Don't worry just shoot what you want and then adjust when it is gone and move on. Life is too short to worry about these things. The only adjustment I won't make is to be totally digital as I like film and I process it myself. Learning to process color/colour film in hair dye at the moment.</p>

<p>I'm with Larry, don't worry. Ilford's business model should be even better when Fuji & Kodak discontinue B&W film. They might even start making color film if nobody else is.<br>

What's going to be sad is when we can't get new projection prints made of classic movies. That day is looming.</p>

<p>if Rollei/Maco can bring out a version of RPX II then not all is dead in e6. Yes it is made by what is left of AGFA but the thing is they found a cutter, perforation machine and even sell it in 120 so life is not all bad. Also the fillms being sold as Redbird at an ISO 400 are an aerial 800 film c-41 with extended red to almost IR with nice grain. It will soon be sold as a normal not back wound film.</p>

<p>APS is still for sale. I can get 116, 126, 127, 620, and 828 size film at filmforclassics.com. I can't find disc film for sale, but I really don't care.</p>

<p>I think 220 is on the way out. I expect 120, 35mm, and the popular sheet film sizes will remain available for quite a while. No matter how good digital technology gets there are plenty of folks who like using film and classic cameras, and there are still millions of wonderful film cameras out there. For all the big fuss about Kodachrome finally being retired I can remember Kodak sales reps griping about it way back in the mid-90s when I was working in a full service lab/camera store. As one put it "If it hadn't been for that damn Paul Simon song we could have gotten rid of it years ago." :) Some folks want to blame digital, but it was E-6 that killed K-14.</p>

<p><a name="00X4HV"></a><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=1841065">JDM von Weinberg</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Subscriber" src="../v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub6.gif" alt="" /><img title="Frequent poster" src="../v3graphics/member-status-icons/3rolls.gif" alt="" /></a>, Aug 13, 2010; 07:29 p.m.<br />"There is also one reference to a Tso-25 film (<a rel="nofollow" href="http://www.lomography.com/magazine/reviews/2010/05/15/tasma-tso-25-35mm-25-iso" target="_blank">LINK</a>) which sounds like it may have been a copy of Kodachrome."</p>

<p>Does this mean that there might be a machine capable of processing Kodachrome in Russia? If so could other folks around the world use Russian chemicals in the now defunct Kodak Kodachrome machines?</p>

<p ><a name="00YKh9"></a><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=714827">John Shriver</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Subscriber" src="../v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub8.gif" alt="" /><img title="Frequent poster" src="../v3graphics/member-status-icons/2rolls.gif" alt="" /></a>, Mar 04, 2011; 04:47 p.m. </p>

<p > </p>

<p >"Of course, APS could go "poof" at any time, since that's also a unique master roll, due to the magnetic layer added." </p>

<p > </p>

<p >This brings to mind that Kodak might also go "poof". How much longer are the stockholders going to hang on before shutting down the company, firing off the employees and selling the assets while there is still some equity left to distribute? </p>

<p > </p>

<p>I would turn this question around and ask who will come out with the next new film. There have been many from Adox, Ilford, Rollei, Kodak, etc. in the last year. I think there are too many cameras out there for the remaining films.</p>

<p>In my local film specialist a couple of days ago I noticed that they have the 'new' Portra 400 in 220, so Kodak must think it commercially viable to put their latest film out in the format. </p>

<blockquote>

<p>Nowadays we project with a digital rig or show it on a monitor screen</p>

</blockquote>

<p>You might, I intend to continue projecting optically.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>Ilford's business model should be even better when Fuji & Kodak discontinue B&W film. They might even start making color film if nobody else is.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That should be resume colour film production rather than start as they used to make it many years ago.</p>

<p>**"You might, I intend to continue projecting optically.</p>

<blockquote>

<p>Ilford's business model should be even better when Fuji & Kodak discontinue B&W film. They might even start making color film if nobody else is.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>That should be resume colour film production rather than start as they used to make it many years ago."**</p>

<p>.</p>

<p>Hopefully some other company will be able to manufacture color film after the big guys quit. As to Kodak, they seem more interested in keeping others from making their discontinued products rather than getting max monies from sale or lease of their now useless-to-them equipment. "I've got it. You can't have it. Neeiner, neeiner!"</p>

<p>I personally take it as a BAD sign that projector bulbs are now somewhat cheaper than they were a few years ago. I think the supply now considerably outnumbers demand for them. I do love a projected Kodachrome II image, but use my old Kodak 500 sparingly. (Reminder to self, must stock up on some bulbs for it.....)</p><div></div>

<p>I have an Argus Projector.</p>

<p>Art, sorry, didn't see your post until now.</p>

<p>I think there was some equivalent of K-12 or K-14 processing in the old Soviet Union, but I think they gave up long before Kodak in the first place, and in the second place, I understand it is not the machinery for K-14 that is not available , but the chemicals which were always tightly controlled by Kodak.</p>

<p>There were also people here in the States doing copies of Kodachrome back when, but things like Dynachrome are now but a foggy memory. I think they had reverse "engineered" the chemistry, or at least claimed to have done so, but it's too late now to hope for a revival, I am afraid.</p>

<p>I also believe Kodak had an exemption from the EPA for some of those couplers.</p>

<p><a name="00YLOv"></a><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=1841065">JDM von Weinberg</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Subscriber" src="../v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub6.gif" alt="" /><img title="Frequent poster" src="../v3graphics/member-status-icons/3rolls.gif" alt="" /></a>, Mar 06, 2011; 05:14 p.m.<br />".................... I understand it is not the machinery for K-14 that is not available , but the chemicals which were always tightly controlled by Kodak."</p>

<p>I did not make myself clear. Yes, that was my thinking. Russian chemicals in an American machine. Or perhaps just the dyes that Dwaynes ran out of. Plus there was a K14 machine for sale in Colorado a few months back. Russia has reverse engineered a LOT of other country's stuff. <br />A little off topic..but I've known photonetter A. T. Burke for most of my life. In the 50s as a teenager I remember him showing me a set of Russian patent papers that had Mr. Burke's distinctive style of writing on them and exactly matching his own patent application. The suspicion was that the Russians had a spy in the Patent office who would duplicate (maybe even with a trusty Minox?) interesting works for his home country. Could they not have gotten Kodak's chemical makeup the same way? If the Russian spy network did not have someone in the patent office they would be incompetent. Likewise ourselves in the Russian office.<br>

Thank you for your reply.<br>

Hope springs eternal.</p>

<p><em>"I suppose I'm not the only person wondering why you're wondering, or what you think about it, and why, and based on what perspective/information."</em><br>

Why am I wondering ? just curious, I was raised on film, shot some of my best work on film, ( do shoot mostly digital now)I still have expensive film cameras, hate to see the of knowledge of film pretty much die out. It is only a matter of time that film, chemicals, darkroom will only be special order, less & less labs will process film.<br>

My information ? from wikipedia, it does list the above film types as discontinued.</p>

 

<p>110 size film is still barely available. It will probably be next to disappear.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>My information ? from wikipedia, it does list the above film types as discontinued.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Which Wikipedia article are you reading? According to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Film_format"> this article</a>, as well as B&H, 127 and APS are still being made.</p>

 

<blockquote>

<p>110 size film is still barely available. It will probably be next to disappear.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Actually, 110 is already gone, at least temporarily. Both Kodak and Fuji discontinued their 110 film last year. However, Adox is planning to restart 110 film production sometime soon.</p>