Kodak Alaris begins shipping Ektachrome film to select photographers for testing

Ok so if you somehow do start shooting Ektachrome then you will have some more data points to add to this Ektachrome film thread.

Putting aside digital vs. film... what is this announcement about? Does Kodak Alaris have anything to do with this? E.g. did they persuade Kodak to find a way to make Ektachrome again because they see a decent market for it? Or did Kodak find a way to efficiently make smaller batches of film and sold the idea to Kodak Alaris?

My guess is that Kodak manufacturing still has a number of "film people" running things and figured since they have all of this equipment and film knowledge, they should take a shot. Whether this turns out well for them is anyone's guess but it could also be that the cost of making this is much higher than they anticipated and it won't be profitable. We are still waiting for their Super 8 too. Did Film Ferrania quit on E6?

New Kodak stock has been on a nosedive since 2014 so my faith in their management is not high.

Will the new Ektachrome be the same as the old?

I'm inclined to view grain as a feature as opposed to a bug.

Grain certainly was not a feature for those shooting LF or MF. You can put any amount of "grain" in your image today... no problem.

https://www.dpreview.com/galleries/3401543788/photos/3788201/digital-tri-x-film-grain-test

To me the unique thing you have to appreciate when shooting film is the assured possibility for disappointment/failure and the need to either accept that or take maximum precautions to CYA.

STUNNING pictures!

You think this because you shot film for years and years. Digital must have been a huge leap forward for you. Especially if you were shooting professionally. People that shoot film now days don't care about that. They shoot film because the like, not necessarily because it's better than digital.

I returned to film a few years ago. I still have my digital camera which i use sometimes.

I found i was becoming bored with the process of photography and its predictability which for me sucked the joy out of image making.

I now have my own darkroom and process the film and prints by hand. I enjoy the process of learning a new skill and shooting film has given me back a passion for photography.

I now happily shoot digital when i want convenience. whilst film isn't eveyones cup of tea its good to have the choice.

Yes clip tests (snips) to see if the roll(s) needed push or pull processing was standard procedure when shooting models. I generally had a separate roll on a "test" back and numbered each roll to match its associated test frame. With static subjects, I bracketed exposure.

There is no possibility of me going back and dealing with these hassles.

Films are mediums, which are intrinsically different to digital.

Maybe we should head over to the forums dedicated to art, so we can tell people that sable brushes and oil paints suck.

*woosh*

That was the sound of the point going way over your head.

It's funny though, you really don't see truly great photographer-artists having this conversation...

I heard of the series but I never watched even one episode because I have pretty much given up watching American TV of today, which I find to be morally bankrupt, politically correct and filled with foreigners being given American acting and production jobs to tell our American stories. That clip has made me look into the series and I think I will watch it. I also checked through Wikipedia and thankfully almost every actor and actress in it is American, though it should have been all.

That scene almost makes me want to buy this film and a Kodak Carousel. Powerful stuff.

Did you know that many of the founders of Hollywood studios as well as numerous directors, actors, writers, and support personnel were foreigners? They seemed to be able to tell our American stories pretty well.

Most simply were not, and it's ridiculous to think that they were needed for Hollywood to happen.

What we have today is disgusting where most American movies and TV shows are now overflowing with foreign actors and actresses. That is NOT how it used to be. That is a relatively recent phenomenon. No other country would allow the same of their own movie and TV industry. Shame on you as an American for being OK with American jobs being given to foreigners and shame on you for thinking they should be telling OUR stories.

You sound like you would be great at telling a hateful zenophobic story.

Goldwyn, Mayer, Warner founded Hollywood major studios and were all immigrants. The role of the first lady of the US has been taken over by a foreigner.

Frank Capra the great teller of the American story was born in Italy.
John Ford - Irish
Chaplin - English
Lubitsch - German
Wilder - Polish
Sternberg - Austria
Cameron - Canadian
Preminger - Austria
Lee - Taiwan
Irraritu - Mexico
Kazan - Ottoman Empire
Lang - Austria
Hitchcock - England
Scott - England
Wyler - Alsace
Lean - England
Forman - Czech

Desi Arnaz - Cuban - I love Lucy and Desilu productions.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exHhVQ0Xc_0

Frank Capra was raised from early childhood in America. Samuel Goldwyn was also a child immigrant. Louis B. Mayer and the Warner’s, ditto. Yep, immigrants, and that's a striking difference to what you see today when foreign actors and actresses are simply allowed to come to America just to work. Get a grip, open your eyes and see the difference.

John Ford was also not Irish; he was a native American.

Once again, shame on you, and I have no qualms in calling anti-American as a result.

"You sound like you would be great at telling a hateful zenophobic story."

Typical anti-American left wing BS response. What next, the race card?

If the situation were the same with a country like France where their movies and TV shows were overflowing with American actors and actresses, anti-American people like you would be up in arms.

Thank you for revealing how anti-American you are. People like you are destroying America. Last response to a traitor.

FWIW, my wife is from Venezuela and our son is a Navy SEAL.

Back to those immigrants who came to America and founded the movie business... would they be welcome by you today? Jews were turned away in the 30s and sent back to die in Germany's gas chambers.

The first lady worked here without a green card. And then she worked here as a foreigner... presumably legally.

Maybe you don't get that American movies and TV appeal to an international audience and are not necessarily focused on telling America's stories. Foreign actors have always been employed by the studios... nothing new here.

Goldwyn - Wikipedia -At an early age, he left Warsaw penniless and on foot, and made his way to Birmingham, England, where he remained with relatives for a few years using the name Samuel Goldfish. He was around 16 years old when his father died. In 1899[2], he emigrated to the United States, moving on to New York in January 1899. He found work in upstate Gloversville, New York in the bustling garment business. Soon his innate marketing skills made him a very successful salesman at the Elite Glove Company. After four years, as vice-president of sales, he moved back to New York City and settled at 10 West 61st Street.[7]

Mayer was born in the Russian Empire and grew up poor in Saint John, New Brunswick, Canada.

A lot of foreigners are playing the great American game of baseball here too. That also has nothing to do with Kodak slide film.

But the movie industry at least did use and still uses a lot of film... regardless of the background of the actors, directors, founders, etc.

You have convinced me not to watch any films starring, Ingrid Bergman, Mastroani, Daniel Craig, Sean Connery, Sophia Loren, Dietrick, Jacki Chan, Bruce Lee, Mifuni, Deborah Kerr... et al

AlanG, you and I have crossed swords on these forums about the usefulness of film; and btw I'm not overly excited by ektaChrome - it was always a mediocre film.

But your well-informed, succinct and articulate responses here are welcome. Photography sites should not be the target of the alt-idiot ideological trolls. Good for you, kudos!

Thanks Richard in the UK. Bizarre off the wall statements and opinions are the new normal for America these days.

"But your well-informed, succinct and articulate responses here are welcome. Photography sites should not be the target of the alt-idiot ideological trolls. Good for you, kudos!"

Not surprising coming from an anti-American foreigner who's fellow citizens have benefited most from wrongly being given American acting jobs.

Did you lose out on the Lincoln role to Daniel Day Lewis or something?

After a worldwide search Selznick finds his Scarlet in England and his Ashley is from there too. We got back at them good by casting Lithgow as Churchill.

Someone should point out that our cameras are foreigners too. How dare we give them our American money.

And Kodak Alaris is a British company that saved Kodak's film business. Sony Pictures is owned by the Tokyo based parent company.

I wonder how Phil feels about Trump giving the “job” of First Lady to a foreigner? Why marry foreign when he had all those American-born women to choose from? He must be anti-American!

The irony in my post will surely be lost on Mr. Xenophobic.

Somebody should tell Phil his ancestors were foreigners too. I would love to see him berate himself in front of the mirror for being a byproduct of immigrants.

"Someone should point out that our cameras are foreigners too. How dare we give them our American money."

Obviously not the same thing. Take up another hobby that doesn’t involve analogies.

"I wonder how Phil feels about Trump giving the “job” of First Lady to a foreigner?"

Another one that is clueless about forming a valid analogy.

"The irony in my post will surely be lost on Mr. Xenophobic."

If I were xenophobic I wouldn’t enjoy watching foreign movies.

Logic. The truth. Try them. You'll be much happier.

"Somebody should tell Phil his ancestors were foreigners too. I would love to see him berate himself in front of the mirror for being a byproduct of immigrants."

And finally, a third one incapable of forming a valid reply and analogy. That's what happens when you let emotions do your thinking for you.

@Phil: You talking to me? I'm sorry I can't understand you. I don't speak Native American. Which tribe are you from?

I am a native American, just like the vast majority of Americans are native Americans. You know how we achieved that distinction? We were born in America. You anti-American lefties who invented and practice the madness and lie of political correctness don’t get to redefine words.

It's like talking to toothpaste.

LOL. This went well. Best of luck to you and yours, Phil.

Being born in the US does not make one a "Native American." Look up the definition of the term.

na·tive
ˈnādiv/

noun
1.
a person born in a specified place or associated with a place by birth, whether subsequently resident there or not.
"a native of Montreal"
adjective
1.
associated with the country, region, or circumstances of a person's birth.
"he's a native New Yorker"
synonyms: mother, vernacular, first
"her native tongue"

***

You anti-American leftists don’t get to redefine words in the pursuit of the madness and lie of political correctness. Reality, try it some time.

"LOL. This went well. Best of luck to you and yours, Phil."

Good luck to you and your kind in betraying your country and fellow Americans. You anti-American leftists are absolutely clueless or in denial as to where all this is all leading.

Phil is liking his own comments because he feels left out.

Phil, you did not actually look up the definition of the term "Native American."

Merriam Webster, "Definition of Native American
: a member of any of the indigenous peoples of the western hemisphere; especially : a Native American of North America and especially the U.S. — compare american indian"

Cambridge Dictionary, "Native American noun [ C ]
us ​ /ˈneɪ·t̬ɪv əˈmer·ɪ·kən/ also American Indian
​
a member of any of the groups of people that lived in North America before the Europeans arrived"

I'm waiting for Phil to direct movies better than Alfred Hitchcock, David Lean, or James Cameron did. Maybe he can act better than Lawrence Olivier and Peter O'Toole.

That's because he's too stupid to realize that Native American is with capital letters. Instead he posts idiotic nonsense to make himself look smart. He failed.

Hey Phil, change your name to Phil Dumb.

Let's boycott any stories by foreign writers like Shakespeare. And how come Disney got away with portraying foreign fairy tales?

In the near future we will have a new House Un-American Activiies Committee with sweeping powers to enforce American purity in all media, news, performances, thoughts, expressions, and actions. It's easy since we had a great model for this in Nazi Germany so get an early start on your book burning.

In The Good, The Bad and The Ugly, Sergio Leone, an Italian director, filmed the story of an American gunslinger in Italy and in Spain. He cast a Jewish American actor to play a Mexican bandit. Wallach and Leone communicated in their common language of French.

There was no original language to the movie and all dialog was dubbed into languages for various markets. How is it possible that this foreigner produced one of the greatest and most influential American Western movies without even stepping for in America?

"Phil is liking his own comments because he feels left out."

Anyone with the authority and means that works at this site feel free to confirm to this individual that I do not like my own comments.

Feeling left out? Unlike you and perhaps the others you are appealing to, I don’t need to be a part of a collective to know I am right about something and to be able to read a dictionary, nor to feel special in any way. Numbers outside of math don’t equal right.

"Merriam Webster, "Definition of Native American
: a member of any of the indigenous peoples of the western hemisphere; especially : a Native American of North America and especially the U.S. — compare american indian" "

Dictionaries merely document and define words and terms used by a society. That doesn’t mean everything in dictionaries make sense. The relatively recent politically correct term of "Native American," used exclusively to describe only one kind of native American, is a perfect example of that. It's also a perfect example of how the left loves to hijack words, including the word liberal.

Around 90% of ALL Americans are native American. Fact. Only someone ignorant, delusional or dishonest would deny that fact.

We were discussing boycotting a lot of movies and foreign actors at the pow wow just last night.

I need your list so I can join you!

"That's because he's too stupid to realize that Native American is with capital letters. Instead he posts idiotic nonsense to make himself look smart. He failed."

The word American is always capitalized. Moving on to the word native, then you should have no problem with this statement: Any American *born in* America is a native American.

Of course you and the other anti-American, politically correct leftists will not be OK with that because you would then have to acknowledge the original and primary meaning of the word native, and not the "stupid" one that contradicts it simply because it is capitalized.

That you have resorted to insults is simply a sign that at least subconsciously you realize you have no leg to stand on.

"Let's boycott any stories by foreign writers like Shakespeare."

When did Shakespeare take the job of an American? You are painfully awful with analogies.

"Phil, when you find some free time, please give me a list of "non American" movies, TV shows, actors, sponsors, producers, writers, and directors, to boycott. I don't have the time to do the research myself."

And here's another example of how bad you are with analogies.

Why would I do that? I have nothing against foreign movies.

I'm going back to ignoring your anti-American, illogical and irrational nonsense. You can continue talking to your supportive collective.

"Dictionaries merely document and define words and terms used by a society. That doesn’t mean everything in dictionaries make sense."

Is this guy for real? Hey Phil, stop listening to the voices in your head. I'm getting kinda jealous here that they are only talking to you.

"How is it possible that this foreigner produced one of the greatest and most influential American Western movies without even stepping for in America?"

Art is a universal expression of the human experience. Nationality is a political device, both random and inane.

Shakespeare is taking work from current American writers every time an American company performs one of his plays. Only a lowlife un-patriotic dog would view one of his plays.

“Good luck to you and your kind in betraying your country and fellow Americans. You anti-American leftists are absolutely clueless or in denial as to where all this is all leading.”

So... embracing foreign actors playing American roles because some casting director decided they are the best fit is leading America to a dangerous place?

Is that a place more or less dangerous than the one the Republicans are leading us into with wildly irresponsible reversals of environmental protections, trade wars with our allies, stacking federal courts with Originalists who don’t hesitate to undo decades of social progress, etc?

Frankly, I’d rather live in an America where an Australian occasionally portrays a Midwesterner. But you’re the true Patriot, so we will defer to you on this. As I said, best of luck living with your demons.

"Frankly, I’d rather live in an America where an Australian occasionally portrays a Midwesterner."

You're ignorant, if not dishonest. It is not "occasionally." American movies and TV shows are now littered with foreign actors and actresses.

"As I said, best of luck living with your demons."

Good luck in a future civil war you anti-American leftists are making much more likely to happen.

OK Phil. It'll just be Jane Fonda and Michael Moore movies for me.

Where is that banned list I need from you?

Phil is an anti-American.

Oh my god please stop feeding the troll.

"Anyone with the authority and means that works at this site feel free to confirm to this individual that I do not like my own comments"
:
Nobody else "likes" your comments either Phil.
Den

@DenseImage

As much as I'm sure you wish you could, you don’t get to decide for others.

I see you've also graduated from trolling to stalking. So much for you being concerned with "credibility."

AlanG! Seriously man. Calm down. You are being trolled. Move on. Internet forum correctness isn't worth this much effort.

Phil is simply disagreeing with you guys. He’s not trolling.

And its me liking his comments, not him.

Please don't confuse and mess up "latter" and "later", especially when you are *teaching* English.
.

It's always true. People speak of who they are and what they are.

You're welcome Vit. Glad I could help. 😊

What toxic and polluting substances are we talking about? Those are not in E-6? My, my polluting footprint just stepped up. Kodachrome was my most favorite film...

Pollution aside, Kodachrome is not coming back due to lack of demand... the same reason its production ended.

I switched from Kodachrome to Velvia and Provia when Kodachrome processing became completely unreliable in 1991.

I shoot film with real cameras. I only shoot digital with a phone.

I rather miss the times of waiting for my prints to pop through the letterbox. A one week holiday, no chimping, and only 5 rolls of film. Then that week or so wait built anticipation for the easily recongnisable plod of Mr. Postie coming down the path to the front door. The footsteps halt, pause, sound of package going through the letterbox, pause and that exciting inevitable thud as one's photos landed. The joy of flicking through the prints, the disappointment of those that "didn't come out". Good days.

How impatient we have become.

To Wye Photography:
Beautiful
Now, tell us about Christmas eve...

Alaris ia just rebranding the name Kodak. Eastman Kodak was the real deal, this is not even close.

That's because it was NEGATIVE FILM.
We made Vericolor slides all the time that beat the IQ of 5247 every day of the calendar.

My solution is I don't ever chimp on vacation. If I miss something or get something wrong I learn from it and try to do better next time. And I always limit myself to 200 photos a week no matter what by only carrying two 500MB cards.

I just mail the cards back home and then I look at the photos a week or more later. I never post them on line and only show them to friends ad family using my digital projector. Very nostalgic approach.

This was really nice except for the couple of times the cards were lost in the mail. Just another reason to go back I guess.

I mail my cards to be more nostalgic and authentic. The same reason for shooting film... the chance of loss of all of the images is just one part of the fun.

Getting good/successful photos every time is way too modern an idea for me.

Merida, rest assured that if PhozoKozmos is the writer, it’s not you... he’s either a poet or a madman or both

Yeah, incoherent mad poet sounds about right.

Acid free paper and platinum. It will still look great a hundred years after you’re dead.

I forgot to add that I shoot digital but also shoot film. I have a Mamiya C220 medium format camera and a Nikon F3HP and a Nikon N60 which I shoot regularly.

I would put it in one of the six 35mm cameras I have from the old days. Plus I would scan the good images using one of the two scanners I have. If, in my dotage, I move to a facility where I can set up my enlarger (Beseler 23c with a Dichro head) then I would print them out on whatever replaced Cibachrome/Ilfochrome.

Is that a problem for you? And I ain't no hipster.

@Roland - I'm with you on that one. Really thinking about 120 BW and scanner.

Because photography is art of removing things from the scene, painting is adding them on blank canvas.

sop51: As far as finding equipment. just look on Ebay. Still lots of enlargers, etc. listed.

bolt...Thanks, but no. I spent far too many years developing and printing B&W, color negative and color transparency film in the wet darkroom. What would take the better part of a day of trial and error, wasting expensive Cibachrome or Ilfochrome papers and chemicals, to get just one decent print from a piece of Ektachrome film, I can do in less than ten minutes on my laptop and printer.

I sold most of my darkroom equipment years ago. I can appreciate wanting to set up a home darkroom and doing your own B&W printing, for the sake of one's art, or even nostalgia, but darkroom color printing is a PITA. And where would one find materials for printing color transparency film these days?

If anyone is seriously considering exposing Ektachrome today, find a decent mailorder E6 lab and buy a working Nikon Coolscan on Ebay. A hybrid work flow is the only way to go. Forget the wet darkroom.

For Gregm61
http://www.bwc.net/bwc/services.aspx

BWC stopped their E-6 processing long ago. They are strictly color negative C-41 processors.

Real men use woodcut.

I'd reply you by writing on a cave wall but you wouldn't be able to see it.

@Barty L

And Woodbines.

At least you could have spelled it correctly. That's "daguerreotype", after its inventor, Louis Daguerre. But I suppose this is too much information for you to process.

You do realize that there are photographic institutions that still teach shooting film and "alternative" processing along with digital don't you? http://pcnw.org/ for one, almost within spitting distance to the buildings where DPR is housed.

Don't let your sneakiness bite you in the vertical smile.

@Arastoo Vaziri Dagooro-dagueroo, fugayzi, fugazi. It's a whazy. It's a woozie. You speak American?

It's either that or you just didn't catch the reference and failed to get the point, Arastoo?

eBay makes cameras now? Who knew!

Not sure what you mean, just shoot the resolution chart that DPreview has been doing for many years, scan the film using the highest supported optical resolution and compare it against all tested resolutions of digital cameras?

Not even close....the latitudinal range is nothing compared to the dynamic range of modern FF cameras. Combine that with the resolution of a modern sensor and going to Ektachrome is a step backwards. That said...it's good to have options, especially if you still own film cameras.

If all you see in photography is resolution or "IQ" then frankly film is not what you're looking for...

'I don't shoot photographs, I shoot resolution.' The digital mantra.

'I don't shoot for quality, I shoot for art'.
The film mantra.

photoaddict: It's not just the quality of the image that is important to film shooters, (I'm on of those!) There is sort of a ZEN quality to shooting film! To quote an adage that fits film shooting; "If I have to explain it to you, you wouldn't understand."

I have done testing. Like many people I concluded that fine grained 35mm transparency film gives around 10-20 MP worth of detail. So digital is better in that regard.

To match FF digital resolution you need medium format film, 645 format and above.

But I’m yet to see digital photos as vibrant as a high quality projected transparency.

I think DPR would love to do a comparison between high end digital and film, but where would they find a Sony camera that takes film?

There is no "zen" and there is no "magic"... there is only nostalgia.

riveredger: Obviously you don't believe so I cannot explain. :-)

@Clint Dunn
Haha. Funny repost. But I personally don't think it's the medium that makes things art. Anything can be made into art. The point is that 'art' is resolution independent.