End of a photographic era?

[Barry]

Sad to see the mighty Kodak company facing bankruptcy:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-16625725

I still think Kodachrome 64 was the best film ever developed.

[Jonboy]

I believe the late Linda McCartney formally Eastman was part of the family

[Stratmangler]

I still think Kodachrome 64 was the best film ever developed.

Nice pun :eyebrows:

[The Grand Wazoo]

I had to chuckle this morning when the Radio 4 news item said Kodak were looking for bankruptcy protection because they were unable to keep up with new developments.

[morris_minor]

Yes, sad news. Senior managers with their heads stuck in the sand . . :(

I had some great results with Kodachrome, but when Fuji Velvia came out I defected . . .:rolleyes: And I always preferred Fujicolour print film; 120 Fuji Sensia in my Mamiya TLR produced some stunning results. And Ilford for B&W - when XP1 came out that was a revelation with its very wide exposure latitude.

Ah, the days of breathing in developer and fixer in my parent's blacked out, airless attic! Loading film spirals in the dark. The miracle of seeing your very first print appear in the tray as you rock it gently. Learning how to manipulate light to dodge and burn your prints. . . .

Clicking around in Photoshop just doesn't give the same satisfaction. :(

Yours,
Sad Old Git.

[Mark Grant]

Loading film spirals in the dark.


I remember that, fun wasn't it :)

My trays and spiral where thrown out the last time we moved house in about 1997, I wish I had kept them now...

[Mark Grant]

BBC Breakfast TV featured the Kodak Gallery at the national media Museum today.

http://www.nationalmediamuseum.org.uk/planavisit/exploreourGalleries/kodak.aspx
http://www.nationalmediamuseum.org.uk/

Not been for a while but it is interesting if you are into photography and film and there is probably somewhere nearby for a good curry afterwards.:)

[morris_minor]

I remember that, fun wasn't it :)

My trays and spiral where thrown out the last time we moved house in about 1997, I wish I had kept them now...

Indeed, fun in a kind of masochistic way! :lol: I always tried to leave the film leader sticking out of the canister when I re-wound a finished film. This helped a lot. If the film totally disappeared into the canister I'd curse 'cos apart from the hassle of popping off the end of the cassette, I'd almost always end up with the film unwinding before it was safely on the spiral. I remember my Dad popping his head in the door asking if I wanted a cuppa during one of these escaped film episodes. He only ever asked that once. . . .:lol:

[Barry]

Fuji always was Kodak's greatest rival. Whilst Fuji produced some excellent formulations, none, in my opinion, bettered the Kodak equivalents.

Fuji's 'Velvia' colour reversal film was readily embraced by portrait photographers on its introduction, as it flattered skin tones, but overall its colour rendition was not as accurate as that of Kodachrome 64. I always went for fidelity over flattery.



For black and white, my fim of choice was, initially, Kodak Tri-X, then later Ilford FP-4, or HP-5. I never got on with XP-1: it was a chromogenic formulation using dyes - give me good old silver!

[The Vinyl Adventure]

You lot talk about this stuff like its long dead!
Kodak maybe, but ilford and Fuji for 35mm and 120 are still going strong!
You can even still get 127 from rollei and efke!

Just after christmas I switched from plastic Patterson spirals to the stainless steel ones as well as buying a bunch of other bits and bobs
http://i728.photobucket.com/albums/ww282/hamish_gill/3e6f4a22.jpg
All bought from SDS http://www.realphotographersforum.com/content/581-second-hand-dark-room-supplies-brief-customer-service-review.html

Stuff the nostalgia, if you enjoyed that stuff, do it again ... You still listen to vinyl after all! ;)

[keiths]

i remember that the Patterson spirals were easier to load, but the stainless steel type had the big advantage that you could load film onto them before they were completely dry - unlike the Patterson ones where you couldn't load them if there was even a hint of moisture on the spiral.

Haven't done any darkroom stuff for nearly 20 years now...

[The Vinyl Adventure]

Steel are much easier for 120 too ... The plastic ones only work (for me) with perforated film ...
But yeah, agree the plastic ones are useless even remotely damp!

[goraman]

Did you guy's know
Kodak invented the first digital camera and patented it now they are selling all their patterns.

I can still remember dropping off our film at the Kodak photo huts.

[Haselsh1]

I wonder if the CEO's first name was Iris...???

One of my alltime favourite films was T-Max 100 developed in Paterson FX-39. With any luck, it still will be.

[The Vinyl Adventure]

I was just given a few rolls of tmax by a member of staff at jessops ... A little out of date and damaged package, but had been cold stored ...
35mm it was, when I asked about 120 she looked a bit confused ...

[Haselsh1]

I was just given a few rolls of tmax by a member of staff at jessops ... A little out of date and damaged package, but had been cold stored ...
35mm it was, when I asked about 120 she looked a bit confused ...

The number of times I get spotted with my Nikon F3 and people ask me if I can still get film for it. I usually tell them "Yes, at the chemist in the market place", that shuts them up for a while.

[Haselsh1]

Just to add a little bit more; I do honestly think that film use will become very 'cliquey' and slightly underground even though there has been a noticeable increase in the use of the medium over the last twelve months. For me there simply is no option. The difference between digital CCD images and film is remarkable. The difference between a darkroom print and a scanned negative digital print is not quite so striking. I love to scan my negatives and then print using Lyson monochrome inks onto a seriously good cotton fibre paper with a beautifully textured surface. This is something the darkroom user cannot do unless he/she gets involved in liquid emulsion.

[The Vinyl Adventure]

Can you still get film or that is a common question I get asked too ..
As for the other bit I won't comment...
I will say though that I haven't shot any digital for personal work this year so far ...
But that's mainly for reasons of enjoying the process more!
Lots of experiments with various dev chems, push processing (inc pushing 3200 delta to 25000 in ddx ... It's just more fun! Digital though is still a big part of my life and I have equal respect for it in terms of quality!

I do understand your previous comments on it being a facsimile of the "real thing" or though I don't concider digital any less real, more just an alternative ... For me at the moment an alternative I enjoy less than film ... For now!

Did you see this?
http://theartofsound.net/forum/showthread.php?t=15052

A camera that has literally changed my perspective on photography and dumped me into this film obsession I currently have!
Although I still say digital is capable of similar results ... It's the effortlessness of getting nice results from the blad/zeiss combo that I am enjoying! No pising around with sharpening raw files, and spending a long time getting a b&w feel I like from a colour raw file ... Take photo, dev photo, scan photo, add a bit of contrast in Lightroom and presto, beautiful look to the images!
This is not something I have had out of any camera, film or digital! Now I'm not saying it's all about the kit ... But this kit, I feel is giving me an advantage in producing images I like ... I'm yet to work out quite what it is... It might be as simple as it being square format ... I'm not sure ... One way or another I'm a happy bunny!

[SCIDB]

I believe the late Linda McCartney formally Eastman was part of the family

Hi,

Linda McCartney wasn't related to the Eastman family that started Kodak. Her dad name was Epstein, he changed it to Eastman.