Jump to content

Pro-8mm WINS, EVERYONE ELSE LOSES...


Alessandro Machi

Recommended Posts

  • Premium Member

Sure 40 ASA is low, but is 64 ASA therefore high? Seems silly to accuse Kodak of not providing a slow-speed film when they give you one that is only 64 ASA! A film stock that is not even a full stop faster can hardly be called a major jump in speed category.

 

Like I said, if your obsession is fine-grain photography, Super-8 is not the format for you. That's hardly one of its key features. And anyway, I'm not convinced that 64T will be significantly grainier than K40.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 59
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Premium Member
I am curious as to why Kodak chooses to make K-40 for 16mm but not super 8?

 

I think this is their way of sidestepping their Ekatchrome VNF film replacement.  This way they only need to make one color reversal film. - Much more cost effective for Kodak.

 

Yes, god forbid Kodak do anything cost-effective as a business. It's supposed to be run as a charity to low-budget filmmakers afterall.

 

In motion picture shooting, I'd say that 16mm K40 is used even LESS than it is in Super-8 -- I mean, I shot a ton of Super-8 K40 but I hardly know anyone that shoots it in 16mm. For one thing, it doesn't have keycode numbers. And the problems of finding a lab are the same. And the costs are higher with 16mm. I don't see any conspiracy here to somehow only grant the 16mm line with K40; no doubt they'll cut K40 from 16mm just as they are doing with Super-8.

 

Look, color reversal is a TINY market compared to color negative in the motion picture world, and Super-8 is a TINY market compared to 16mm and 35mm, so the fact that Kodak only wants to make all Super-8 color reversal stocks in the E6 process rather than the E6, VNF, and K14 processes is quite understandable.

 

Afterall, there is only ONE process for color negative motion picture film, ECN2, so why should users of Super-8 reversal have to find labs that can do THREE different processes? THAT makes no business sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Alessandro, seriously, you need to:

 

1. Lighten up.

2. Stop biting the hand that feeds you.

3.  Take a class or read a book on basic business and.or capitalism.

 

Companies do not engage in conspiracies against their customers IF they are making a hefty profit off them. There's simply no reason to do that, but the fact is, the Super 8 market is an extremely niche market for Kodak.

Hell, I've only shot 20 rolls or so of S8 in the last three years.

Most serious Super 8 shooters are buy a handful of 50ft cartridges every few months, if that.

That hardly compares with what people shooting even low budget 16mm or S16 films do: fill up their freakin' fridge with film!

 

So give Kodak a break. They're still supporting the format.

Six years ago, they only offered two Super 8 stocks; K-40 & Ektacrhome 160 (yuck!).

It's not the end of the world.

Matt Pacini

 

Matt I entirely agree with you.

 

Alessandro, you seriously need to get into the real world. Kodachrome has some SERIOUS issues that, I would argue, demote the super8 format, and I could argue, even though I love all Kodachrome emulsions in all formats, that the super8 format is better off without it in terms of attracting new users.

 

1. K40 is far too slow

2. it is far too contrasty

3. it is FAR to difficult to expose for newcomers

 

When I try and get others into shooting super8 I don't even mention K40, other than to say it is readily available cheaply with processing, but I also add, you need serious anount of light to shoot it, and know how to expose film properly.

 

A lot of perople coming to super8 are younger people who want to shoot a cool looking film or music video on a budget and Kodachrome is far less suited to these people than the newer more modern stocks. I read that the new 64T is less contrasty than K40.

 

I think that you should praise Kodak. To even consider that anyone at Kodak can be bothered to waste their time plotting with Pro8 is fantasy.

 

AS my day job I run a business here in the UK (not at all related to film) and if someone comes to me and says "I think that this product is being purchased by consumers in this quantity" the first thing I say is "OK where are your figures?"

 

Where are your figures and hard evidence for they assertions you make, both about the usage of super8 and the conspiracy theory?

 

Come up with this and you will be taken seriously.

 

In the meantime I see Kodaks dedication to the super8 format as almost philanthropic, especially with this new 64T being available specifically for Super8! Presumable money has been invested R&D to ensure that it will work for the format, money will also be spent on marketing - and if you think that this costs nothing unless you put out huge advertising campaigns etc think again.

 

Matt

Edited by Matt Wells
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, god forbid Kodak do anything cost-effective as a business. It's supposed to be run as a charity to low-budget filmmakers afterall.

 

In motion picture shooting, I'd say that 16mm K40 is used even LESS than it is in Super-8 -- I mean, I shot a ton of Super-8 K40 but I hardly know anyone that shoots it in 16mm. For one thing, it doesn't have keycode numbers.  And the problems of finding a lab are the same.  And the costs are higher with 16mm.  I don't see any conspiracy here to somehow only grant the 16mm line with K40; no doubt they'll cut K40 from 16mm just as they are doing with Super-8.

 

Look, color reversal is a TINY market compared to color negative in the motion picture world, and Super-8 is a TINY market compared to 16mm and 35mm, so the fact that Kodak only wants to make all Super-8 color reversal stocks in the E6 process rather than the E6, VNF, and K14 processes is quite understandable. 

 

Afterall, there is only ONE process for color negative motion picture film, ECN2, so why should users of Super-8 reversal have to find labs that can do THREE different processes?  THAT makes no business sense.

 

I do not deny that having fewer processes seems to make sense for the shooter and Kodak. My concern is that they were supposed to release Ektachrome 100 E-6 to replace their current VNF Ektachrome (scheduled to be discontinued). To my knowledge, this has been cancelled. Now they are releasing the 64 T Ektachrome and discontinuing K-40 AND their VNF Ektachrome. I see this as a tactic to replace BOTH films. They knew that attention would be turned away from the discontinuation of their current VNF stock when they took K-40 away from us.

 

So, my question to Kodak is, "what do you intend to do about your replacement for your discontinued Ektachrome VNF? Nothing?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"They knew that attention would be turned away from the discontinuation of their current VNF stock when they took K-40 away from us."

 

Dude, lay off the ganja or up your dosage of antipsychotics.

 

There is no "they".

 

"They" is a business... "they" don't owe you - - - -.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

It's as if enough unmeritous reasons are given for the discontinuation of Kodachrome 40 then it must have been the right decision.

 

The fact that it wasn't stopped for 16mm just means the reasons don't make sense at all. The lab or labs that currently offer Super-8 and 16mm Kodachrome, how does this help them?

 

Kodak didn't make enough of an effort to keep the processors going, labs WANTED to offer kodachrome 40, but Kodak didn't make an effort to help them because they had pre-planned this day.

 

You guys are also missing the point about K-40, it's not for everyone, it is for people that want a really nice look and have extensive knowlege about contrast issues and therefore know when to shoot and when not to shoot with it.

 

The bottom line STILL REMAINS, there are no lower ASA films for Super-8 that would nicely complement the higher ASA film stocks that are popular. Why would the granier stocks be popular but not the lower, "cleaner" stocks? Because same day processing is available for those stocks.

 

So for the K-40 move to make even a modium of sense, then release the Vision 100T and the ASA 50 negative stock in Super-8.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member

The business case for having any additional Kodak films available in Super-8 is still being evaluated. Will they meet the real needs of filmmakers and grow the market? :) Or just cannibalize sales of other films and needlessly add to inventory costs? :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"They knew that attention would be turned away from the discontinuation of their current VNF stock when they took K-40 away from us."

 

Dude, lay off the ganja or up your dosage of antipsychotics.

 

There is no "they".

 

"They" is a business... "they" don't owe you - - - -.

 

You obviously know little about how tactics are used in a profit oriented business environment. <_< Perhaps it is best for you to just continue shooting film and leave the intelligent conversation about its future to us.

 

Additionally, I never implied Kodak owes me anything. I only state the obvious needs of many of the filmmaker's (including myself) to make super 8 viable for Kodak?s own benefit. If they fail to meet our needs then they will simply lose market share - just like any other business. Product support is going to be key to their survival now that filmmakers have other options (such as digital). The days of their monopoly are over. They need to learn to be more accommodating instead of blowing off the needs of their low end clients (as they have done in the recent past) - even if it costs them in the short run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reality is, none of us "knows the needs of filmmakers" better than Kodak.

They're the only ones who can actually look at the ordering statistics and tell how much of what stock is being used.

The rest of us are just guessing.

 

It's simle supply & demand:

If it's making money, Kodak is going to keep selling it.

If it's not, they won't.

 

Whining doesn't change that equation, buying lots of film stock does.

 

Matt Pacini

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The business case for having any additional Kodak films available in Super-8 is still being evaluated.  Will they meet the real needs of filmmakers and grow the market?  :)  Or just cannibalize sales of other films and needlessly add to inventory costs?  :(

 

I believe that the underlying reason for cutting Kodachrome in Super 8mm is the losses on the processing end for Kodak. Everything from the shipping costs, honoring old mailers and upkeep of the Swiss plant was draining profits from the 8mm division. Problem is Kodachrome Carts are the biggest seller and in Kodaks opinion taking away from the higher profit 8mm products. The strategy is by cutting K40 carts Kodak is forcing Super 8mm loyalist to purchase higher profit products. Even if sales dip profits will go up because no processing headaches. Kodak probably has decided that this decision will ultimately make the 8mm film division healthier and therefore be able to continue to provide products for the long term. I can imagine that the new CEO said either cut the entire 8mm product line or find a way to make it more profitable.

 

I commend Kodak for sticking with Super 8mm when just about every other company folded up the tents years ago. I wish they would have figured out a way to keep K40 by giving up the processing and still provide the raw stock. Dwaynes in the US solved some of there problems but they needed a similar company in Europe because thats were the majority of the Kodachrome Carts are sold.

 

My 2 cents :)

 

BTW John - Thanks for your posts in this and other forums and I promise I will try the new 64T. I shoot 90% of my super 8 for projection so I am less thrilled with all the new choices but if my thoughts are correct and Kodaks move keeps Super 8mm cartridge filmaking alive then OK they did what they had to do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
I don't know why you keep insisting that 40 ASA is low but 64 ASA is not.

 

 

Kodachrome 64 I could live with, but that isn't on the table. I didn't mind the Etkachrome 125, it was ok, and the Ektachrome 64 should look less grainy than the Ektachrome 125, but in all likelihood it won't come close to what Kodachrome delivers, but when it comes out I'll see for myself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reality is, none of us "knows the needs of filmmakers"  better than Kodak.

They're the  only ones who can actually look at the ordering statistics and tell how much of what stock is being used.

The rest of us are just guessing.

 

It's simle supply & demand:

If it's making money, Kodak is going to keep selling it.

If it's not, they won't.

 

Whining doesn't change that equation, buying lots of film stock does.

 

Matt Pacini

 

I disagree. Anybody who believes the a filmmaker shooting super 8 color reversal can get by with just one low ASA emulsion knows nothing about making films.

 

Again, playing it strictly by the numbers in super 8 will only reduce Kodak's market share in the higher formats. How many professional filmmakers do you know that got their start shooting super 8? How many young filmmakers now shoot mini dv because of lack of support in super 8? As I have stated before, super 8 is an investment in the future of film. So, Kodak may have to take some relatively small losses in super 8 to get the big fish in 35 and 16.

 

Just a couple of big 35mm features on film will pay for any new super 8 emulsions many times over. So, if anybody is whining it is Kodak trying to pinch pennies for a short-term gain. Well, if it is gains they want, then gains they shall have. But, I would hate to see what the outcome for them will be in 10 years.

 

Concerning closing the swiss lab: How do you suppose they intend to process their K-40 16mm film? Obviously, they have no intention of closing the lab. They only want to discontinue super 8 K-40 because of the trouble and lack of profit margins involved. I believe there is no question that Kodak makes money on K-40 super 8. Just not enough to make them happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Kodak,

 

Bad decission.

 

I wonder what Europes reaction will be? They use more.

 

Fujichrome is still alive. The ZC1000 is an awesomly built camera! Runs like a clock. 72 fps and sells for under $500.

Film gate produces steady pictures.

Film is $16 a roll

Processing $10

Time 4-6 weeks

Japan does an excellent job at quality controll...and will glue a sound stripe for $2 extra.

 

Kodachrome Double Super8 being discontinued? Bought a Canon the other day.

 

What will ASA64 ccost to buy and develop? Will the cartirdge automatically make my camera self adjust for the odd asa rating? Nope. Gotta but a Beaulieu?

 

If Kodachrome was processed in the US with better quality controlled conditions and short turnaround like Dwyanes then I would shoot more kodachrome.

 

Probably go to 16mm or DV...Yuck!

 

 

Sincerely,

 

 

John Adolfi

Edited by John Adolfi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dear Kodak,

 

Bad decission.

 

I wonder what Europes reaction will be? They use more.

 

Fujichrome is still alive. The ZC1000 is an awesomly built camera!  Runs like a clock. 72 fps and sells for under $500.

Film gate produces steady pictures.

Film is $16 a roll

Processing $10

Time 4-6 weeks

Japan does an excellent  job at quality controll...and will glue a sound stripe for $2 extra.

 

Kodachrome Double Super8 being discontinued? Bought a Canon the other day.

 

What will ASA64 ccost to buy and develop? Will the cartirdge automatically make my camera self adjust for the odd asa rating? Nope. Gotta but a Beaulieu?

 

If Kodachrome was processed in the US with better quality controlled conditions and short turnaround like Dwyanes then I would shoot more kodachrome.

 

Probably go to 16mm or DV...Yuck!

 

 

Sincerely,

John Adolfi

 

Kodak is probably counting on some of us to shoot K-40 16mm. However, I'm not.

Edited by John Hyde
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What will ASA64 ccost to buy and develop? Will the cartirdge automatically make my camera self adjust for the odd asa rating? Nope. Gotta but a Beaulieu?

 

Any camera with 6 pins will recognize 64T accurately. Dwayne's has always done a good job for me processing K-40 and will now offer E-6, a completely safe and clean process as opposed to the highly toxic K-14 process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Any camera with 6 pins will recognize 64T accurately. Dwayne's has always done a good job for me processing K-40 and will now offer E-6, a completely safe and clean process as opposed to the highly toxic K-14 process.

 

If laboratories follow the Kodak specifications, the K-14 process is no more "toxic" than process E-6:

 

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/service/Zmanuals/z50.shtml

 

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/service/Zmanuals/index.shtml

 

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/corp/HSE/homepa...ml?pq-path=7196

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like I said, if your obsession is fine-grain photography, Super-8 is not the format for you.  That's hardly one of its key features.  And anyway, I'm not convinced that 64T will be significantly grainier than K40.

 

Well if 7280 is really EBY, why not (if you're impatient) get a roll of EBY & a roll of K64 and compare em ? (allowing that the K64 might be a tad grainier than K 40).

 

(I've got 2 C prints over my desk one from K64 & one from Velvia (50); I see no serious grain issues :D

- the Velvia might be a touch tighter. Both look pretty nice altho different...)

 

I also fail to see the profound difference between 40 and 64 EI. If anything the xtra 2/3 stop might be a small dividend. (I'm aware of the virtues of a very low speed stock in some cases, but..)

 

-Sam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
Well if 7280 is really EBY, why not (if you're impatient) get a roll of EBY & a roll of K64 and compare em ? (allowing that the K64 might be a tad grainier than K 40).

 

(I've got 2 C prints over my desk one from K64 & one from Velvia (50); I see no serious grain issues :D

- the Velvia might be a touch tighter. Both look pretty nice altho different...)

 

I also fail to see the profound difference between 40 and 64 EI. If anything the xtra 2/3 stop might be a small dividend. (I'm aware of the virtues of a very low speed stock in some cases, but..)

 

-Sam

 

It's KODAK EKTACHROME 64T Professional Film (EPY):

 

http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professiona...5.30.14.3&lc=en

 

The motion-picture version will be called KODAK EKTACHROME 64T Color Reversal Film 7280

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
So John, I don't think you've answered the question about whether our cameras will be able to read the new stock's ASA notching.  Will it?  Has that been considered?

 

Super-8 cartridge notching is specified by standard SMPTE 166-2004.

 

AFAIK, plans are to use the filter notch (tungsten balance) and use the EI 64 speed notch (dimension X=0.700 inches). Many cameras will properly sense this balance and speed, and adjust meter and filtration appropriately.

 

However, a few cameras can only automatically set speed for either EI 40 or EI 160, so the notch will be interpreted as an EI 40 film, and the meter will give 2/3 stop more exposure. In some cases, it is possible to use an "aperture lock" feature or exposure compensation dial on the camera to override this mismatch.

 

Another possibility is to consider offering a slightly "pulled" E-6 process, making the film effectively 2/3 stop slower (EI 40) for those cameras that can only meter properly for an EI 40 film.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Super-8 cartridge notching is specified by standard SMPTE 166-2004.

 

AFAIK, plans are to use the filter notch (tungsten balance) and use the EI 64 speed notch (dimension X=0.700 inches).  Many cameras will properly sense this balance and speed, and adjust meter and filtration appropriately.

 

However, a few cameras can only automatically set speed for either EI 40 or EI 160, so the notch will be interpreted as an EI 40 film, and the meter will give 2/3 stop more exposure.  In some cases, it is possible to use an "aperture lock" feature or exposure compensation dial on the camera to override this mismatch.

 

Another possibility is to consider offering a slightly "pulled" E-6 process, making the film effectively 2/3 stop slower (EI 40) for those cameras that can only meter properly for an EI 40 film.

 

 

So users of this new stock are not going to be able to trust our automatic light meters as much plus now we have to use a different filter other than what's built in? Gee, that's creating unnecessary work, i'n't?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Premium Member
So users of this new stock are not going to be able to trust our automatic light meters as much plus now we have to use a different filter other than what's built in?  Gee, that's creating unnecessary work, i'n't?

 

If your camera cannot read all NINE speed notches specified in the SMPTE standard, technically, you have a non-standard camera. As mentioned, there are ways of compensating. E64T is a recognized speed and balance combination in the standard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Forum Sponsors

Metropolis Post

New Pro Video - New and Used Equipment

Gamma Ray Digital Inc

Broadcast Solutions Inc

Visual Products

Film Gears

CINELEASE

BOKEH RENTALS

CineLab

Cinematography Books and Gear



×
×
  • Create New...