From: Steven Budden (email suppressed)
Date: Tue Mar 07 2006 - 16:46:31 PST
Could probably raise those numbers significantly by passing the petitions
around a few film schools.
In a message dated 3/7/2006 12:51:40 P.M. Pacific Standard Time,
email suppressed writes:
> Hi, I will have the opportunity to meet with a kodak rep. so I figure this
> a good time for fellow film makers to post concerns or questions to kodak
> that I can pass on in person. Concerns such as, we would like reversal
> kept or we need the b&w print stock that was just eliminated to be brought
> I don't know how receptive they will be but I will attempt to communicate
> our concerns. Thanks -Pete
Thanks Pete. Never hurts to ask I suppose, but I did circulate a petition
a while ago to sustain
or revive (in new form) 7250 and the print stocks 7399 and 7361.
Each petition numbered about 400 endorsements (including a few celebs). To
my surprise the color reversal peition (7250/7399) had the largest
response. But the figures are too low for EK I'm afraid. Perhaps if the
petition had 5000 to 10000 names each it would have impressed EK, but then
the finance folks would ask "then why don't they buy/shoot more?"
The idea of keeping these stocks around is really a strategic one rather
than for money making, thus the reason it's difficult to convince EK to
change their mind. These reversal stocks are used by artists and student
filmmakers as a cheap route to finishing on film. As Tim Wilkins mentioned
you can cut the original (or in his case and others project it as well).
I cut my last film this way: shot 7276 and 7278, trimmed selects, work
printed on 7361 at Franklin (now out-of-business), and did the final
prints at Forde on 7361. The emulsions are harder and slightly more
resistant to damage incurred from handling. (IMO, the new Tri-X is not so
great, at least what I've seen from the rolls I shot...looks kinda muddy,
though I should have sent it to Mark Kosarik to see if he's perfected the
If Kodak would keep reversal B/W and color available, and the stocks to
print on, then more folks would shoot film is the arguement. Cheaper
filmmaking options = more people trying their hand at film and buying more
7250 would have to be reformulated...to an E6/Ektachrome equivalent due to
environmental issues that surround the manufacture and use of VNF. Tim
Wilkins suggested that a replacement to 7399 would be the current E6 dupe
film for 35mm slides, which could be slit for 16mm. (Be aware that color
reversal prints are not great for sound, worse than B/W reversal prints.
At least, this is what I've heard from others and the Ekta prints I've
seen have proven this.)
My bid is for 7361, a favorite or mine. If 7361 came back maybe Mark
Kosarik would finally buy a printer. He's been promising to do this for
years. Both the old owner of Franklin and Rich at Forde swear that optical
sound is much more well defined on 7361 when compared to 7302 because the
blacks are richer.
I'm all for there being more options for B/W filmmaking. Hey, how about a
400 ISO camera neg that has the same amount of grain as 7222.
P.S. I know a fellow here in town who is setting up an E6 processor in his
basement for short
425 SE 3rd, #400
Portland, OR 97214
+1 503 231 6548
Skype ID: frames40
For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.