Will Kodak Bring Back Kodachrome?

[@tempus_fugit7366]

A quick, funny story about Kodachrome slides. In the early 2000's, I worked in a 1 hour photo lab. We could scan and print slides. A customer had dropped off 6 boxes of slides to be scanned and transferred to CD-ROM. Because of the volume of slides in the order it took me about a week to scan everything during the brief free moments I had. The slides mostly looked to be from a trip to Europe and a very lovely young woman was featured in many of these photos. Being a true novice to Kodachrome and the durability of the colors, I assumed they were made recently. I really became enamored by the young woman in the photos. Until the customer showed up to retrieve their slides. It turns out the Customer was the subject, and she was then in her late 60's and the pictures were taken between 1957 and 1959 when she was in her 20s. Unfortunately for my silly fantasy, the customer didn't age as nearly well and her photographs. lol

[@229dave46]

lol

[@RobertLeeAtYT]

Kodachrome was notable for its dark storage keeping ability. It essentially doesn’t fade if not exposed to light. It is much superior to E6 emulsions in this respect. Howevr, Kodachrome deteriorates quite quickly if. projected.

[@CS-uc2oh]

What a gross story right down to the dig about her aging (as if you will age well). You perved over a stranger's photos and then took a dig at her because she was no longer the beauty you were perving over. I bet you're so proud of this story too. Gross.

[@aqdrobert]

Dorian Gray: Would Kodachrome have recorded my sins?

[@Gregory-Palamas1349]

Great! Story!

[@JanPBtest]

1:50 This is the part that made Kodachrome so good: unlike standard reversal films, Kodachrome did not have any colour components in its emulsion. It was basically a black-and-white film with three layers. This is why it was so stable and forgiving of abuse while shooting, very important for pro photographers in hot climates, etc. And because the dyes were added in processing, they need not have to be derived from chemicals that produce colour from substances already present in the film (as in all other reversal films). This again allowed choosing better quality dyes than the E-6 ones. The separate processing of the three B&W layers was done by exposing the film during processing to red and blue light (IIRC) which affected one layer at a time, and the final third layer was simply developed with a fogging agent (instead the of third light which yielded the same effect but with less fuss). The colours of Kodachrome are not only very high quality but also very stable. The usual estimate is that a well-kept Kodachrome slide which is not projected too often should not alter its look for about 100 years.

[@CrispyFrenFry]

I sincerely hope that Kodachrome does come back because it is the most stable color positive or reverse negative film technology. This is according to a film conservator who hosted a cohort of archivists like myself as we learned about how to identify and make film prints, negatives, reverse negatives ready for long term preservation and accessibility.

[@jst7714]

About 10 years ago, I found vacation slides from the 1960s stored in a metal box up in a 1880s era Florida house. Who knows how long they are up there, but it was constant heat and awful humidity. All the Ektachrome slides were shot, only the magenta remained. The Kodachrome slides were perfect however. Not even mold damage

[@Overexposed1]

That’s fascinating. Thanks for sharing!

[@DeloreandudeTommy]

My dad used to work at Kodak and has a big photo print of a Porsche that was shot on Kodachrome 64 (can't remember if it was given to Kodak employees or if he got it somewhere else). The colors on the photo were truly incredible and very vibrant.

[@thomaschamberlin2485]

I scanned an old Kodachrome slide I shot in 1982 yesterday. It was kept in an archival sleeve in a filing cabinet. The colors were pretty wonky. The subjects hair was magenta, but the landscape was green. The left side of the sky was blue and the right side was pink. Kodak was accused by DOJ for antitrust violation for keeping the developing process for Kodachrome in-house in 1954 and agreed to release the process so camera stores were then able to process it, which was important because film developing was a major part of their business. Nature photographers abandoned Kodachrome for Fuji Velvia's vivid greens and reds when it was introduced in 1990 and never looked back.

[@guccimain89]

Huh interesting. I do a lot of scanning for relatives. I very very regularly have to correct the blown out magenta of ektachrome slides but I’ve yet to see a single Kodachrome slide from any of my family extended or otherwise that doesn’t look as good as the day it was developed. Weird.

[@mkshffr4936]

Kodachrome was my favorite film back in the day. Unmatched in every regard. I used K25, K64, and K200 depending on the situation. Always outstanding results.

[@sophietucker1255]

I have several Kodachrome images my dad took 70 yrs ago and they are remarkable. The colors and clarity are still there as if they were taken yesterday. I agree that it is doubtful that Kodachrome would ever come back using the original processes but then stranger things have been known to happen. I think we would see an Ektachrome with more Kodachrome like colors before we’d see a real Kodachrome slide film. Maybe an Ektachrome II in ISO 64 or even 25

[@Gwalion]

I have shot countless rolls of Kodachrome in my time - I'm 70 now, it was always a favourite. It would be fantastic if it came back, but I rather doubt we shall be that lucky. Good video, thanks.

[@Overexposed1]

You’re welcome!

[@thomasfeimer1706]

The other thing Kodachrome was known for was extremely narrow exposure latitude. About a half stop either way, max. Of course all slide film has narrow latitude, but Kodachrome was especially unforgiving. This is why camera maker marketing departments of the late film age seem so obsessed with the accuracy of their metering systems. Color negative film doesn't care if you're using a pair of slow old CDS cells that are a stop or two or more off. But pro's didn't shoot negs (unless they were doing portraiture). They shot reversal. And exposure for reversal film had to be on the money all the time, every time. Kodachrome was also expensive. Slide film in general was always more expensive than negative (today it's ridiculously expensive) but back in the day you had to throw in the cost and extra time of having it sent to one of the specialty labs that could actually process it. Of course, most corner drug and grocery photo finishers couldn't do E6 either, but there was usually a lab much closer by that could. You also mention the slow 64 ISO, but for years 64 was the "fast" Kodachrome! Until 2002, you could get a 25 ISO Kodachrome. As you can imagine, the grain was near non-existent. Nobody talks about it anymore, but they came out with a 200 ISO Kodachrome in the 80's. Of course it had more grain than 64, and less saturation. Add in the added time and expense of Kodachrome processing, and most people didn't really see any advantage over cheaper and easier to process E6 films. But it had an interesting tonal pallet in its own way, and 200 is a far more flexible speed than 25 or 64. I wish somebody still made an ISO 200 slide film today.

[@guccimain89]

I always like to come back to this question every once in a while. Like “here’s how the film photography landscape has changed. Do I think Kodak could find a place in it to make Kodachrome and its development viable.” You know they have to be asking themselves that and seeing if they could tweak the process one way or another to make it work. Or maybe they don’t. But I like to think they do.

[@teleaddict23]

Kodak can’t make enough of the films they’ve got already, let alone going into the complications of making Kodachrome again

[@robdixon5016]

If there is money they will

[@Nitidus]

​​@@robdixon5016 Right. Unfortunately, Kodachrome has already gone bankrupt once and is still deeply in debt. In fact, if one big thing goes really wrong _today,_ they could easily become incapable of upholding their contractual obligations for $80 mil. in liquid financial reserves. The risk of commiting to a project like this for them is insane. And if they go down, that's the end for almost ALL color film. Besides, I'm sure one single roll of reintroduced Kodachrome would be $50 or possibly much more, especially if it includes development. Kodak would realistically need to invent a completely different chemical process that local labs can get into for relatively cheap so that there's at least something like one lab per country (in Europe). But then it's literally not Kodachrome anymore. With the old process there would at best be one lab in Rochester and maybe one in the UK so most people in the world would have to mail their rolls internationally only to get them developed at all. That's quite ridiculous. I love Kodachrome, it is absolutely unique and beautiful. I'd love to see it back and I'd pay those dollars to be able to shoot it whenever I could, which would be very, very, very rarely. But it's simply nigh impossible. The only glimmer if hope I have: In today's market, it's mostly about the colors. Maybe, just maybe, Kodak can one day create an E6 emulsion that comes _kind of_ close to the Kodachrome look. It's not the same at all, but it's very much the only thing that sounds even remotely doable.

[@chrisloomis1489]

Bring it back , I will buy this lovely film 🙏🏻 Maybe it is not the best , but the slides that my father took with is humble ARGUS were a treasure , so mock me if you want, I will always love the work that film preserved.

[@xwingfighter999]

There has been (as with everything) a surge in prices of chemicals, so if I'm a suit at Kodak, I do not want the expanse of relaunching Kodachrome, plus it's hard to justify when Ektachrome was brought back; you "already have" a color positive film on the market. If I'm Kodak right now I'm keeping the profit margins high by having a narrow product line that's produced en masse and reuses the same chemical components. Economy of scale plays a role I would guess.

[@clintgillespie8579]

The first time I heard of Kodachrome was from a certain Paul Simon song...

[@kyuseok98]

I would really like to see Kodachrome come back!! But unfortunately, Kodak even cannot bring back their own E-6 chemicals despite the promises :(

[@stevenolson3788]

Kodachrome originally was sold only as motion picture film. A year and a half later it was available for still cameras. It was not until 1938 that Kodak began mounting the processed film as slides.

[@CalumetVideo]

I started shooting Kodachrome 64 in 1989. It was never cheap, especially for a 15 year old back then. It took about a week to get the slides back from the lab, it seemed about 1/4 of them would be under or over exposed with no image, either due to metering and reciprocity failure. I always through it was a temperamental film. In my experience, when I received back 20% of the slides back as good, they were good! Between film and processing it was a very exclusive and expensive ordeal. Do I wish a Kodachrome would return? Kind of, but I find Ektachrome to be very close in performance.

[@GeoHvl]

I took a photography course in 1981. Parts of the classes were Kodachrome and Ektachrome. These were the only films we used.

[@joemiller7296]

I wish Kodak did limited runs on old film stocks. If they did that, and open sourced the K-14 process so that companies like CineStill can create powdered home developer kits, I'd be in for a few rolls whenever a limited run of Kodachrome came around. Do I wish Kodachrome came back permanently? Probably not. Lab development costs for Kodachrome would probably be extreme, and the film would fail again.

[@stephendrake8145]

The reason that Kodachrome has such high resolution, fine grain & vivid colors is because the dye couplers(precursers to the dyes) are in the individual developers & not incorporated into the individual film layers. I remember how complicated the process control for K14 and even with extensive chemical analysis of all developers(4 in all) & re-exposure control for each layer it always was difficult to maintain consistancy from run to run & day to day, unlike E3, E4 & E6 which are reproduceable to a fraction of a stop. But damn it was beautiful when it worked and since there were no dye couplers in the emulsion it is inherently more stable. I have to admit Fujichrome Velvia Professional processed in a quality professional lab comes so close to Kodachrome that anyone but the most discerning eye can tell them apart...

[@Overexposed1]

I just got a roll of velvia 50 back from the lab back in medium format. It’s exquisite.

[@geofff6671]

Velvia can be extraordinary but it is not Kodachrome.

[@petepictures]

Nice video, packed with info.

[@Overexposed1]

Thanks friend!!

[@TraditionalsFilmProduction]

Would love for Kodachrome to come back! Specially in 8mm movie film. Has anyone been able to process Kodachrome at home (in color not B&W)?

[@tedvitale8978]

I don’t know a lot about what goes into the chemistry of the different development processes but I do know there’s a big enough film community that somebody can figure out a system to develop it at home. I feel like all we’d need is Kodak releasing the chemical recipe or maybe selling the chemicals as a kit like we see with the C41 or even some E6 processes. It would be a brutal development but I’m sure someone would try and they’ll eventually be enough KZbinrs showing the process that others will go for it. I’m just thinking there’s plenty of Kodachrome out there that needs to be shot (I’ve got two dozen rolls in my fridge I have hopes of shooting one day). I remember 15 years ago as film was seemingly on its way out completely and you could hardly get the chemistry to develop color film at home. Now we have lots of kits and accessible ways to do it. I’d love to see Kodak open- source or just share more information on the developer and dyes recipe for K-14 because I really there’s enough smart people within this community trying alternatives to develop it that with some more information someone will figure out a tried and true way to develop it at home for all (but mainly masochists). Then again maybe I don’t know what I’m talking about…

[@robdixon5016]

Shot dozens of rolls of K64. It was nice but I prefer Provia 100F . Just hope reversal film is around for a long time.

[@gavinjenkins899]

Any good modern film stock with latitude and accurate colors (vision3, aerocolor, portra) plus editing can make your results look just like kodachrome

[@7mikeraj]

Good info, God bless!

[@borderlands6606]

Kodak made large format Kodachrome for government use in WW2. It's what those Rosie the Rivetter shots of aircraft construction were made on, and they are unsurpassed for detail and colour saturation even today. It was never made available for public use as far as I'm aware, and would likely have been prohibitively expensive. Dye transfer prints from large format Kodachrome are probably the ultimate in colour analogue imaging.

[@srfurley]

I remember Brian Coe talking about hand processing Kodachrome sheet film in a lecture at MoMI in London.

[@j.zuberi]

Unless they find an easier process for it. I highly doubt it. But that thing is the GOAT!

[@berndpfe]

C-41 is a process for colour negative films btw. (these are called the "Kodacolor" films) . E-6 is the reversal process for "Ektachrome". "Reformulating the Kodachrome" into another simplier process : makes no sense I suppose because then we have to add preformulated couplers. Which then is nothing else like Ektachrome or another similar color reversal film finally. Because the emulsion depends on the process and therefor vice versa. You simply have to formulate corresponding emulsions for being developed by a specific existing process.

[@diabloakland]

I’ve just found 4 rolls of super 8 Kodachrome sound. I am so sad i can’t even develop it.

[@JonnyEnglish-gu1cs]

Love to see Aerochrome come back only because I love to shoot it I be happy to £25 a roll for the hell of it Kodachrome was class in its day even if it was for a limited time I have to go and shoot it it’s colours are amazing some of the most famous images were shot on Kodachrome I remember as a kid family slides shows after holidays all shot on Kodachrome happy memories

[@Overexposed1]

With people still paying over 100$/roll for aerochrome. One has to conclude that there would be LOADS of support at a $25 price point. Make it happen Kodak!

[@JonnyEnglish-gu1cs]

@@Overexposed1 there was a an advert for 12 rolls 120 for $3500 mad price for Aerochrome that’s $24.50 per shot lol 😂 without processing!!! But I still want some come on Kodak give us something to get excited about

[@kiwipics]

Shoot digital Infrared, as it is cheaply available without relying on a soon to be depleated stock.

[@JonnyEnglish-gu1cs]

@@kiwipics I agree I am looking at options but still I love to shoot the real thing

[@NoosaHeads]

I would certainly buy it, we're it available.

[@brineb58]

I believe that there was some environmental issues that will keep it from coming back!!! I would be cool with an E-6 film that has more of the feel, but I don't feel true Kodachrome will ever be back!!!

[@ioandavies8864]

Kodachrome wont work in C41 or E6. Its essentially a black and white film until processed having no dye couplers in the emulsion, they’re added in during the development process.

[@Thereal111t]

During the height of film photography… Kodachrome became economically and environmentally unsustainable. It’s not coming back. Use ektachrome or if you really want the ‘greens of summer’… use velvia. Also, while 64ISO was popular, I remember the 25ISO being just as popular. It was always a ‘bright scene’ type film.

[@Someyungrebel]

I mean look at velvia, it has a similar look to Kodachrome, but it was developed in e6 before it was discontinued. I reckon Kodak could probably introduce an e-6 version of Kodachrome with enough engineering and money behind it, but I doubt we’ll ever see true k-14. Still, it’d be nice to have a more saturated version of Ektachrome

[@daviddoes6174]

I guess I'm wondering how Kodachrome differs from Ektachrome? can anyone answer this in easy terms?

[@DethronerX]

Totally agree, without that creating and processing method, it's not Kodachrome anymore. Although, if modern technology can make the process faster somehow, with night vision glasses that don't have any external light, can help. You know, something like AI Powered 3D glasses that have already measured and registered the dark room, so in complete dark, you have a real time regenerated images and if you have sensors on your hands and all the tools and utensils you're using, you can actually see everything based on the movements and sounds (because liquid doesn't have a sensor in it, but the sound will tell the glasses how to create the image) Or, am I too much into the future or just high?

[@xuanzheng1049]

Fuji veivla,provia simply beat kodak in terms of finer grains, cheaper cost, color rendition, and also longevity... Fuji can be projected for hours without much fading in color, on the counterpart Kodachrome will start very noticeable color shift for 50 hours of projector time

[@metalfatigue]

I was worried you'd get to the end of the video without figuring out the obvious answer and the obvious reason. There are even more reasons, like environmental concerns, equipment expense and difficult process control. Like dye transfer, It's hard to to believe we ever did it.

[@kiwipics]

The answer is no, as the process is massively expensive, complex and requires the now defunct equipment and staff. Yes, it was one of my go to film stocks back in the 70s when I started my photographic journey as a teenager. I loved my 25, 64 and 200 ASA Kodachrome, and always eagerly awaited my little return postage packet of slides from Kodak. The Simon and Garfunkel song was spot on, and my slides vivid colours always reminded me of my time spent at holiday destinations or happy times. Kodachrome for me was replaced by Fujis gorgeous Velvia, and the outstanding 50 ASA emulsion. I haven't shot reversal film in over 20 yrs, but would be tempted if Kodachrome was released again, but I'm sure it would be massively expensive.

[@robdixon5016]

I dont think it will be back but never say never

[@cennsa140driver]

Even if it did come back processing would be very expensive.

[@PatrickDempsey-bx9pi]

The background music is to loud. There are parts of this video where you can't be heard.

[@Overexposed1]

I haven’t seen any other comments indicating this. Maybe your head phones aren’t good? Thanks.

[@moseshorowitz4345]

Kodachrome won't be back. Not from Kodak, at any rate. What they should do is license it to someone who can handle it, like FujiFilm, and take the check while we get some decent film.

[@LaskyLabs]

As if Fujifilm would be willing to put the work into creating and maintaining new machines as they're tearing down everything they use to produce their films.

[@OdinsCloud]

I think that if they brought it back they would screw it up. Something would be left out or changed. The dyes might be different for example. Given today's convenience over quality ideals the people designing a new Kodachrome would screw it up. I would buy it immediately if they brought it back and if it had the SAME colors and warmth with equal to higher resolution it would replace much of digital photography. I really liked the look of that film...

[@wdb1932]

So 2 things... Kodachrome 25 was also available and ridiculously good. You might want to check that pronunciation of halide.🙂

[@LesterBeasley]

With the price of film steadily going up have you looked for alternates to try and achieve a 'film' look? Adapting vintage glass to digital cameras, LUT's, presets, ...? I've decided to look around and try and find some alternatives to film that won't break the bank. I'm curious if you are looking into alternatives to shooting film as well.

[@superbug1977]

Perhaps Kodachrome could be developed in a far more automated way than before. This might speed things up and lower the cost of using the film.

[@areallyrealisticguyd4333]

modern ektachrome is great but it won't hold up on its own once Fuji decides to kill Velvia and Provia. I think they should focus on making a completely new slide emulsion. Personally I'd like them to bring back Panatomic-X as a b&w film because that's been gone for far too long

[@cameraman655]

Shot with K64 and 25 throughout the 80s to the mid-90s, when I switched over to Fujichrome (Velvia and Provia). I love shooting slide film and love Kodachrome, but as it became time-consuming to get it processed quickly as Kodak was scaling back on Kodachrome processing, I made the jump to Fujichrome in 94. As indicated, the complex processing and costs associated with this, Kodak would be out of it’s mind to bring it back. Sure some of us ‘old school’ shooters might dabble with a roll here and there, but our ‘bread-n-butter’ is digital, so, no, I simply do not see K-chome ever making a comeback. But who knows?…. I still have one of my old F1s sitting in my closet, I would not mind cranking through a few rolls of K64 through it.

[@sesa2984]

At one time we have all laughed or rolled our eyes at someone “old” who wished things could have stayed the same. I’m only 40, in my estimation that's too young to be crotchety, but technology changed the way humans did what they do. At one time , the oldest members of a community were the MOST respected because they knew how to do things the best. Farming. Hunting. Loving. It was like that for millions of years because for most of that time, the skills we needed were essentially the same. Now, at 60 people are forced out of jobs, and we’re debating wether a president or congressman is “too old.” The Industrial (and subsequent technological) revolution set us on a path that eventually made near-enemies out of groups ten or so years apart. The “Old” ( as opposed to the “wise” which is what they used to be able to be) are a nuisance taking up money to be housed. I guess the only thing we can hope/wish for is that the machines that replace us don’t rely on an economic system that makes it prohibitive to develop Kodachrome.

[@257squadron]

Wow just seen a flock of flying pigs cross over the house! Let’s pray Kodak keep making film full stop!

[@Borzoi86]

Prints from slides via the average photofinishing lab (back in the day) suck! I know; I worked in a large lab near Chicago during the summers in high school. Prints from K64 can be stunning if done by a pro but the average high volume lab? -- not so much. I think Kodak had their Kodachrome lab in Aurora. Our lab did B&W, C-41, E-6 and lots of mailed-in 35mm German Perutz reversal film.

[@weldermarshall]

If they do it will probably be too expensive to buy knowing Kodak prices these days.

[@ivar_oslo-hr3mc]

I have shot Kodachrome with 110-format, APS, and Super8.

[@stephengreico2810]

Just bring It back! They know they can

[@marshalltravis3217]

I have 5 rolls of Kodachrome 64 in the fridge. Just waiting to see if a lab can process it..🙏

[@Overexposed1]

Super cool. Best of luck!

[@number6705]

I wish they’d bring it back, and others I know also agree

[@pdcorlis]

Chances of the re-introduction of Kodachrome? Sadly, close to zero percent. It’s far more likely we’ll see a digital Kodachrome “LUT” for digital photo files. I hope I’m wrong, but I doubt it.

[@tomislavmiletic_]

Nope, reformultion for development in E-6 is much more likely (similar things where done before), given how much different types of slide film Kodak had on the market just 15 years ago, while today there's only one, which is actually brought back due to popular demand. There's simply not enough interest for such large, time consuming and expensive endeavor...

[@alexcarrillo5510]

Ok Good Presentation However you did not mentioned in WHY Kodak Kodachrome Process had to CEASED Production - The Chemicals were to TOXIC, Why do you think that the EPA Shut Down the Kodak Processing plant at Palo Alto, California in which it employed most of the population for that city for Decades as Kodak was dumping Kodachrome, and other chemicals towards the San Francisco Bay Area Marshes where ALOT of Birds were found Dead and Deform. So the plant closed... And when I was working at a camera store in San Francisco, we were still selling Kodachrome from ISO 25 to 200 film stock as most of our customers were buying them in 20 to 40 rolls Bricks as they would test out a roll on a clip test, and then have it process at Palo Alto, and then they results back next day to prove if the film stock is at it's true ISO speed or if it needs an adjustment by placing color correction filters when they do a job. Then a lab called: "The NEW LAB" was the only lab in San Francisco to Process Kodachrome, and have ready NEXT DAY. And they also did One stop Push, as I use to shoot PKR 64 at 100, and PKL 200 at 400 ISO in which the Kodak Rep would visited us, and gives us the tech info on Kodachrome... And last it that Kodachrome was getting $$$$$$$$ expensive that most of out customers were getting E-6 stock like Yes Kodak Ektachrome in which they offer about 10 different speeds, and Fuji, and Agfa offer better emulsions.... Now Kodak only has E100 that close close to price of Kodachrome as I use in using 400 speed emulsions, But they did make a Ektachrome 64X, and 100X, and 400X meaning they place a Warm Emulsion into the color dyes, and easy to push.... I wish that Kodak would bring back a Color Neg film called Ektapress, or Supra, or Ultracolor in which these color print films were meant for the Press Media at the time but these films were meant to be push, and to be scanned easy for print work... Com on Kodak Bring these film stock back - That is Ektapress or Supra, or Ultracolor Neg films... in either 5 roll box or the 50 Roll Tub Box like you guys did....

[@Overexposed1]

All of this seems like something interesting to dig into and maybe come back with another video. Very interesting stuff!

[@alexcarrillo5510]

@@Overexposed1 Thank You - Love The Kitty!

[@vegsmashed]

Yea I got the LUT.

[@goldenhourkodak]

People always forget T-Max 3200 was also discontinued and brought back

[@stratocactus]

T-Max 3200 is a "simple" BnW film. You can get it developped everywhere. Nothing prevented them from bringing it back when they wanted to.

[@bondgabebond4907]

@@stratocactus One can develop B&W film at home. During my time in the Phillippines in the early 70s, I and many others made our way to the photo hobby shop to develop and print B&W pictures. The process is super simple, developer, fix and wash. Same goes with making prints.

[@stratocactus]

@@bondgabebond4907 don't know how it relates to my comment, but sure :) (I develop my own BnW and color films at home, also wet print both)

[@goldenhourkodak]

@@stratocactus My point is Ektachrome is not the only one that was discontinued and brought back.

[@stratocactus]

@@goldenhourkodak same answer as TMax3200. Nothing special about Ektachrome. It's a simple E-6 positive film. They just needed to "want" to make it again to make it happen. Kodachrome used a special 14 steps development (K-14), with nasty chemicals that are not allowed and thus not produced anymore. Also it was the only film using it, requiring users to send their film back to Kodak, who were the only ones who could develop it. So you can bring as many examples of discontinued films to prove your point. I'm sorry to say, but you don't seem to understand the difference with bringing back Kodachrome films and any other film. It's not a matter of "if they wanted to, they could".

[@DCD_180]

Nice video

[@Overexposed1]

Thanks buddy! I love you!

[@lensman5762]

If they did and judging by the way Kodak has behaved in the last few months, it will probably be priced around £30.00 a roll, because it has to include processing in a Kodak lab. Kodak no longer has any processing labs around the globe, Kodachrome is lierally 3 layers of B&W film which were then given colour in a complex process. When I used Kodachrome Professional in the 80s, I used to send it to Kodak France , rather than use the UK lab as the processing and handling was much better over in France. I doubt very much if Kodak is going to start building processing plants just so that they could bring back Kodachrome.

[@robdixon5016]

I guess stop shooting it if you are that unhappy with it

[@lensman5762]

@@robdixon5016 Did you read what I wrote? '"Stop shooting it if you are that unhappy with it "? Stop shooting what, Kodak? Yes I have stopped buying Kodak film since 2020, though I still have a few rolls and sheet of Kodak film left. As for Kodachrome, they stopped producing it in June 2009. Kodak are milking the film market at the moment.

[@tlatosmd]

You forogot about the second-biggest reason why it ain't coming back: Kodak has demolished their entire Kodachrome production and processing park. Every single unit was building-sized. They would have to build all that up again from scratch in order to bring Kodachrome back. As for a Kodachrome subtitute, I guess my no. 1 choice in bright sunlight is Kodak Color Plus, which is really the 8th generation of Kodadacolor --> Kodacolor Plus --> Kodak Color Plus. Sure, it's way grainier, but especially the reds and yellows magnificiently resemble the last generations of Kodachrome. Same about blue skies and sun-lit clouds on that sky. Outside of that, sun-lit structures in neutral grey, white, or black also look a lot like Kodachrome on it. Anyways, for that and all other purposes, Velvia50 is also still cloest to Kodachrome. It looks a lot like it, even if it's not as close to the reds and yellows as Kodak Color Plus is.

[@RealSergiob466]

Hopefully E6 but not optimistic about rereleasing Kodachrome

[@Old-School-Liberal]

I f*cking hope so!!

[@Humble_Yourself95]

No , in this era u would be surprised if u even still found it unfortunately due to things being doing expensive now days and due to the process being hard I don’t see it coming back

[@LWRC]

Unfortunately, even if Kodak brings back Kodachrome, the chemicals used in processing are illegal in the US so the film won't be processed in the US!

[@thomass4840]

Bringing back kodakchrome but not aerochrome *crying noises*

[@Overexposed1]

The prospect of them bringing back the K14 development process is extremely unlikely. I would say you have a better chance getting Aerochrome!

[@kayla-kt1cj]

Short ans is no , long ans is nuh uhhh

[@dalehammond1704]

At age 75 and sill shooting film, I say with deep felt emotions...film is dead. I say that comparatively speaking. It's dead compared to what it once was before the invention and popularizing of digital. Bring back Kodachrome? Why? When I attend an important social event, I pack my latest digital camera. It's lightning fast and every shot is good (maybe not great, buy okay). When I'm doing my art, I resurrect my vintage AE-1. To me, film is artistic and it will always have it's definite place in the abstruse world of art.

[@WeekdayProductions]

Luigi ghirri, Saul leiter, ernst haas.

[@concorde2003]

As Dana Carvey's George Bush would say, "Not gonna happen."

[@Overexposed1]

Probably right

[@soulfulstrum131]

Sadly the dyes do not exist anymore

[@LaskyLabs]

No. But if they do, I'll be happy to be wrong.

[@Horse6L]

They would charge $1000 a roll

[@ivanm.krsticevic1535]

When Portra is $36.99/roll 😅

[@Overexposed1]

Whew. Brutal

[@toomanynegatives]

Just from a developing stand point, no. Kodachrome will never come back. Which is ok. Get yourself a Fuji x and you can shoot Kodachrome to your hearts content.

[@dps6198]

No. Kodak is not even the shell of itself. On top of that the demand isn't there to reproduce the film. On top of that the equipment to manufacture and develop the film are no longer made and neither is the chemistry to manufacture the negatives or develop them. The best you can hope for is a picture style or recipe that recreates Kodachrome 100% for digital cameras. Otherwise no.

[@charleseliason4694]

No, no they won't.

[@geofff6671]

Much as wish it would, it is not coming back.

[@scotthullinger4684]

On account of the relative complexity of processing Kodachrome film, and volatile chemicals, Kodachrome had to be processed ONLY by Kodak exclusively, or by the very few labs here and there which had been specifically contracted and authorized by Kodak. All things considered, Kodak has always been a rather GREAT American company, and the crowning achievement of Kodak is indeed Kodachrome film. In addition to SO many countless high quality features, the fact that Kodachrome will NOT fade appreciably during your entire lifetime (particularly when properly stored) is a mighty fine achievement. A transparency made 60 or so years ago looks every bit as good right now as it did all those many years ago.

[@canturgan]

Damn immigrants, coming over here and inventing Kodachrome.

[@Blackmind0]

Kodak can't even make enough other films, where did you get the idea that Kodak would make a new ( old again) film?

[@Overexposed1]

Did you watch the video? Sometimes these videos on the interweb, they answer the question presented in the title or in the thumbnail, in the video. 75% of this video is me explaining why it’s unlikely to come back.

[@Blackmind0]

@@Overexposed1 ..i watched a short time, but stopped, because when i know kodak can`t do that, why should i listen to an explaining they can`t do that... ;-)

[@janchristianursuaaguilar7434]

ban digicams, return to kodachrome!

[@229dave46]

It's a era gone by never to return. So sad.

[@nicholassheffo5723]

Never going to happen!

[@cameraprepper7938]

No

[@RobertFalconer1967]

No.

[@UpcomingJedi]

Of course they wont since everyone is using cellphones giving INSTANT results. Most people dont want to wait or pay more to get it printed. It just isnt cost effective since almost nobody will buy it.

[@janchristianursuaaguilar7434]

ban the sale of digicams as a punishment

[@MidwestBriar]

The answer is NO. Color reversal film is over. It is no longer being produced. Fuji dismantled all their equipment and the stuff for sale is being held in cold storage and 300% more expensive than it was 3 years ago. Color negatives are next. I give it 3-5 years before it is only B&W.

[@miracleyacht__1538]

No.