Kodak's current view on Vision 2 50D and Ektachrome 100D?

[Jim Carlile]

The problem with all of this is that 100D is a wierd film when it comes to the SMPTE standard. It doesn't fit in anywhere, and trying to wedge it in to the marketplace would give Kodak more headaches than 64T. All any manager looking for an excuse to say 'no' needs to do is just take into consideration the general compatibility issues here.

You totally lost me here. 100D/160T has the 0.5 notch. No filter notch for 100D. How does that NOT fit into the SMPTE standard. While this fits fine into the standard, it works with ALL smpte D Type cameras. As explained before, MOST 40/160 G Type cameras will read this as 160. Thus underexposing by 2/3 stop. Most of these cameras have +1 correction thus removing the problem. Am I missing something here? Actually the problems encountered using 100D are LESS severe than issues encountered with E64T using 40/160 cameras. I simply do not understand your line of thinking here.

100D fits into the SMPTE standard as the way of rating daylight ASA 100 films, but the problem is, it's unusual. And the 40/160 cameras will underexpose it 2/3 stop.

Until the new Plus-X came along, Kodak never had a daylight 100 film. It's a kind of an ass-backwards offering, because all other color films were rated at the top speed-notch tungsten ASA. So, all cameras could read them properly ( except for type 'G', which started the confusion... )

The problem with 100D is that underexposure with the 40/160 cameras is viewed by Kodak to be worse than overexposure. They seem to favor overexposure for their films these days (look how they notch VISION 200, and Tri-X is always overexposed 1/3 stop.) It's obviously their philosophy.

Their thinking kind of makes sense-- at least you'll get an image. You'll also get a nice bright picture on the screen. But if you underexpose in a low light situation, the results will be poor.

Remember, they're thinking of the general customer, not the specialist. Underexposed film in a large number of newer cameras is not what they want to hear about. That problem doesn't normally crop up with 64T.

Many 40/160 cameras do not have a +1 knob, unfortunately.

Hey, I'd love it if they offered 100D. But from the history of all of this, I know how they think about things. If anyone in Rochester is looking for an excuse not to offer it, the compatibility issue gives the nod to 64T.

Daylight color films are just not the Kodak norm for Super 8-- or any MP film nowadays...

[Angus]

overexposure is preferred for negative films.

I have never heard anyone other than Jim recommend it for reversal films.

And the 100D we are talking about is reversal, right?

[Film16]

[quote="But your little order stands not alone, and if any of these little orders should become big, it is hoped they will be for film, if best suited to the project. Perhaps you have a film-project story to send to In Camera?

Mitch

This is the best idea I've heard so far... if we can get Kodak's own magazine to publish a feature on the growing community of Super 8 shooters, detailing the obvious preference for 100D, that might make Kodak notice there is a market with great potential. The only downside is whether they actually want to acknowledge a format that is currently outside their official product range. This also makes me wonder how well 100D sells in 16mm. But, as Mitch said it is all about numbers, so who has Super8 projects shot on lovely 100D to show off? If there are enough of these I am sure it could warrant some kind of article. I am working on something, but alas, I'm new to this, so can't quite offer anything other than sample 100D footage at the moment.

[Mitch Perkins]

Remember, they're thinking of the general customer, not the specialist.

Remember from what? The last time you stated this without evidence?

The evidence, (introduction of negs and removal of all Super 8 products from the consumer catalogue), points the other way...even 64T is best viewed as a good retro look for the commercial producer.

Underexposed film in a large number of newer cameras is not what they want to hear about.

The best way to not hear about anything is to sell to folks who know what they're doing - professionals who understand that manual setting of exposure is required for serious photography...or even consistent home movies!

Mitch

[Mitch Perkins]

[quote="But your little order stands not alone, and if any of these little orders should become big, it is hoped they will be for film, if best suited to the project. Perhaps you have a film-project story to send to In Camera?

Mitch

This is the best idea I've heard so far... if we can get Kodak's own magazine to publish a feature on the growing community of Super 8 shooters, detailing the obvious preference for 100D, that might make Kodak notice there is a market with great potential.

For now, I think it's enough to write about any project involving Super 8. More stocks will become available if the format itself is seen to be in wide enough use.

Mitch

[Jim Carlile]

overexposure is preferred for negative films.

I have never heard anyone other than Jim recommend it for reversal films.

And the 100D we are talking about is reversal, right?

With overexposure you'll get an image. With underexposure, you quite possibly will not. There'll be lots of complaints.

Get it?

Kodak has to think about the general user-- and general users USE reversal film, not negative. When given the choice, Kodak prefers setting their reversal films to slightly overexpose anyway.

Just look at Tri-X. They could have speed-notched it at ASA 250 and made it a notchless cartridge, like the old Plus-X. But they didn't. They preferred a slight overexposure at ASA 160 for all cameras. That was a deliberate decision.

Same with the old Plus-X. They could have notched it at ASA 64 for some cameras. But they didn't. They notched it at ASA 40 for all, so every camera ended up slightly overexposing it.

Overexposure gives a nice bright image for the general user. That's who they have to think about. There's no issue here. Even if they wanted to release 100D, the technical problems would be an added headache. It doesn't fit into the super 8 system very well.

[Mitch Perkins]

Kodak has to think about the general user-- and general users USE reversal film, not negative.

I'd say the general user uses a camcorder these days.

The negs are, as you point out, a perfect example of emulsions released in Super 8 without any thought for the general user, or notches. 64T is a less dramatic example of the same.

A not unreasonable conclusion is that Kodak is targeting a more technically aware user.

Mitch

[Angus]

overexposure is preferred for negative films.

I have never heard anyone other than Jim recommend it for reversal films.

And the 100D we are talking about is reversal, right?

With overexposure you'll get an image. With underexposure, you quite possibly will not. There'll be lots of complaints.

Get it?

No.

Perhaps try and use some reversal film, Jim.

[Angus]

A not unreasonable conclusion is that Kodak is targeting a more technically aware user.

Mitch

With the neg stocks Kodak has clearly hit a market they were unaware of a few years ago...when people started buying the old "surveillance" film, some bright spark at Kodak realised there was a significant market for neg film in the format and now we have 200T and 500T.

64T is supposedly to replace K40, the workhorse film that can be used by everyone from the few remaining home enthusiasts to film schools (probably the target) and pro's who want to shoot reversal for its "look". I imagine they figure the film schools and pro's can deal with the exposure/filter issue (and at least 64/40 is a standard notch)...and they probably think the amateur film-for-fun gang are a very small niche, most of whom are technically proficient.

[Jim Carlile]

Kodak has to think about the general user-- and general users USE reversal film, not negative.

The negs are, as you point out, a perfect example of emulsions released in Super 8 without any thought for the general user, or notches. 64T is a less dramatic example of the same....

A not unreasonable conclusion is that Kodak is targeting a more technically aware user.

Mitch

Negative film is clearly not intended for the general user. That's why they notch it the way they do. Reversal has become completely consumer-- they barely even offer it any more. In fact, they don't in MP.

But even then, the "technically aware" users always complain about how technical they've made negative with the notchless cartridge! So poor Kodak just can't win.

Every time Kodak is in a position to make a speed-notch choice between overexposure and underexposure, they choose overexposure. Every single time, without exception. Just why is that?

The answer is common sense: most users will have less problems with an overexposed image. At least you'll get something you can see. And I suspect that Kodak feels that these films respond better to overexposure.

I simply don't understand how Kodak's logic here fails to make a dent. It's been their history for years-- and it presents a clear problem for 100D in super 8..

[audadvnc]

Reversal has become completely consumer-- they barely even offer it any more. In fact, they don't in MP.

Not true: Ektachrome 100D is available in 16mm and 35mm MP:

http://www.kodak.com/US/en/motion/produ ... .6.4&lc=en

[Angus]

Jim, may I ask a question?

Have you seen over and under exposed reversal film?

The general recommendation Kodak has for its MP neg stocks is actually to overexpose by 1/2 a stop. I've seen that on Kodak's site and the late Mr Pytlak used to say so too. So I am not surprised if Big K err on the side of caution as far as the notching on neg stocks goes. Not that many users will use auto exposure, but those who do might prefer to shoot 200T at 160 or even 100.

For reversal one often benefits UNDERexposing by 0.5 stop. One will get a projectable image if UNDERexposed up to two stops. OVERexposing just results in a white mess....

If you telecine instead of projecting, often the result looks better with the reduced contrast of an under-exposed reversal film. One can, in post, rescue a reversal film that is two stops under exposed. No amount of post can rescue a reversal image which has been over-exposed by even 0.5 stop....over-exposure latitude of reversal films is usually around 1/3 stop with under-exposure latitude given as 1 stop.

You can check that quite easily by examining the DX codes on 35mm neg and slide films. The same 64T that we use in super 8 has...if memory serves....1/3 or 1/2 stop latitude for + and 1 stop for -.

[Mitch Perkins]

Kodak has to think about the general user-- and general users USE reversal film, not negative.

The negs are, as you point out, a perfect example of emulsions released in Super 8 without any thought for the general user, or notches. 64T is a less dramatic example of the same....

A not unreasonable conclusion is that Kodak is targeting a more technically aware user.

Mitch

Negative film is clearly not intended for the general user.

So that Kodak was not thinking of the general user when they released it, which pretty much proves they don't have to think of the general user when releasing stocks...

Reversal has become completely consumer-- they barely even offer it any more.

Reversal offerings outnumber neg 3 to 2. None of it is in the consumer catalogue.

[...] the "technically aware" users always complain about how technical they've made negative with the notchless cartridge!

Where do they "always complain" about this? I've seen folks ask questions here about proper exposure...does Kodak receive a lot of these complaints? How do you know this?

Mitch

[Jim Carlile]

Negative film is clearly not intended for the general user.

So that Kodak was not thinking of the general user when they released it, which pretty much proves they don't have to think of the general user when releasing stocks...

No, negative film is not being marketed to the general consumer. Either is X-ray film. Kodak is not thinking of the general consumer when they market these films. But specialty markets are not their only business. Pros don't use MP reversal any more, and Kodak knows this..

Reversal has become completely consumer-- they barely even offer it any more.

Reversal offerings outnumber neg 3 to 2. None of it is in the consumer catalogue.

Not so. The only color reversal I've seen these days besides 64T is E100D-- and they're both still films, I believe, cobbled over into MP. They don't make color reversal MP films any more. They're barely there with B/W.

[...] the "technically aware" users always complain about how technical they've made negative with the notchless cartridge!

Where do they "always complain" about this? I've seen folks ask questions here about proper exposure...does Kodak receive a lot of these complaints? How do you know this?

People on this site are always complaining about the notchless VISION cartridge, and how it complicates things. Imagine what would happen with 100D in non-compatible cameras, with badly underexposed footage. You think 64T's a problem?

Jim Carlile wrote:
Reversal has become completely consumer-- they barely even offer it any more. In fact, they don't in MP.

Not true: Ektachrome 100D is available in 16mm and 35mm MP:

It's a still film, isn't it? Pros don't use MP reversal film any more. I suspect the only reason 35mm 100D B+H perf is in the catalog is because of military or oldtime industrial customers. I can't imagine who is using it seriously.

Ektachrome stocks are marketed to small-time users, amateurs, students, most of whom would prefer an image that is too light rather than too dark. 100D is too complicated for most people to use correctly-- again, look at the problems with 64T.

Just thought of another reason why Kodak would be averse to releasing 100D in super 8-- you can't use it indoors. That makes it extremely limited for the general user.

Camera Films
Color Negative Camera Films

KODAK VISION2 50D Color Negative Film 5201 / 7201 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3
KODAK VISION2 100T Color Negative Film 5212 / 7212 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3
KODAK VISION2 200T Color Negative Film 5217 / 7217 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4
KODAK VISION2 250D Color Negative Film 5205 / 7205 / SO-205 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .4-5
KODAK VISION2 500T Color Negative Film 5218 / 7218 / SO-218 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .5-6
KODAK VISION2 Expression 500T Color Negative Film 5229 / 7229 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
KODAK VISION2 HD Color Scan Film 5299 / 7299 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .6
KODAK VISION 200T Color Negative Film 5274/ 7274 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7
KODAK VISION 500T Color Negative Film 5279 / 7279 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7

Color Reversal Camera Films

KODAK EKTACHROME 64T Color Reversal Film 7280 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7
KODAK EKTACHROME 100D Color Reversal Film 5285 / 7285 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .7-8

Black & White Negative Camera Films

EASTMAN PLUS-X Negative Film 5231 / 7231 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
EASTMAN DOUBLE-X Negative Film 5222/ 7222 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8

Black & White Reversal Camera Films

KODAK PLUS-X Reversal Film 7265 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8
KODAK TRI-X Reversal Film 7266 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .9

[Angus]

100D is not a still film. Jim really doesn't have a clue when it comes to reversal...sad to say...

It was, I believe, specificallty designed as a modern 16mm MP reversal film.

Which is why it works better than 64T in small format movie projecting.

Having said that my latest super 8 64T back from Dwayne's is the best yet...but I specifically shot some colourful close-ups and scenes with lots of movement. I will get a chance to telecine these and put some on the web next month.