Kodak signs deal to secure future of film manufacturing.

John Salim · June 7, 2013

Kodak has reached a deal with 20th Century Fox to supply film to its movie and television studios making them the sixth major studio to sign up.

This good news will secure motion picture film manufacturing for the foreseeable future.

Kodak article here….

http://motion.kodak.com/motion/About/News/2013/Jun03_1.htm

John S :D

Phil Rhodes · June 7, 2013

I hate to say it, but where else would they have gone for film stock?

Adrian Sierkowski · June 7, 2013

I think it's more important that they are still going for film stock.

Will Montgomery · June 7, 2013

Hope they can use this time to figure out a model that allows for small runs when this deal is done so we can have something to put in our cameras.

Matt Stevens · June 7, 2013

FOX could have shot DIE HARD 5 with an Alexa or RED but they shot it on film (Fuji stock) so thank God some studios are realizing that film needs to live.

Giray Izcan · June 7, 2013

Also, look at other movies like Hangover. Part 2 was shot on digital, and 3 is back on film. Amazing Spider man was shot on digital, and the second one is back on film. Superman Returns was shot digitally and the latest one is back on film. Star Trek is on film. The Lone Ranger was shot on Alexa for interior scenes and 35 for exteriors, how come? Isn't digital's dynamic range supposed to be pretty much equal to film? Ling story short, I am really glad that film is here with us...

Adrian Sierkowski · June 8, 2013

There is nothing more addictive than the smell of a fresh can of stock. And, I think a lot of it comes down to the fact that at those budget levels, costs become really a wash... or at least much more inconsequential.

The main concern is whether or not it, that is film origination, in it's current state, can still sustain an industrial scale which makes financial sense and doesn't skew the math. I am optimistic, which is to say young enough to still be naive and hopeful.

Giray Izcan · June 8, 2013

Nowadays people try too hard to nominate the "best" camera. I think it is pretty absurd to do that, because, every story callsfor different camera system.

Prashantt Rai · June 9, 2013

Film rocks! It's colour rendition is still the best, the tones and textures still unbeatable. The problem for film lies in distribution. Film manufacturers made money on prints; negative processing for features would be literally free say 10-20 years back. Honestly, I still like watching films in theatres on print.

In digital screening there are often lot of problems - black level, heavy compression of files, etc. at least with film prints, though they were expensive but one thing was assured, in that much money you paid for the print your quality of images were assured and inbuilt.

All these talks of scratches and dirts are bullshit. In Mumbai, I always saw films in theatres with pristine print quality only in smaller towns the qaulity of print suffered. Now a days, it is just the other way round - People in small towns, pay less money and watch pristine prints because they cannot afford a hefty digital projection system 'upgrade' and people in big cities have to watch compressed digital projection. not every theatre is purely 2K or the digital files originating in highres

Chris Burke · June 10, 2013

I thought they already figured out how to do short runs and the ability to resurrect any stock from yore.

Adrian Sierkowski · June 10, 2013

Depends how you quantify short. You basically have to do a whole master roll order I believe, and that's a fair amount of film.

Will Montgomery · June 10, 2013

Depends how you quantify short. You basically have to do a whole master roll order I believe, and that's a fair amount of film.

Sounds like a project made for Kickstarter. What stocks would we want back? (Besides Kodachrome since they wouldn't produce the processing chemicals again for it)

Adrian Sierkowski · June 10, 2013

Hmm... I really miss what they called 5260, a odd-ball 500T which was similar to Fuji Vivid, or honestly, I'd LOVE the old 800T stock back. I know it's a snowstorm of grain.. but man, I'd have fun with that (and I also know that '19 can be treated the same as it with much better results.. it's just one of those stocks slightly before my time that I got to roll once and never saw the results of, alas).

Bill DiPietra · June 10, 2013

PLUS-X!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Alan Duckworth · June 12, 2013

But, according to this http://rochesterhomepage.net/fulltext?nxd_id=394722 Kodak is discontinuing production of acetate stock. There is a statement in there about buying it from other manufacturers....??? Since acetate is camera stock, this doesn't sound good.

Heikki Repo · June 12, 2013

The author of the book writes:

Secondly, Kodak has announced that they will stop making acetate support (cellulose triacetate, CTA) that is primarily used for still roll and motion camera films. After their existing stocks are consumed they plan on purchasing acetate for these films from other manufacturers.

I don't believe that this will cause any significant decrease in product quality or availability of Kodak photographic film. CTA is used for applications like flat screen TVs so other have learned how to make high quality CTA.

http://www.apug.org/forums/forum390/119376-kodak-stops-making-acetate-film-base-making-kodak-film-author.html

Heikki Repo · June 12, 2013

And then there is this: http://motion.kodak.com/motion/About/The_Storyboard/4294971668/index.htm

Adrian Sierkowski · June 12, 2013

Exactly. You're talking just about one of the most basic parts of film. If it's more economical for them to buy it as needed in bulk and leave the manufacture to others, then why do it in house? As long as there is QC on it, and I am sure there will be, I don't see this having and substantial impact on film, aside from allowing Kodak to save a few bucks which they need.