Bad news for Kodachrome lovers: Kodak may not be re-launching the iconic film after all

January 27, 2017 by Dunja Djudjic 11 Comments

Film photographers all over the world had high hopes for the comeback of Kodachrome. However, it appears we’ll have to wait for it. Probably for a long, long time. The problems with film processing haven’t been resolved, so it may be unlikely for this iconic film to reach the users again.

After announcing the return of Ektachrome, there were speculations about returning other types of Kodak film as well. Kodachrome was one of them, as Kodak was “investigating the possibility” of bringing it back. However, it turns out they will clean the dust off some types of film – but Kodachrome is not likely to be among them.

The reason is that it would be too complicated to start the whole development process anew. First of all, Kodachrome required the costly K-14 process, and the chemicals for it were discontinued along with the film in 2009. Kodak would need either to re-start their mail-in processing service, or start producing and selling chemicals that lets film photographers develop the film at home. Either way, it’s probably not very viable for the company.

Dennis Olbrich, president of the imaging, paper, photo chemicals and film division at Kodak Alaris, was interviewed by TIME Magazine. He said that Kodak is “already starting to evaluate what other films [they] could bring back and whether it would make sense to do it”.

As for Kodachrome, this is his statement:

“I would love for it to be Kodachrome, obviously. It’s such an iconic film – that rich saturation, the graininess that people love. But it’s a very difficult proposition to get that whole infrastructure back in place. It’s much more likely that we will be bringing back other films than Kodachrome”.

If it’s any consolation, Kodak will at least bring back Ektachrome. But they need to upgrade the emulsion so it respects the new environmental regulations which emerged since 2012 (when it was discontinued). I just wonder why they can’t do the same with the emulsion for Kodachrome. They will re-launch some other films as well, but… Yeah, I know, none of them is Kodachrome.

Did you have your hopes up for the return of Kodachrome? Or Ektachrome will do just fine? Which other films do you hope will make a comeback? Share your thoughts in the comments.

[via DPReview]

« The internet addiction is killing your photography

Build your own Lensbaby style DIY soft-focus lens for under $15 »

Andrea Elva Mulder

I know that this was too good.
John Wojciechowski

Great to see a resurgence of film activity. I’ve worked with film since my teen years and professionally throughout my life. For the moment, I won’t give up my digital camera. I love it to death.
Nikolay Abadjiev

In the age of digital it’s hard to imagine Kodachrome being anything but a boutique hobbyist experience.
- Doug
  
  it wouldn’t be the only. No one needs Coke or Pepsi, but they’re doing fine….
Mike Nicholson

It is complicated to process Kodachrome and Kodak have long since closed all their Kodachrome labs. I’m not surprised it will not be resurrected. C41 and E6 are different beasts though.
Bruce Harding

In the meantime RNI makes quite a decent Kodachrome simulation for Lightroom: reallyniceimages.com/products/all-films-lightroom-pro.html
- splintercottage
  
  Anyone have news of Bud Mills? Please, please let me know … Email: Splintercottage@aol.com. .For years Bud & crew processed all my film …and did all the printing … often matching prints I made myself. Something like 3-5000 rolls of Fujichrome. I used Amatuer mostly… after united lost my tested film on route to IBM Burlington for a series of tech releases. I bought 20Xp rolls of fujichrome … 86 rolls if memeory serves and we went on to produce press kits with the highest return in their history. Kodachrome was a continuing problem not approuching fujichrome in consistency and reliability. We stopped tests for almost anything outside of Museum work. A few of The new emultions we dropped into the old and I would test if we notice a differance. Never did. Routinely made 40X 60 prints and bill boads. My knowledge of the film was more important than the “perfection” of 1 in a hundred batches of K64. Was Secretary of the American Society of Magazine Photographers and Editorial Chair in the old days when we were working photogprapher who worked more than talked. The Kodachrome was so bad and improperly aged that people looked like cancer patiets or alcholics. The cross over between the reds and blues created un corectable purple. the k12 film had a deep blue D MAX … the K14’s of the time had agreen D Max. Kodaks reponce was “tests within our tolerences” and stuck me with $3000 in raw stock and the only reshoot in my career. I finally went in to a monthly board meeting in the old penthouse on 32nd street with chapter pres proxes enough to prevent over ride on a vote. All I was doing was dealing with Kodak complaints . My motion was to send a letter to the CEO of Kodak “YOUR PRODUCTS ARE NO LONGER SATISFACTORY” with the ASMP signature. and cc’s from AD Age to the Times , Wall Stret Journal and the photo press. We heard back the next day and a plain was sent to pick us up in 2 weeks where we made a presentation … that was the beginning of Pro Kodachrome. I remember making the tech presentation. “If you don’t get the green out of the film and the impossible cross overs … the green will not be in the film but on our boxes.” By the time Kodak produced Pro we were already using Fuji. I arranged a meeting with Fuji and Fuji was released as a pro film i short order. Don’t rememeber the chronology but John Stage & I sat down and discusse it as I felt an entire profession should not be held captive by a group of MBA’s who could see aprofit in releasing film before it was ready to shoot. I remember begning at Kodak by saying “We are here because or livlihood are in danger … rathr than a smooth flow of business we are left with absurd discussions of how to filter daylite film for daylight.” (Some emultions required an FLD … fluressant filter) . When I looked for the best lab in the country … both Burk Ussel and my neighbor of SI swimsuit fame Bob Hunzinger said … right out “Bud Mills in Phila. Smart kind and sincere folks. I believe Bud was one of the first to run custon Fuji Chemestry. Any way Kodachrome is not missed here. For one second.
gtrane

I had an E-6 processor in my commercial studio and I processed Ektachrome film from 35mm to 8X10 sheets. The color in E-6 film comes from chemical reactions with the five chemicals. The first developer is a B&W developer and the first three (negative) CMY layers are developed in this bath. The next step is a reversal from negative to positive. In the previous E-4 process (there was no E-5) a photo-flood lamp exposed the film’s 4th 5th and 6th layers through the developed 1st 2nd and 3rd layers and that uniformly created a reversed (positive) image of three B&W RGB 4,5,6 layers! In the E-6 process the clumsy light re-exposure was replaced by a ‘chemical’ reversal bath making table top processors available. Once the 4,5,6 layers were exposed either with light (E-4) through the 1,2,3 layers or Reversal Bath (E-6), the 4,5,6 layers are developed in a ‘Color Developer’, rinsed (stopping development) and next into a strong bleach that bleached away the 1,2,3 layers leaving a full color reversed (positive) image ready for fixer and a wash. Finally a stabilizer water wetting agent to prevent water spots and into the dryer. I struggled- for YEARS. The professional films were consistent- But getting one’s hands on good film was dicey. Each Kodak run had an emulsion number and was slightly different. The Fuji products were far more consistent. A box of 10 iso 4X5 sheets was $30.00. 50 sheet boxes were more. Not only did the colors vary requiring Color Compensating filters in front or behind the lens to balance the color in 5cc increments, so did the ISO speed! Finally when the great Bud Mills at Pro color took me under his wing I was able to have the inventor of the E-6 process (no re-exposure) Ken Neitz plot my process test strips and fine tune the chemical, time and temperature side of my process. That clean accurate process and access to good film finally enabled me to provide fantastic film to my commercial customers. Trying to do this today would be problematic at best. One would need deep pockets or plenty of work flow to keep materials fresh.

Kodachrome? It is incredible to me that two violinists invented Kodachrome’s brutally intense process!

The pure Azo Dyes in Kodachrome are not within the emulsion when one buys or exposes the film- the dye is introduced in the processor. And these processors can be a quarter mile long. I bet conventional Kodachrome is not likely to return. It’s famous great color rendition and archival qualities were appreciated by pros and amateurs alike. But its manufacture and especially its processing is a lost art.

Forget about it.

I had a great advantage offering clients like Dupont, MATTEL and International Paper film the same day without breaking down a set or sending models and creative directors home…

Do I miss film?

Nope.

I don’t miss film, Polaroid, processing, printing, scanning or any of it…
To me it is like owning a yacht-

And I’d rather sail than varnish-

http://www.genesmithstudio.com
gtrane

I had an E-6 processor in my commercial studio and I processed Ektachrome film from 35mm to 8X10 sheets. The colors in E-6 film comes from chemical reactions with the five chemicals. The first developer is a B&W developer and the first three (negative) CMY layers are developed in this bath. The next step is a reversal from negative to positive. In the previous E-4 process (there was no E-5) a photo-flood lamp exposed the film’s 4th 5th and 6th layers through the developed 1st 2nd and 3rd layers and that uniformly created a reversed (positive) image of three B&W RGB 4,5,6 layers. In the E-6 process the clumsy light re-exposure was replaced by a ‘chemical’ reversal bath making studio processors available. Once the 4,5,6 layers were exposed either with light (E-4) through the 1,2,3 layers or chemically (E-6), the 4,5,6 layers are developed in a ‘Color Developer’, rinsed (stopping development) and next into a strong bleach that bleached away the 1,2,3 layers leaving a full color reversed (positive) image ready for fixer and a wash. Finally a stabilizer water wetting agent to prevent water spots and into the dryer. I struggled- for YEARS. The professional films were consistent- But getting one’s hands on good film was dicey. Each Kodak run had an emulsion number and was slightly different. The Fuji products were far more consistent. A box of 10 100 iso 4X5 sheets was $30.00. Not only did the colors vary requiring CC filters in front or behind the lens to balance the color in 5cc increments, so did the ISO speed… Finally when the great Bud Mills at Pro Color took me under his wing I was able to have the inventor of the E-6 process (no re-exposure) Ken Neitz plot my process test strips and fine tune the chemical, time and temperature side of my process. That clean accurate process and access to good film finally enabled me to provide fantastic film to my commercial customers. Trying to do this today would be problematic at best. One would need deep pockets or plenty of work flow to keep materials fresh.  

Kodachrome? It is incredible to me that two violinists invented Kodachrome’s brutally intense process!   The pure Azo Dyes in Kodachrome are not within the emulsion when one buys or exposes the film- the dye is introduced in the processor. And these processors could be a quarter mile long. I bet conventional Kodachrome is not likely to return. It’s famous great color rendition and archival qualities were appreciated by pros and amateurs alike. But its manufacture and especially its processing is a lost art.

Forget about it.

  I had a great advantage offering clients like Dupont, MATTEL and International Paper finished film the same day without breaking down a set or sending models and creative directors home…   Do I miss film?   Nope.
  I don’t miss film, Polaroid, processing, printing, scanning or any of it… To me it is like owning a yacht-  And I’d rather sail than varnish-  

http://www.genesmithstudio.com
Rev Les Crowley

Never liked Kodachrome 25 or 64 – too much cycan tint. Terrible at photographing the color green, which ruled out nature shooting. The 120 version and Kodachrome 200 were pretty nice, as was OG Kodachrome, KII and KX. If they bring it back I hope it’s a new emulsion and a new K15 process that is environmentally friendly.
- Tom Freda
  
  I shot Kodachrome II (ASA25) and Kodachrome 25 for many years and never had a problem that I couldn’t manage. Definitely nothing that negated the film’s fabulous saturated color and unparalleled archival qualities.
  
  Most color shifts with Kodachrome were due to its unique aging process. Fresh batches tended to be greenish, while old or expired film shifted magenta. I’d often buy several bricks of 20 rolls with the same emulsion and let them sit on a shelf for a few months until they’d “ripen,” then refrigerate. Usually, by then, the color would be right on or pretty close.
  
  Professional Kodachrome solved that, but of course, it always had to be refrigerated until use and it was pricier. And, as with all professional film, if exact color was essential, you’d buy a big batch with the same emulsion, test one roll, then filter the rest.
  
  If you had a cyan shift, I would normally suggest it was the lighting or the processing lab, both of which were common issues with all daylight film. If consistent, maybe it was you. Some people – 10% of men in particular – have some kind of mild color blindness. A good percentage don’t even know it. One type; tritanopia, would make Kodachrome warm tones look more cyan.
  
  http://www.color-blindness.com/tritanopia-blue-yellow-color-blindness/