Some Good News

it was bought by the British arm of Kodaks pension fund although I don't know where it is produced.
 
Is it not still made in the same place, but just marketed by this new company? That was my impression from previous announcements.
 
That is good news now i've found film i'd hate for it to have stopped:banana:
 
Andysnap said:
Just saw this on PetaPixel

http://petapixel.com/2013/11/14/kod...-vow-keep-film-photography-alive/#more-125746

Its all good news

Andy
Click to expand...

I think that this is mostly marketing fluff, as I believe that Kodak were already making some of Lomography emulsions anyway (e.g., one of Lomography's black and white film's is a repackaged TMax 400).

I don't think that this points to anything new at the moment, although that could change.

steveo_mcg said:
Indeed.

I just saw this and it confused me. http://petapixel.com/2013/09/26/kodak-alaris-will-keep-kodak-legacy-alive-plans-stop-selling-film/
Does that mean that all the Kodak film business is now British? Is it made in the UK or by an Ex-Kodak company in the US?
Click to expand...

The UK Kodak Pension plan (now called Kodak Alaris) have obtained the marketing rights for photographic still film and imaging, but the manufacturing is still in Rochester, NY as it has been.
 
Essentially they've sold the still film/paper division to the UK Kodak Pension Plan (Alaris), who have contracted it back to Kodak in essence. Its still being made at Rochester as there are very few facilities in the world that can do the sort of coating that Kodak films are designed for, so you couldn't just contract it out to a Chinese etc film coating company as they'll probably use much different methods which will mean the film would have to be re-engineered for that coating machine. Obviously that would cost a hell of a lot of money, not to mention time so it'll always come from Rochester as far as I see it.

They have done something similar before as they spun off one of their other divisions (can't remember which at the minute) into a separate company, yet the new company payed a fee every year to Kodak for their facilities as only it had the equipment they needed (and it was also used by another part Kodak didn't spin off) so essentially nothing changed except some employees now worked for the new company, but worked at the same place as before.
 
Last edited:
Sectionate said:
I think it is made in Harrow, london
Click to expand...

Thats where the papers are coated - all Kodak film is now made in Rochester, NY. Harrow certainly used to coat films in the past (going back over 20 years if I remember) but not anymore.
 
I really doubt we'll ever see Kodachrome again... not just the film, but the processing was much more complex and expensive.
 
ChrisR said:
I really doubt we'll ever see Kodachrome again... not just the film, but the processing was much more complex and expensive.
Click to expand...
"Never give up, never surrender!"
 
build it......and they will come

lol

srsly though, if there is a market, somebody will cater for it if the margins are good.

its not like its a b/w 100 film, its like Velvia, a legend.....who would not want to shoot it..:shrug:
 
joxby said:
build it......and they will come

lol

srsly though, if there is a market, somebody will cater for it if the margins are good.

its not like its a b/w 100 film, its like Velvia, a legend.....who would not want to shoot it..:shrug:
Click to expand...
Me :lol: ;)
 
I'd shoot it at £30 a roll

not very often mind, but I would

But then, you'd have to pay me £30 to shoot poundland film, so...:thinking:

It takes allsorts...lol
 
joxby said:
I'd shoot it at £30 a roll

not very often mind, but I would
Click to expand...
Me too, it would still work out cheaper than Impossible Project per shot, all that Kodachromey loveliness mmmm :D
 
joxby said:
I'd shoot it at £30 a roll

not very often mind, but I would

But then, you'd have to pay me £30 to shoot poundland film, so...:thinking:

It takes allsorts...lol
Click to expand...

Well I suppose on a rethink...if I was going somewhere special then, but for me I'd make every shot count with no chance of exposure errors, so it would have to be something like sunny scenery.
 
TheBigYin said:
at £30 a roll i'd definitely treat myself to a roll once a year... hell it's less than a penny a day
Click to expand...
To be fair there were a lot of film users back in the day that did just that, film was expensive to buy and to get processed (prior to the launch of cheap and cheerful processors of the 70's like Trueprint and Tudorprint) so it wasn't unusual to find a whole years events all on one roll of film, shots of birthdays and summer holidays bookended by Christmases.
 
RaglanSurf said:
To be fair there were a lot of film users back in the day that did just that, film was expensive to buy and to get processed (prior to the launch of cheap and cheerful processors of the 70's like Trueprint and Tudorprint) so it wasn't unusual to find a whole years events all on one roll of film, shots of birthdays and summer holidays bookended by Christmases.
Click to expand...


So true for my dad, but in the old days Kodachrome was 25 asa so used it in sunny conditions, but the same problems exist then as today as if you are bringing up a family and all the bills etc ...it would put off some film users paying £30 a roll.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top