Andy Hager

Hi Tyler, Thanks for the quick response. Yes, I have just the mechanics, but was looking more for technical information about the recorder and amplifier combo. A schematic diagram or a owners manual would be more what I was searching for. As far as my excitement about Ektachrome, there is no technical reason at all. The new re-release of Ektachrome is more just like the original version before. Just the fact that Kodak is even offering a color reversal film product again, that's it. My preferred color reversal was always Kodachrome but alas, that will never come back. I liked Ektachrome for 35mm still frame pictures with my Stereo Realist camera, then projecting the 3D images. I really believed that film was always better for 3D. Although now with 4k, digital 3D isn't bad at all. For motion pictures, it makes sense to offer Ektachrome in Super 8. But yes, for 16mm shooting I almost always used negatives, either black and white or color because of the better overall image quality. It's also true for shooting in Super 8 as well. That is correct about print films being more durable for projection!

Hello, Been away from film for a while, and now with Kodak announcing the production of Ektachrome 100D again, I'm excited to get back to shooting on film again. I'm looking at my old Magnasync 602E recorder, looks to be type 5 from what I've seen on the web, and I don't have a manual for it. I don't have the amplifier that would have came with it originally either. So I'm hoping someone knew what the electrical specs were with the record and playback heads to be able to determine which amp would be a good fit for using them. Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks, Andy

Film has changed a lot since the 1970s; as such so have the folks using it. Looks like during the 1980s is really when using color negatives became more popular. Looking through an old Kodak catalog now, from cia 1975, and it looks as though very few negative stocks were available back then. Most common was the Eastman Color Negative II 5247 which was a 100T film which used the ECN-2 process. They also had 5254, which was also a 100T stock, but used a different developer process, I suppose ECN? Huge selection of Reversals though, my gosh! Between Kodachrome and Ektachrome and PlusX and 4-X. Several VNF stocks for video news footage, 125T and 400T and 400D which used the VND and VXD processes as well as VNF-1. What a weird time for film stocks!?

I thought about trying some night shots of the Northern Lights this summer with all the solar flareups that are expected this year. All time lapse with super long single frame exposures. Those Kubrick 0.7f lenses would be nice. But perhaps all that grain of the 5230 might just be the trick for the audience into thinking its actually all the stars! :P

I just ordered a bunch of 16mm film from Kodak directly. My local Kodak sales rep is in the contacts list on my phone. Ordering from them direct really is the best way to gaurantee fresh stock. I wonder if Dwaynes Photo will make 'death of Ektachrome' t-shirts like they did for Kodachrome? :unsure:

I'll probably get shot right here and now for this, but here it goes.... Some of the larger chains have gone digital, while some of the smaller ones and mom and pop theaters are still projecting 35mm. I know in my hometown they tore down the old 16 screen cinema complex and built a new 16 screen digital cinema complex in it's place. While the town next to me still has the old one screen theatere owned by a mom and pop outfit that still projects 35mm. For the smaller venues, the cost of these digital projectors is hard to justifiy even switching. Many have said they could buy a 35mm projector for $25,000 to $30,000 and be able to get at least 25 years of service life out of it. Last I heard the average cost of these new digital projectors are in the $60,000 to $80,000 range and there is no garantee they will last 25 or 30 years first to allow engough time for them to pay for themselves, especially for a smaller venue. I think the only people who are truly happy with all of this are the distributors.

Hi David, Thanks for your reply. That's kind of what I was wondering in my original post. I wanted to get that nitro cellulose pre panchromatic type look. I don't think filters alone will get there. I'm not sure myself what processing labs could attempt it either or how much the C-41 process can deliver or be manipulated. I wanted to do a short montage of automotive history and film different cars from different time periods at the next upcoming Detroit Dream Cruse in August. It's the 1900 to 1915 period that I was thinking more about. I think with the other time periods a filter would work just to cast some kind of hue specific to that time.

Well, I just opened up the Tiffen catalog......guess this is where I'll start first. Then shoot and see what I get. The best way to learn. :)

Indeed! Better living, through modern chemistry!

I still think film technology has room to advance from where it is today. I think the use of chemicals and bieing able to import into a computer is what is really limiting for the mass market. I have made holographic images on glass plates before and I think the future of film technology can easily go here next!

All of the film gauges available today are derivatives of larger sizes of stock. 35mm is just slit down reperfed 70mm stock and so on down the line with 16mm and super 8. As far as I know, there still are folks who are slitting and perfing regular 8mm. At this point in the game, I think it is now an all or nothing kind of deal. I don't think there will be any breakups or discontinuations of film gauges available, just the kind of stock manufactured will change, like the discontinuation of Ektachrome and Kodachrome, for example. In the end, one day I think Kodak will just simply do what Fuji just did and make a blanket statement and say something like: it costs X amount of dollars to manufacture this, and we sold X amount of dollars worth of it and now we can no longer lower our overhead costs of manufacture so, we don't see a viable business in this market segment here anymore. THE END!

What's interesting in this Bloomberg article is how they mention that Kodak is a company in termoil and then later in the article mention that Hewlett Packard is one of Kodaks largest competitors in the inkjet photo printing market. What Bloomberg forgot to mention, was that Hewlett Packard is also a company in termoil and has struggled to restructure its overall buisness the last couple of years! None of the major computer manufacturers are on sold business footing at all anymore! Look at Dell, Compaq and Gateway. All of them have had some major restructoring over the last five years as the business world really doesn't see the need to upgrade any of there computers in a big hurry anymore. Notice how IBM completely sold out of the PC market all together. Take a look at Apple, they don't make all that much selling MacBooks and MacPros, they sell phones! No doubt that Kodak is a company in termoil, but honestly, aren't all digital equipment manufacturers in some tight spot?

Hi Folks, Since black and white products are still available from our friends at Kodak, why not make the most of it!? I was thinking about doing some sephia tone 16mm shorts and I'm wondering how to do it? Now sure, anything is possible with a computer in post, but is there a way through the camera or film processing? Simple filters? Any ideas and what to expect? Regards, Andy

Hi Richard, Thanks for that info. That does make more sense then on Kodaks part. The only thing now though, I wished more labs offered super 8 prints to take the place of color reversals. I know it won't save on the cost of just shooting reversal, processing and then projecting directly. Seems pointless to blow up to 16mm, to get a print. But then, getting a good color negative motion picture scanner at reasonable cost would be ideal too. Regards, Andy

I think the best news of the last year was when Fuji announced they were pulling out of the Motion Picture Film market. Why Kodak doesn't see this as a capitolistic oportunity, I don't really know? There is NOTHING new with digital technology anymore and, frankly, I think the film market has been penetrated as about as far as it will go with substitue digital products. I do NOT believe that there is anyone still "on the fence" between going digital or stying with film anymore. That ship has definately sailed over a decade ago already!!! Sure, there will be some who will still step away, but I do believe that the majority of people stepped away from the film market and I think some have come back to film, regardless of its costs. It costs about $150 to $160 dollars for a 400ft roll of 16mm film not including processing and other items. I can't fill the gas tank of my daily driver pickup truck without it costing $100 anymore!! It's $150 per month for a cable/phone/internet subscription for crying out loud! Somehow I'm told to be expected to believe that film is expensive?