A solution to keep K40 Super 8mm

[Roy Brown]

I along with many others are very dissappointed in Kodaks decision to stop K40 Super 8mm. Personally I think the decision was made because of the losses on the processing side. The number of Kodachrome cartridges sold has to be greater than the negative stocks and at least similar to the B/W stocks. The difference is Kodak doesn't have to worry about processing any of the other stocks. It can not be a huge expense to slit film and load it into cartridges for Kodak. However I think that processing Super 8mm Kodachrome is killing them profit wise. I imagine that the equipment in Switzerland has seen better days and huge amounts of money would be needed to maintain quality over the next decade. Another point is PK59 mailers, They are revenue that has been spent years ago but yet they keep streaming in full of cartridges. I alone have sold nearly 50 PK59 mailers on Ebay that were originally purchased in the early 1980's! (Dear God It's my fault!!) Shipping costs have increased, wages increased and the bottom line says we have to cut this expense. My processing theory doesn't explain why they did not cut processing and sales of 16mm Kodachrome. The reason is they are not losing money on 16mm, the level of sales are low and the cost of processing high and they don't have mailers from the last 20 years to contend with. They don't have to worry about shipping from the US to Europe. In other words they can afford to string us along for a while. Basically a good PR move.

The solution is simple Kodak has to get completely out of the processing business, problem is they have to insure reasonable processing accessability for any film they sell by law. The US has Dwaynes but Europe, the main market for K40 does not. My guess is that Kodak either tried and failed or maybe they didn't even try to encourage a European lab to take on Kodachrome. The Prepaid processing practise in Europe is probably at the center of the reluctancy of the investment. If Europe did have a reliable alternative for processing Kodachrome I am convinced that this decision would not have happened. I doubt because of the expense and risk any Lab in Europe would now take it on, but I hope I am wrong. Would Kodak reverse its decision if it could legally stop processing Kodachrome and just sell the cartridges? I don't know, once decisions are made it is hard to go back on them even if it makes sense.

I want Super 8mm Kodachrome to survive because 90 % of my use is for projection. I have thousands of feet of home movies that I have shot over the last 15 years and seeing these images projected on a eight foot screen is inspiring. Filmed images projected satisfy the senses like no other medium and Kodachrome captivates the audience like no other film. I also shoot B/W and other color reversal but still when a roll of Kodachrome is delivered by UPS to my office from Dwaynes. I immediately complain of chills and a fever and rush home to view the glorious footage. Kodachrome is credited for preserving the color images of several generations and will continue to preserve those images for decades to come. I first became hooked on filmmaking when I saw a 1948 16mm Kodachrome original projected by a Elmo Xenon projector onto a 20 ft screen. The images were incredible, it truly was the closest thing to time travel.

Lastly I commend Kodak for sticking with Super 8mm and Kodachrome when it would have been so easy to kill it long ago. Many Companys once produced Film, cameras, projectors and tons of accessories. They are almost all gone. Kodak however is still hanging in there. It may be selfish and useless to ask but Please Kodak lets come up with a solution to keep Kodachrome alive in Super 8mm.

[vanderVelden]

I fully agree with Roy's opinion why Kodak has taken the decision to stop producing Kodachrome super 8. They just want to get ride of the developping and mailing situation. However, what they have forgotten to think about is that the kodachrome super 8 film is still their best selling super 8 film. By abandoning the kodachrome and after having noticed that the stock is finished, I predict that they will see a tremendous decrease in the sale of super 8 and within a 2-5 years super 8 has died ! What is our alternative now ? Every alternative super 8 film that is available now is - including processing - much more expensive than the actual price of the Kodachrome.
In my opion the only alternative would be if they bring on the market a new colour film with a fine grain with a price that would match the actual kodachrome selling price including developping in a lab.
An other alternative could be to move their Kodak lab. from Switzerland to China where labor is so much more cheaper than in Europe. By doing that they would greatly benefit as labour charges would be much lower. They could still sell for the same price and make much more profit !
Although I can hardly believe that a "customer unfriendly" concern as Kodak will read our protests and suggestions, I nevertheless hope that there is some smart business man who can work out some solution that can make most of us happy.
Regards,
RSA filmer
South Africa

[BK]

.
An other alternative could be to move their Kodak lab. from Switzerland to China where labor is so much more cheaper than in Europe. By doing that they would greatly benefit as labour charges would be much lower.

But how much money can they save in labour? Surely they don't employ hundreds of people at the Lausanne lab?

Bill

[kentbulza]

I think this is right too. But the solution would have been to raise prices on processing. I thought it was very strange that for a while there, Kodak was selling me processed-paid K40 for $2 more than without -- sounds like financial suicide. Everyone expects to pay $10 a roll to process other Super 8 films, so a new mailer with an $8.99 price would have been a better solution. Actually, they could have increased efficiencies by moving to some web solution: log on to a website, pay your $8.99 (direct to Kodak without a middle-man), print a mailing label with tracking. Want to check on your processing? -- just log in and it'll tell you if it's arrived, in process, or on its way back to you.

[Evan Kubota]

I agree with this thread also. It would be pretty decent if Kodak offered $9 processing or something - it's going to cost at least $15 plus 2 shipping charges from most labs, now.

Then again, if Kodak cared about efficiency, they'd bring back the web order system for film. It can't be more expensive than employing phone operators on the 1800 number, who sometimes mess up the order or fail to apply the correct discounts...

[camera8mm]

Sure, just steal the jobs over to china like everything else.
Even if they did, they would still have to pay for the chemicals involved in the process.
From kodaks standpoint I believe its the manufacturing cost, not the processing cost.

They should at least sell the stock (since they are continuing the 16mm and 35mm production anyway) in ds8 16mm rolls and offer reloadable cartridges.

[woods01]

Hmm very international posters in this thread. With K40 about to go
what sort of film processing options do you have in South Africa or
Hong Kong? Kodachrome seems to be tailor made for Africa!

[BK]

With K40 about to go
what sort of film processing options do you have in Hong Kong?

As far I I know, zero. Most of the professional labs here only do 35mm for features, very very very few will even do 16 negative and you have to "beg" for it.

It does mean we have to ship it to Europe or the US for processing where it's cheaper than Japan, unless I do it myself.

Bill

[Evan Kubota]

"As far I I know, zero."

Interesting. You'd think that with all the HK film production that historically has existed there would be a few labs providing local service. I guess they send it out to somewhere else?

[BK]

Interesting. You'd think that with all the HK film production that historically has existed there would be a few labs providing local service. I guess they send it out to somewhere else?

The "big boys" can have 35mm motion picture film processed locally but not for super 8, or 16mm.

My colleagues think I am crazy when I tell them I am shooting on film, "you can do it on DV and apply a film plugin in your NLE rather than shoot on film" saids one guy. That's the mentality here sadly. Non of the TV stations use film for anything, it's all video, and DV. " Cheapness" and "money" is the major concern here.

When I first arrived in Hong Kong in the mid 80's I was surprised that you could get Single 8 processed at the local Fuji labs, it takes about a week and returned to you by registered mail. For super 8 don't think there was a lab locally, you have to send it to the US or Australia.

Bill

[woods01]

Yes a few Asian friends have told me of the general low quality of Asian
TV production (not the feature films, of course).

Unfortunatly it looks like the K40 decision is going to drastically end S8
shooting outside of Europe or NA. Which is all the more reason to have
a forum project of summer in K40, with long takes and slow-mo, it
could be possible to make a Baraka-type film on 8mm while the
international filmmakers still have a chance to get their film processed.

But Single 8 looks like a pretty cool format. I would pursue it if not for
the very long turnaround for NA customers.