Question:
They were afraid that Annika would load some into her EOS-1V and the people at Fairlawn,NJ would go on strike after processing film of those mutts
Response:
Very good, tell Annika what the shots are really worth. I think he is just a kid, so do not demean he/she too much or we may end up with another problem at school. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – They were afraid that Annika would load some into her EOS-1V and the people at Fairlawn,NJ would go on strike after processing film of those mutts
Response:
They were afraid that Annika would load some into her EOS-1V and the people at Fairlawn,NJ would go on strike after processing film of those mutts
I thought they only killed K25 Professional, not all K25. Mac Breck Vorlon Empire Defender of Marcus and Lennier Watch "CRUSADE" 8 PM on The Sci-Fi Channel Mon-Thurs. in April 2001, beginning 4/9
Response:
They were afraid that Annika would load some into her EOS-1V and the people at Fairlawn,NJ would go on strike after processing film of those mutts I thought they only killed K25 Professional, not all K25.
Think carefully. Have Kodak *ever* announced their discontinuance of a non-professional film? They don’t care about professionals or consumers, but they sure as hell dont’ feel it neccessary to tell consumers anything 
B
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – They were afraid that Annika would load some into her EOS-1V and the people at Fairlawn,NJ would go on strike after processing film of those mutts I thought they only killed K25 Professional, not all K25. Think carefully. Have Kodak *ever* announced their discontinuance of a non-professional film? They don’t care about professionals or consumers, but they sure as hell dont’ feel it neccessary to tell consumers anything B
"We at Kodak regret to inform you that Kodachrome II will be discontinued by year’s end, 2001. We realize that this notice is more than a quarter of a century after the fact, but hey, that’s your tough luck. We at Kodak, the corporation that cares about its base product, film discontinuances, felt the need more than 27 years later to inform our buying public that this stalwart unparalleled film of our K-12 flagship fleet is no more. It id done, fini, kaput, verbotten. For a further time table of when we plan to announce discontinuance of BlEchtachrome-X, Pan-atomic(Gargleblaster)-X, DrEktar 25, and Snoblite 100, please don’t contact our public relations department at 1(800)USEOURFILM?EATSH*T!" The preceding was regurgitated from the Kodak chocolate pudding film company and should not be confused with the company that makes silver halide film of the same name. We are in direct competition with Fungi (that other film company whose films on their chocolate pudding are not as fine or as frequently dicontinued as ours but have more saturation, finer grain and less harsh contrast than ours). Remember, at Kodak we care… not! Lewis I’ve set (anti-spam) controls to allow in only people on my list. If you want to be on my list contact me through the newsgroup. I regret the inconvenience. Thanks. Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION": http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm
Response:
"We at Kodak regret to inform you that Kodachrome II will be discontinued by year’s end, 2001. We realize that this notice is more than a quarter of a
This is the most hilarious post I have read in quite a while. I thank you; my neighbors do not. B
Response:
ROFLMAO!
– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – They were afraid that Annika would load some into her EOS-1V and the people at Fairlawn,NJ would go on strike after processing film of those mutts I thought they only killed K25 Professional, not all K25. Think carefully. Have Kodak *ever* announced their discontinuance of a non-professional film? They don’t care about professionals or consumers, but they sure as hell dont’ feel it neccessary to tell consumers anything B "We at Kodak regret to inform you that Kodachrome II will be discontinued by year’s end, 2001. We realize that this notice is more than a quarter of a century after the fact, but hey, that’s your tough luck. We at Kodak, the corporation that cares about its base product, film discontinuances, felt the need more than 27 years later to inform our buying public that this stalwart unparalleled film of our K-12 flagship fleet is no more. It id done, fini, kaput, verbotten. For a further time table of when we plan to announce discontinuance of BlEchtachrome-X, Pan-atomic(Gargleblaster)-X, DrEktar 25, and Snoblite 100, please don’t contact our public relations department at 1(800)USEOURFILM?EATSH*T!" The preceding was regurgitated from the Kodak chocolate pudding film company and should not be confused with the company that makes silver halide film of the same name. We are in direct competition with Fungi (that other film company whose films on their chocolate pudding are not as fine or as frequently dicontinued as ours but have more saturation, finer grain and less harsh contrast than ours). Remember, at Kodak we care… not! Lewis I’ve set (anti-spam) controls to allow in only people on my list. If you want to be on my list contact me through the newsgroup. I regret the inconvenience. Thanks. Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION": http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – "We at Kodak regret to inform you that Kodachrome II will be discontinued by year’s end, 2001. We realize that this notice is more than a quarter of a This is the most hilarious post I have read in quite a while. I thank you; my neighbors do not. B
Your welcome and thanks for the complement. Your neighbors must live in either Rochester, NY or Fairlawn, NJ 
Lewis I’ve set (anti-spam) controls to allow in only people on my list. If you want to be on my list contact me through the newsgroup. I regret the inconvenience. Thanks. Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION": http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm
Response:
ROFLMAO!
SNIP Lewis I’ve set (anti-spam) controls to allow in only people on my list. If you want to be on my list contact me through the newsgroup. I regret the inconvenience. Thanks. Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION": http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm
Response:
It’s a shame that such parodies go unnoticed!
Response:
too close to the truth and not so funny if you used to use kodachrome 25, Ektar 25 or VPS films as mainstays – all now gone or going soon. The lack of slow film offerings for highest quality results on 35mm is pushing me more towards medium format. In the meantime, they are putting their resources into digital cameras where they haven’t made any profits yet. — * Third Party 35mm Lenses: http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/third/index.html * * Medium Format Cameras: http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/mf/index.html megasite*
Response:
too close to the truth and not so funny if you used to use kodachrome 25, Ektar 25 or VPS films as mainstays – all now gone or going soon. The lack of slow film offerings for highest quality results on 35mm is pushing me more towards medium format. In the meantime, they are putting their resources into digital cameras where they haven’t made any profits yet. — * Third Party 35mm Lenses: http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/third/index.html * * Medium Format Cameras: http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/mf/index.html megasite*
For once, I agree with you wholeheartedly! I have, at some point, used all of the above films extensively, and am continually disappointed with the quality of current ISO 100 offerings. Velvia, here I come, at least for now! Skip — Shadowcatcher Imagery http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com
Response:
It’s a shame that such parodies go unnoticed!
Indeed. And what are a you a parody of? A human? B
Response:
too close to the truth and not so funny if you used to use kodachrome 25, Ektar 25 or VPS films as mainstays – all now gone or going soon. The lack of slow film offerings for highest quality results on 35mm is pushing me more towards medium format. In the meantime, they are putting their resources into digital cameras where they haven’t made any profits yet. — * Robert Monaghan
Hmmmmm: Let me see… digital, APS…… 35mm – I though 35mm was medium format Lewis I’ve set (anti-spam) controls to allow in only people on my list. If you want to be on my list contact me through the newsgroup. I regret the inconvenience. Thanks. Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION": http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm
Response:
They were afraid that Annika would load some into her EOS-1V and the people at Fairlawn,NJ would go on strike after processing film of those mutts
As if I’d use any of that Yellow-boxed junk! When the guy said, "Mama don’t take my Kodachrome away…." he wasn’t talkin about me. Fuji spoken here, babe. Now since you ran off at the mouth, I shall be forced to post some slides taken with my new 70-200 2.8L and a roll of Fuji Astia.
Response:
After Ektar and VPS were discontinued, I discontinued Kodak. Fuji didn’t steal the market, Kodak threw it at them. Bob Hickey
Response:
They were afraid that Annika would load some into her EOS-1V and the people at Fairlawn,NJ would go on strike after processing film of those mutts As if I’d use any of that Yellow-boxed junk! When the guy said, "Mama don’t take my Kodachrome away…." he wasn’t talkin about me. Fuji spoken here, babe.
Sad you don’t have a clue which films are best at what….and also sad you have no memories of Kodachrome. Never fear, our old Kodachrome slides will be around long after your pooping pups negatives and E6 slides have faded. Steve – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Now since you ran off at the mouth, I shall be forced to post some slides taken with my new 70-200 2.8L and a roll of Fuji Astia.
Response:
Bob: I think Kodak has been pulling out of the slow film markets because they couldn’t recover the cost of manufacturing the emulsions. Kodak doesn’t quit manufacturing products that it can make money on. There are not many of us who shoot Kodachrome. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – too close to the truth and not so funny if you used to use kodachrome 25, Ektar 25 or VPS films as mainstays – all now gone or going soon. The lack of slow film offerings for highest quality results on 35mm is pushing me more towards medium format. In the meantime, they are putting their resources into digital cameras where they haven’t made any profits yet. — * Third Party 35mm Lenses: http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/third/index.html * * Medium Format Cameras: http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/mf/index.html megasite*
Response:
umm, by that logic, Kodak should have pulled out of digital cameras in any of the last 25 years, since they have never made a profit on them despite millions sold, yes? While there were 15-17 million digital cameras sold (including webcams and low res.) there were 85 million film cameras sold this last year (see this week’s BJP or quotes/cite from PPN at http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/mf/photostats.html bottom). And film sales are up, not down, or so they claim. Kodak is losing millions on digital cameras, not on selling us Kodachrome, which is a major part of their tradition and a flagship product for high quality 35mm photography. Instead, the lab quality has gone to pot (see postings in rec.photo etc.) which also encourages pros to switch to more reliable films (by Fuji etc). I agree with Bob that they are forcing us to switch from Kodak to Fuji products such as Velvia. Once we start testing new films, we are more likely to find non-Kodak products we like, which they seem to not understand. As an engineer, it is hard to see how they are going to save much $$ dropping the product, other than in modest warehousing costs. They already have the complete production line, and all R&D – long ago amortized, right? Then again, how much did they save by orphaning all those 620 cameras when they stopped making 620 films – I mean, they are the same film and emulsion and paper as on the 120 films they make? Don’t you think they have a modest obligation to provide films for the cameras they promoted and sold to us? You may have some 620 cameras by Kodak, and instant print models, and kodak disc, and 110 format, and 126 carts, and APS (soon to go, now years without slides and full spectrum of emulsions) etc.? They got the profits from selling us the cameras, and we have cameras we can’t get film to use them with, right? I think Kodak’s real agenda is to push the 35mm tyros out of film and into digital cameras, and getting rid of the higher quality 35mm films is a major step in that direction. If you don’t have 35mm kodachrome slides for comparison, you might think that 800 ASA prints are pretty close to digital so why not go digital? Same reason they dropped Ektar 25 etc. what I’m hoping happens is a dot.digital_camera crash, a la dot.com crash; a chip maker takes the market away from Kodak, and then kodak discovers all of us are using Fuji film – so sorry! grins bobm — * Third Party 35mm Lenses: http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/third/index.html * * Medium Format Cameras: http://www.smu.edu/~rmonagha/mf/index.html megasite*
Response:
umm, by that logic, Kodak should have pulled out of digital cameras in any of the last 25 years, since they have never made a profit on them despite
I think they think digital is a growth market and they want to be sure they have a market position on the curve. cameras, not on selling us Kodachrome, which is a major part of their tradition and a flagship product for high quality 35mm photography.
Yes, but not enough people buy it. I thought I heard they only have enough demand on K25 to do one emulsion run a year. Conclusion is they have been carrying the K25 users for sometime, now they’ve decided they can no longer eat the segment loss. Instead, the lab quality has gone to pot (see postings in rec.photo etc.) which also encourages pros to switch to more reliable films (by Fuji etc).
I don’t like Fuji. Even if I did, I wouldn’t use it because it takes food off the tables of American workers. I agree with Bob that they are forcing us to switch from Kodak to Fuji products such as Velvia. Once we start testing new films, we are more likely to find non-Kodak products we like, which they seem to not understand.
I don’t believe anyone is "forcing" anyone to use Fuji. As an engineer, it is hard to see how they are going to save much $$ dropping the product, other than in modest warehousing costs. They already have the complete production line, and all R&D – long ago amortized, right? Then again, how much did they save by orphaning all those 620 cameras when they stopped making 620 films – I mean, they are the same film and emulsion and paper as on the 120 films they make?
That is a rather over simplified view of cost flows. Don’t you think they have a modest obligation to provide films for the cameras they promoted and sold to us? You may have some 620 cameras by Kodak, and instant print models, and kodak disc, and 110 format, and 126 carts, and APS (soon to go, now years without slides and full spectrum of emulsions) etc.? They got the profits from selling us the cameras, and we have cameras we can’t get film to use them with, right?
No. They are not my slaves. They have a very high and direct obligation to their stockholders, the widows & orphans segment (pension funds). I think Kodak’s real agenda is to push the 35mm tyros out of film and into digital cameras, and getting rid of the higher quality 35mm films is a major step in that direction. If you don’t have 35mm kodachrome slides for comparison, you might think that 800 ASA prints are pretty close to digital so why not go digital? Same reason they dropped Ektar 25 etc.
I don’t subscribe to the paranoia paradigm. The simplest explanation is they are just trying to make a buck for their shareholders. what I’m hoping happens is a dot.digital_camera crash, a la dot.com crash; a chip maker takes the market away from Kodak, and then kodak discovers all of us are using Fuji film – so sorry! grins bobm
I fail to see the humor.
Response:
I don’t like Fuji. Even if I did, I wouldn’t use it because it takes food off the tables of American workers.
Except those American workers involved in the importing of the film, the sale of the film, the processing of the film, and the actual photographers who make their livings by USING the film. So who is starving here? Some fat guy in Rochester?
Response:
I don’t like Fuji. Even if I did, I wouldn’t use it because it takes food off the tables of American workers. Except those American workers involved in the importing of the film, the sale of the film, the processing of the film, and the actual photographers who make their livings by USING the film. So who is starving here? Some fat guy in Rochester?
*boggle* Oh my god. You’ve slipped and made a sensible post!!! B
Response:
As an engineer, it is hard to see how they are going to save much $$ dropping the product, other than in modest warehousing costs.
I think that the overhead costs play a big part in these discussions, as do distribution costs. But, perhaps this was just the time for a expensive decision about equipment renewal? Perhaps, the Kodachrome developing process have environmental problems that can be costly to solve? There could be many valid reasons for not keeping the film available anymore. As for your other thoughts, I have no idea. Kodak may work this after a plan, but I doubt it. — Anders Svensson
Response:
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I don’t like Fuji. Even if I did, I wouldn’t use it because it takes food off the tables of American workers. Except those American workers involved in the importing of the film, the sale of the film, the processing of the film, and the actual photographers who make their livings by USING the film. So who is starving here? Some fat guy in Rochester? *boggle* Oh my god. You’ve slipped and made a sensible post!!! B
Yes, maximum entropy has been reached. The universe will now implode in 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 seconds… WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSSSSSSSSHHHHHHH!!!!! Lewis I’ve set (anti-spam) controls to allow in only people on my list. If you want to be on my list contact me through the newsgroup. I regret the inconvenience. Thanks. Check out my photos at "LEWISVISION": http://members.aol.com/Lewisvisn/home.htm
Response:
I don’t like Fuji. Even if I did, I wouldn’t use it because it takes food off the tables of American workers. Except those American workers involved in the importing of the film, the sale of the film, the processing of the film, and the actual photographers who make their livings by USING the film.
Talking only about the film. The greatest cost and margin on fuji are absorbed BEFORE it gets to the USA. The processing and USA shooting are all in USA costs /margin development activities and thus irrelevant to my statement. So who is starving here? Some fat guy in Rochester?
Dood, you really ought to pack up your camera and head on up for a tour of the old mill and industrial towns of the North East. Interesting photo essay; buildings as dead fish. I only shoot Kodak. Once in a while I buy a roll of one of fuji’s products to remind myself how much I dislike it. Kodachrome forever!
If you like this post and would like to receive updates from this blog, please subscribe our feed.