Another brand heard from after a long while.. Lucky Film.

[Film-Niko]

was the Lucky firm not closely involved with the "Kodak China" story, where Kodak invested in making film in China originaly for that market, and leter exposted to other places.

Yes, in 2003 Eastman Kodak and Lucky signed a contract for cooperation, which should have a timespan of 20 years. Part of this cooperation was that Kodak bought shares of Lucky (about 20% if I remember right), and Kodak should offer a certain technology transfer. Part of that technology transfer should be that Kodak had to built an emulsion making and coating line for Lucky.
At that time, in 2003, global film demand was still almost on its record level high (absolute record was in 2000-2001 with 3.5 billion films; source: Robert Shanebrook, Making Kodak film book).
Kodak thought that China would be a very attractive and profitable market for film for many years to come.
But Chinese customers reacted very similarly to other global markets, and demand for film in China dropped very significantly, too, from 2004 on.
Therefore Kodak already in 2007 cancelled the cooperation with Lucky completely and terminated the contract. Total stop of Kodak's activities with Lucky.
How much of the intended technolgy transfer was realized and implemented is unknown. But as the contract originally had a time span of 20 years, and was cancelled after 4 years, most probably only a minor part of the originally planned technology transfer could have been done.

 

[koraks]

How much of the intended technolgy transfer was realized and implemented is unknown. But as the contract originally had a time span of 20 years, and was cancelled after 4 years, most probably only a minor part of the originally planned technology transfer could have been done.

"Technology transfer" is a very vague term, and the notion that the transfer would somehow be a gradual yea-by-year process seems like an odd approach to begin with. It also implies that technology is viewed as some kind of tangible asset, which in reality it isn't. Trying to somehow gauge the effects of a tech transfer on the basis of this kind of information is impossible.

 

[cmacd123]

At that time, in 2003, global film demand was still almost on its record level high (absolute record was in 2000-2001 with 3.5 billion films; source: Robert Shanebrook, Making Kodak film book).
Therefore Kodak already in 2007 cancelled the cooperation with Lucky completely and terminated the contract. Total stop of Kodak's activities with Lucky.

so if the contract was expired in 2023... Perhaps any restrictions on using Kodak technology outside of China has already expired also????Japana and the US often demoslish factory sites not in use, BUT could Lucky have retained the machinery that Kodak provided them?

the latest Kodak film in 2007 would be a generation or two back from the current Kodak Max, but might be at least level to the other Start up colour film Players???

 

[koraks]

could Lucky have retained the machinery that Kodak provided them

There's more to technology than machines.
As to the question whether Lucky would stop itself from marketing technology that might have been part of a contractual agreement with an entity that since went bankrupt...well, I'm skeptical.
By all means the plausible explanation is that Lucky has spent considerable time reinventing the wheel, just like InovisCoat and Harman et al have been doing - out of necessity. Because technology transfer isn't a matter of putting some items into a box and taking them off a shelf once you need them. Technology isn't a static artefact. It's a bit like an organism - you need to keep it alive.

 

[MattKing]

As to the question whether Lucky would stop itself from marketing technology that might have been part of a contractual agreement with an entity that since went bankrupt...well, I'm skeptical.

Just a point - although EK went into bankruptcy, they also came out of bankruptcy and continued thereafter.
They did sell off a lot of valuable things though as part of that process - just not everything.

 

[halfaman]

Yes, in 2003 Eastman Kodak and Lucky signed a contract for cooperation, which should have a timespan of 20 years. Part of this cooperation was that Kodak bought shares of Lucky (about 20% if I remember right), and Kodak should offer a certain technology transfer. Part of that technology transfer should be that Kodak had to built an emulsion making and coating line for Lucky.
At that time, in 2003, global film demand was still almost on its record level high (absolute record was in 2000-2001 with 3.5 billion films; source: Robert Shanebrook, Making Kodak film book).
Kodak thought that China would be a very attractive and profitable market for film for many years to come.
But Chinese customers reacted very similarly to other global markets, and demand for film in China dropped very significantly, too, from 2004 on.
Therefore Kodak already in 2007 cancelled the cooperation with Lucky completely and terminated the contract. Total stop of Kodak's activities with Lucky.
How much of the intended technolgy transfer was realized and implemented is unknown. But as the contract originally had a time span of 20 years, and was cancelled after 4 years, most probably only a minor part of the originally planned technology transfer could have been done.

The deal was to upgrade Lucky triacetate production and provide an emulsion and coating lines. I read somewhere that it was an old Kodak emulsion and coating line, nothing state of art. They even supposely produced some Kodak Gold.

China Lucky Film - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[Agulliver]

The deal was to upgrade Lucky triacetate production and provide an emulsion and coating lines. I read somewhere that it was an old Kodak emulsion and coating line, nothing state of art. They even supposely produced some Kodak Gold.

China Lucky Film - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

I thought they were producing something akin to Color Plus (Kodacolor). But essentially I remember reading around the time that Kodak was setting Lucky up with the ability to make films derived from slightly older Kodak emulsions, probably late 90s stuff.

If Lucky have regained the ability to produce something similar to Color Plus and lawfully sell it globally, that would be very interesting.

 

[Film-Niko]

"Technology transfer" is a very vague term, and the notion that the transfer would somehow be a gradual yea-by-year process seems like an odd approach to begin with.

I have not written that the intended technology transfer would be "gradual". I've been involved in technology transfer processes for most time of my professional career, therefore I know quite well about the complexity of it.
From my experience I know that after signing a contract it takes time for the processes to start and accelerate on an operational level. And when a contract will be ended the action on an operational level will be mostly stopped a significant time before the contract-stop is signed.
Therefore it is quite likely that in the case of Lucky the real time ("netto") of cooperation and technology transfer between Kodak and Lucky was indeed less than these 4 years of the effective contract life-span.
And that assessment is proven by my test results of the last / latest / most advanced generation of Lucky color films which I tested just short before Lucky stopped production. The quality of these films was significantly lower compared to Kodak quality.

 

[koraks]

And when a contract will be ended the action on an operational level will be mostly stopped a significant time before the contract-stop is signed.

Depends entirely on the situation. There's plenty of cases where the cessation is abrupt.

Therefore it is quite likely that in the case of Lucky the real time ("netto") of cooperation and technology transfer between Kodak and Lucky was indeed less than these 4 years of the effective contract life-span.

Agree.

What we don't know, and cannot know based on the information available to us, is to what extent the present/upcoming generation of Lucky color films is based on technology acquired from Kodak.

 

[Film-Niko]

so if the contract was expired in 2023... Perhaps any restrictions on using Kodak technology outside of China has already expired also????

No, the contract did not expire in 2023, it was already terminated (by Kodak) and expired in 2007. At that time a contract for the termination was made, and Kodak paid Lucky a compensation for ending the original contract and stopping the cooperation.

Japana and the US often demoslish factory sites not in use, BUT could Lucky have retained the machinery that Kodak provided them?

That is possible that the machinery was not scrapped. I think it is even likely that the machines were kept, because Lucky has continued making certain film products for the local market (e.g. for Chinese military).

the latest Kodak film in 2007 would be a generation or two back from the current Kodak Max, but might be at least level to the other Start up colour film Players???

The current Kodak amateur color negative films are on the technological level of that time (2007). After that no improvements have been implemented in the amateur film line. There has only been the slight improvement ( a bit finer grain) to Portra 160 and 400 in 2011 (Portra 800 was not changed).

 

[Film-Niko]

The deal was to upgrade Lucky triacetate production and provide an emulsion and coating lines. I read somewhere that it was an old Kodak emulsion and coating line, nothing state of art.

I remember that, too:
That the technology Kodak delivered to Lucky was not their latest and best, but earlier versions on a lower level.

 

[Film-Niko]

Agree.

What we don't know, and cannot know based on the information available to us, is to what extent the present/upcoming generation of Lucky color films is based on technology acquired from Kodak.

Well, in the end, what for us as potential customers count is simply how good the new film(s) will be. Whether that quality may be based on former Kodak technology input, or mainly based on in-house Lucky technology........the photographic result counts.

As explained, I have used and tested the latest Lucky films which were available just before Lucky stopped their production. They were not bad, but not on the same quality level as the Kodak, Fuji, Agfa, Konica and Ferrania offerings.

 

[Agulliver]

"not bad" will be good enough for most of the amateurs getting into film photography. I know a few in their twenties who are sourcing film as cheap as possible - apparently a back street film dealer has popped up in London!

 

[JParker]

"not bad" will be good enough for most of the amateurs getting into film photography.

Most probably. And especially now with the problematic monopoly-markup done by Kodak Alaris.

But it also looks like American film shooters can be lucky by having special, very attractive deals:
Midwest Photo - mpex.com - is selling Fuji 200 3-pack 36 for $18.95.

So $6.32/roll only!!

And the Fujifilm 400 is less than 9$ there.

I know a few in their twenties who are sourcing film as cheap as possible - apparently a back street film dealer has popped up in London!

Film dealing in the dark at the backyards.........like drug dealing......... .

 

[koraks]

Well, in the end, what for us as potential customers count is simply how good the new film(s) will be. Whether that quality may be based on former Kodak technology input, or mainly based on in-house Lucky technology........the photographic result counts.

As explained, I have used and tested the latest Lucky films which were available just before Lucky stopped their production. They were not bad, but not on the same quality level as the Kodak, Fuji, Agfa, Konica and Ferrania offerings.

Yes, I read that with interest. Frankly, I don't expect the color film that will supposedly hit the market this year to be significantly better than what they had before the cessation of production. My suspicion is that they basically revived what they had back then, resolved the inevitable supply chain/material availability issues and have worked on essentially picking up where they left off. Towards the future, there's a chance that there will be actual improvements/innovations, but this will depend also on how sustainable and sizeable the whole film revival thing will prove to be.

 

[Agulliver]

If it turns out to be "not bad" and an extension of what they were doing a decade or more ago (as seems most likely) then it will be good enough for many users. Not sure where I stand on it myself. i may well try the Lucky colour film depending on price. But I tend to only use slower speed CN film when I'm on holiday, two or three times a year...and I've already got Kodak and (genuine) Fuji in stock for 2025. However, this could be a product that my younger friends might find very attractive if there's a price break compared to Kodak.


And yes, there is now a dodgy back street film dealer in London selling dubious quality film in branding I've only seen on eBay in the manner of drug dealers. I'm imagining a man in a trenchcoat..."Pssst...wanna buy some cheap film?"....

 

[Sanug]

A bw sample arrived today.

The film base have an intense blue colour. The canister is plastic and with DX coding. I am very curious how it will perform.

 

[cmacd123]

that looks like a DX code by label. first time i have seen that.

 

[blee1996]

@Sanug did you order any ISO 100 film as well? I heard from some review that ISO 400 rating might be a bit optimistic.

In a world full of wonderful B&W film emulsions, I pray for more color emulsions.

 

[Sanug]

It was a special welcome offer at Aliexpress. Only valid for 1 ISO 400 film. Therefore I do have this film only. I will expose it at ISO 200 and develop in Adox XT-3.

 

[foc]

that looks like a DX code by label. first time i have seen that.

It looks like a smart idea. One cassette fits all and just have different die cut labels for the different DX.

 

[Film-Niko]

It was a special welcome offer at Aliexpress. Only valid for 1 ISO 400 film. Therefore I do have this film only. I will expose it at ISO 200 and develop in Adox XT-3.

Please report here about your results! I - and certainly most other members here as well - would highly appreciate it!
Thanks in advance.

 

[baachitraka]

how much does it costs?

 

[Marcelo Paniagua]

how much does it costs?

Seeing it on Aliexpress at the moment:

Also seeing 100ft rolls.

Probably will order some tomorrow.

 

[Supercine]

@Film-Niko I've shot the SHD 400. Its an interesting film. Unfortunately it's in those god awful plastic cassettes. The film colour is very odd blue and it also has a very odd smell, like disinfectant...
I found the box speed to be very optimistic! I shot mine at 125 ISO and developed in HC-110 'B' for 7:15. These were then printed on Ilford 8 x 10 RCVC.
I found the tone of the film very nice and the dynamic range is good, however, the coating left something to be desired, There is some faint 'banding' to the coating, scratches and also a large and very odd artefact embedded in the emulsion, it looks like an insect! I hope these are teething problems and they improve, as it could be a very nice film.