KODAK Preannounced Discontinuances

[d_s31]

I see a lot of posts regarding films that have been or are about to be

discontinued - some are incorrect. I figured I'd post the link to KODAK's list:

<a

href=http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professional/products/films/discontinuedNotice.jhtml?id=0.2.26.14.25&lc=en>KODAK

Films about to be discontinued</a>

[ellis_vener_photography]

Sad to see EPN go away. If you have to shoot film and you really, really need neutral color rendition and have really, really good E6 processing it was the one to go for.

[erik_hattrem]

In stead of EPN, use 100G or EPP. EPR will still be produced for japan, order from a japanese webshop.

[jeff_drew4]

Is not the term "preannounce" a euphemism for "leak!" Grammatically attaching the prefix drives me crazy . . . like "pre-planning!" Isn't this an "announcement?" . . . or are they not sure . . . :-)

[d_s31]

Jeff, I'm with you! Another one I hate is "pre-existing". It's like saying, "So, it existed before it existed?"

[william_john_smith1]

Jeff and DS, so I'm not to only one! My favorite is "pre-installed". It comes " pre-installed",

which is different then it comes" installed"?

[petr_val__ek]

I think Kodak is just trying to be pro-active with this.

[bill_tuthill]

What colors are more saturated in EPP than in EPN, all of them?

[john_shriver]

EPP has color enhancement through interlayer effects. As does it's successor E100VS.

 

EPN has unique spectral sensitization, very low IR sensitivity. That's what kept this rather grainy film (predating T-grain technology) in business.

 

I suspect that they aren't going to keep making EPR, it's just that they will only sell off the remaining stock in Japan. Of course, so long as EPP is still being made, they could make EPR as well.

[anthony_valvo]

Kodak is what happens when a company's success is based on circumstance and not good management. I've abandon this company and Fuji and Ilford now get all my business. They don't even have the good sense to sell the formulas / film business. The market is shrinking , but it will be around for many years to come and there are profits to be had for a well run business.

 

Good riddens Kodak!

[keith_lubow]

I feel the same way, Anthony. I am making the transition from Kodak chemicals to Ilford for black and white. As for switching from C-41 and E-6 to Fuji's versions, not so sure I can do that, as they are harder to find and way more likely to stop being manufactured than Kodak's.

 

Jeff, I hear you. Kind of like "PIN number".

 

Keith

[jos__azevedo]

I'm so happy with Fuji (Provia family) and Ilford (HP5 Plus and XP2 Super) that I won't miss Kodak when it finally disappear. I just hope their "people" don't happen to find jobs at Fuji or Ilford. Then, film will be an endangered species...

 

José Azevedo

[d_s31]

I've been checking back here, now and again, to see what replacements others are suggesting and it amazes me about the ill will towards KODAK. If KODAK is creating such animosity among the film community (what's left of it), then their business is truly in trouble. <p/>I don't like their consumer digital products, but I do like their film products. That being said, I have been trying other brands myself: Illford, Foma, Fuji, and Arista's lines. In regards to chemicals, I've been doing the same. Not because I dislike KODAK, but because I'm not sure what is going to be in production next year or the year after and I want to have a substitute ready. I also like to experiment with the different looks.

[kelly_flanigan1]

In process camera work we ended buying Fujilith for negatives and Fuji-films for blowback (projection/enlargements) towards the last years we ran the giant beast. Kodak still had soem products; but the prices were well above Fujis. Then some products were dropped by Kodak; and Fuji was the only game, and prices went above Kodaks. When there were many players, volumes sold were good, prices were acceptable. One would buy a 42" by 100 foot roll for 500 bucks in the early 1980's. Once Kodak, Fuji, GAF, and Dupont produced process camera materials. Still camera films will continue to have "discontinued products" as volumes contract. ; and only a max zoom 800 C41 35mm film will remain :)

[jtk]

It's ignorant to be unaware that Kodak's shareholders demanded harsh changes, didn't want them heavily committed to dying technologies and dinosaur factories. They wanted the company to be brutally hurt, expected it to hurt for a decade, they demanded that it clean house, survive, and become a 21st century company...as they have done.

 

Who really thinks New York State (or Great Britain or Japan for that matter) are reasonable places for paper and film factories, such as Kodak's, Ilford's or Fuji's?

 

Ilford's already abandoned the biggest part of its photo paper business (the Swiss factory) to the Japanese, its Harmon paper doesn't rival the visual quality of Legion's Moab line IMO, and Fuji's been talking darkly about its film business...they have bigger fish to fry.

 

Kodak continues to dominate the digital sensor market and in announcements subsequent to this link they've introduced sensor technology that may keep them in the lead.

 

http://www.edn.com/article/CA6395964.html

[grain]

The Great Yellow Father has been frantic in its efforts to make film seem inferior to digital

over the past few years. When digital imaging became a viable alternative to photography,

some time a-way back in the year 2003 or so, it became obvious what was coming next

from Big K. Well the tables have turned. It used to be a mark of distinction for a person to

use a DSLR. But even now when we see an SRT101 or an IKONTA around someone's neck,

we see THAT as the mark of distinction.

My freezer is full, and I've dry chems. in stock for a while to come.

Drive the market, don't let it drive you.

[jtk]

Kodak first sold digital cameras in the late 70s. They've been at it for a long time...they announced the eventual demise of film back then...I remember that from a PMA convention where they demonstrated the first production digital camera I'd ever seen...a high speed camera for motion analysis. It only cost $10K, which was less than the film equivalent. It was one of the factors that killed Polaroid in that scientific/engineering market.

 

Kodak isn't trying to make film "seem inferior," it's simply doing what it needs to do to a)survive longterm b)reward shareholders c)capitalize on decades of expensive research.

 

Film actually IS inferior for virtually all professional uses.

 

The big challenge isn't film, it's color processing. Dwayne's is the only surviving US lab for Kodachrome, and it's Fuji's only US lab. It's not a great lab to rely upon.

 

SRT101 was NEVER a mark of distinction. :-)

[bill_tuthill]

I'm tired of Kodak bashing. They still make some great films,

including 400UC and 100G(X). When was the last time you bought EPN

or EPR? In my case, it was never.

 

If anything, Fuji is responsible for the dumbing down of film

by placing their awful Frontier scanners all over the place.

If the Agfa d-Lab had won, you'd be able to get excellent filmscans

competitive with DSLR for $2 a roll.

[jtk]

Kodak sold and supported Noritsu minilabs almost 25 ago. Can't blame Fuji for the inevitable dumbing down of film.

 

Remember the "disc" (maybe 1975)? Kodak announced it to labs saying they knew it was terrible but their research indicated it would sell more prints (ie make more money) because the tiny format meant everything would be equally unsharp. Same concept, but worse than 110. Dumbing-down intentions included Instamatic, for that matter, though Minolta and Kodak's Zeiss friends did pretty well with that format.

[d_s31]

<i>Kodak announced it to labs saying they knew it was terrible but their research indicated it would sell more prints (ie make more money) because the tiny format meant everything would be equally unsharp.</i><p/>To add: Photography is a businesses; get over it. Art is working within the confines of society and expressing your imagination within those confines.

[chaitanya_das_tamayo]

thus spake the grumpy old men

[plasma181]

Actually, none of those films in the link mean anything to me. I've never sullied a roll of 64 film in my life. For most of my casual shooting now, I use High Def 400. I can run it through my scanner and make it look however I wish; high contrast, low contrast, saturated, washed out, etc.

[kelly_flanigan1]

With amateurs getting the focus "OK" is often troublesome. The smaller formats of Kodapak/126; then 110; then disc allowed the common joe/jan to get a better focused image; the smaller format gives a larger DOF at a given F8 to F11 situation. Many labs would 'eat' the sale for poor ill focused prints. Its the labs that wanted a better format for the amateur. The drop in instant loading radically reduced film fog; cameras with automatic double exposure locks reduced double exposures. With 110 and disc the color print films were not as good as todays Kodak max zoom 800 of today; or Fuji 800 Superia. There was not even a asa 400 color print film for 110 when the 110 system was on its roll; it came out later in the 110 life.