Eastman Kodak temporarily paused all film production - to upgrade manufacturing plant (Nov 2024)
-
- Thread starter albireo
- Start date
Recent Classifieds
-
For Sale Hasselblad HC 150mm 3.2
- Started by bellyface
-
For Sale Metz SCA344 cables for Nikon F3 and Metz 45/60 series.
- Started by Chan Tran
-
For Sale Kodak's 1947 Sensitometric Step Table
- Started by Gaston 012
-
For Sale Photronix Mod 73 Transmission densitometer with instructions
- Started by Gaston 012
-
For Sale Eseco and XRite densitometers
- Started by gmikol
Forum statistics
The camera film used for IMAX is the standard 65 mm film from Kodak, and it is on acetate base like all of the motion picture camera films. ESTAR polyester base is used for the print films.
We can safely say that this tiny number is in fact 0 (zero). Kodak doesn't sell 5294 in 100ft rolls.
Drew You;re mixing apples and oranges. Even if Kodak never spent the money on new manufacturing facilities, prices have and will go up for other reasons. Take inflation. Just the devaluing of the dollar by twenty percent means that costs for everything and prices have to go up 20%. The point is, that investing in faster and better manufacturing will lower costs and/or increase production to meet demand, otherwise companies would not invest. That's how they increase their sales and profits. Prices may go up for inflation and other reasons, but newer facilities would keep them from going up higher than they would have even if they don;t go below previous pricing.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 13,663
- Format
- 8x10 Format
Alan - I'm very familiar with invest or don't invest in updated facility capacity issues. The "don't upgrade/invest, but outsource and pocket the difference, and run" strategy is how an awful lot of US manufacturers committed corporate suicide in the 90's onward. I've often referred to it as equivalent to slash and burn agriculture. It only works in the short run, and only for just a few people at the very top.
In the case of Kodak, it's more of a do or die scenario, I suspect. Utilize the cash flow wisely while they have the opportunity. In the past, they threw away a lot of their momentum with stock buy-backs and so forth. In certain ways, it's better that they're a much smaller company now, and realize who they actually are, and why.
In the case of Kodak, it's more of a do or die scenario, I suspect. Utilize the cash flow wisely while they have the opportunity. In the past, they threw away a lot of their momentum with stock buy-backs and so forth. In certain ways, it's better that they're a much smaller company now, and realize who they actually are, and why.
Didn`t knew that - i am surprised that 65mm 15Perf works with acetate in the camera. I once had some "Aerographic...something" in 16mm and it was Estar base.
it apparently did take the team at IMAX some time to come up with a camera that is NOT a film confetti maker. fortunatly their are some clever folks in the Toronto area.
among other tings the film is held for each shot by a vacuum system. and the film in both Camera and projector is moved by "waves" rather than trying to drive it by the perforations.
among other tings the film is held for each shot by a vacuum system. and the film in both Camera and projector is moved by "waves" rather than trying to drive it by the perforations.
I am aware of the technical challenge to make such a "beast". I have seen a very interesting video of a camera-technician restoring one of these 65mm 15Perf machines - and it did have a claw in it. A double claw i think. And the pressure plate is swung back each transportation cycle.
Therefore i wonder if acetate can survive this.
But maybe this is not 15Perf:
EDIT:
The video is at the bottom of the page - it is a 15Perf camera.
Therefore i wonder if acetate can survive this.
But maybe this is not 15Perf:
EDIT:
The video is at the bottom of the page - it is a 15Perf camera.
Last edited:
I recall watching a video that CBC did a while ago (proably 4 or more years ago) , I think they had someone interviewing the two main folks at IMAX. But my google skills are not up to the task of Locating it
On another note, it really is quite wild how large the IMAX format is. I have never really been interested in IMAX, but it is quite striking just how much larger of a film area it is than the other motion picture film formats.
The Kodak Film Format Choices document shows this (PDF link).
Kodak doesn't have it labeled as such, but the 35 mm 4-Perf, 3-Perf, and 2-Perf illustrations that they are showing in that document are really the Super 35 formats and not the traditional 35 mm formats.
The Kodak Film Format Choices document shows this (PDF link).
Kodak doesn't have it labeled as such, but the 35 mm 4-Perf, 3-Perf, and 2-Perf illustrations that they are showing in that document are really the Super 35 formats and not the traditional 35 mm formats.
Last edited:
MattKing
Moderator
Depends on whether you are referring to the motion picture version (5294) of Ektachrome, the still version of Ektachrome, or a bunch of the other still films.
Some of the other black and white still films are made by Eastman Kodak for sale in 100 foot rolls. The numbers are tiny, and production is relatively inefficient, both of which argue against expanding that 100 foot roll production into any colour still films, including Ektachrome.
But this is a catch-22 because more people would bulk load if more of these rolls were available.
And we can see how there is absolutely no demand for bulk rolls where Kodak doesn't allow "civilians" to order even 400ft rolls of cine film, ccc...
People would bankrupt Alaris if EK sold 100ft (or even 400ft) rolls of Gold, Portra and Ektar at cine film prices.
People would bankrupt Alaris if EK sold 100ft (or even 400ft) rolls of Gold, Portra and Ektar at cine film prices.
Spot on...
A frame is about the same as 120 6x7 medium format.
Alaris's lawyers would certainly have something to say.
Alaris is the roadblock here. They have ruined Kodaks name and relations with many of us end users!
Maybe Kodak Eastman's markups of roll still film to Alaris are too high and it's Eastman ruining relations with you?
It's Alaris who is jacking up the prices here. This has been covered already.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 13,663
- Format
- 8x10 Format
No sense going into the complicated pros and cons of middleman distribution. For the time being, it's simply a given in this case.
Maybe Alaris is jacking up prices because Eastman is jacking up prices to them? Inflation affects everyone. Do you have a report that shows what markups Eastman is applying to sale of their film to Alaris? I don't recall reading that anywhere in this forum.
MattKing
Moderator
Alaris is the distributor.
If they didn't do it, and EK did, EK would have to replace the distribution infrastructure with their own, hugely increase their costs, and build those increases into the resulting price.
At the time of the bankruptcy, a great majority of the photographic film related employees and infrastructure left EK or its subsidiaries and most of that was taken on by KA.
As a result, the film part of EK became a much, much smaller entity with a much, much smaller exposure to ongoing costs.
And that remains the case to this day.
Perhaps EK could reverse that, take on much higher costs again, and do it more efficiently than they once did. And perhaps they would go up.
But whatever the situation, Tanstaafl applies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_such_thing_as_a_free_lunch
If they didn't do it, and EK did, EK would have to replace the distribution infrastructure with their own, hugely increase their costs, and build those increases into the resulting price.
At the time of the bankruptcy, a great majority of the photographic film related employees and infrastructure left EK or its subsidiaries and most of that was taken on by KA.
As a result, the film part of EK became a much, much smaller entity with a much, much smaller exposure to ongoing costs.
And that remains the case to this day.
Perhaps EK could reverse that, take on much higher costs again, and do it more efficiently than they once did. And perhaps they would go up.
But whatever the situation, Tanstaafl applies.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_such_thing_as_a_free_lunch
That's true. There are thousands of businesses that can do the job that Alaris does.
But, it's also true that it's EK's own doings that landed them in this position. A debt of a couple of billions does not just disappear overnight.
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2011
- Messages
- 13,663
- Format
- 8x10 Format
Alan - in certain instances, it's not only Alaris taking their cut in between, but in addition, a secondary wholesaler too, for sake of lesser quantities to smaller film retailers. This kind of scenario is way more common than most people suspect. It takes real $$$ clout to buy directly from manufacturers in some categories; they have better things to do with their time.
100 ft bulk rolls for Still Cameras are part of the Alaris Portfolio. still film in 100ft rolls generaly comes with at least a frame number every 4 or 8 perfs. And it is generaly wound on a 1 inch core. Many of the bulk loades like the Lloyd would be hard pressed to accept 100ft on a 2 inch core as used for Movie film. I also tried the fit in a lloyd with a 100ft Daylight (EYEMO) spool and it would not fit.
yes, at one time one could buy a least a few of the MP films on 100ft spools for Cameras like the B&H Eyemo. those were often used as "Crash Cameras", where the camera was run remotly while a dangerous stunt was performed. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eyemo )
| Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links. To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here. |
PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:  |