Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
11-19-2023, 10:28 AM - 1 Like   #1
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
ChrisPlatt's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Rockaway Beach NYC
Posts: 7,604
Good news: Kodak chemistry

Kodak Professional photographic chemicals will now be manufactured by Photo Systems Inc. in Michigan.
They were discontinued last year by the previous manufacturer and have been in very short supply since.

News of the announcement in John Sexton's blog:
https://johnsexton.com/newsletter11-2023.html#anchor08

Chris

11-19-2023, 10:38 AM   #2
Pentaxian




Join Date: May 2009
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 828
I wonder if they plan to reintroduce chemistry that was discontinued over the years like Selectol or D-76R.
11-19-2023, 10:48 AM - 1 Like   #3
Pentaxian
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,726
QuoteOriginally posted by ChrisPlatt Quote
Kodak Professional photographic chemicals will now be manufactured by Photo Systems Inc. in Michigan.
They were discontinued last year by the previous manufacturer and have been in very short supply since.
Chris
I Ďm surprised that Kodak didnít find a way to continue these. They are basically a chemicals company, afterall.
11-19-2023, 11:44 AM   #4
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
EssJayEff's Avatar

Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: near Saxapahaw, NC
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 881
I remember in the early 2000s when one of the big pushes to "go digital" (at least in the USA) was the problem of photographic chemistry pollution, especially silver. Do those concerns and their corresponding regulations no longer matter?

11-19-2023, 12:13 PM   #5
Pentaxian
StiffLegged's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2018
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,282
QuoteQuote:
Our plan is to reintroduce the entire range of black and white products by December 15, 2023, followed by the release of C-41, E-6, and RA-4 color products.
This is excellent news!
11-19-2023, 12:31 PM - 1 Like   #6
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Idaho
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 2,265
QuoteOriginally posted by EssJayEff Quote
I remember in the early 2000s when one of the big pushes to "go digital" (at least in the USA) was the problem of photographic chemistry pollution, especially silver. Do those concerns and their corresponding regulations no longer matter?
Most photo chemicals are pretty eco-friendly and aren't any worse than flushing washing detergent down the drain (there are some exceptions). If processing is done right, very little silver goes down the drain. That which comes out of the film can be reclaimed from the fixer and large processing operations almost all used silver reclamation. Septic tanks can be another thing and it doesn't take much silver to poison them, so it's wise not to put any fixer effluent into a septic tank system. Home processing doesn't pose that big of a risk otherwise unless some of the more toxic chemicals are involved.
11-19-2023, 12:56 PM - 1 Like   #7
Digitiser of Films
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North East of England
Posts: 19,898
QuoteOriginally posted by EssJayEff Quote
I remember in the early 2000s when one of the big pushes to "go digital" (at least in the USA) was the problem of photographic chemistry pollution, especially silver. Do those concerns and their corresponding regulations no longer matter?
QuoteOriginally posted by Bob 256 Quote
Most photo chemicals are pretty eco-friendly and aren't any worse than flushing washing detergent down the drain (there are some exceptions). If processing is done right, very little silver goes down the drain. That which comes out of the film can be reclaimed from the fixer and large processing operations almost all used silver reclamation. Septic tanks can be another thing and it doesn't take much silver to poison them, so it's wise not to put any fixer effluent into a septic tank system. Home processing doesn't pose that big of a risk otherwise unless some of the more toxic chemicals are involved.
^^^ This. Plus, for those processing at home, used fixer (and the other chemicals, if necessary) can be collected in bottles and dropped off when convenient at local recycling facilities in many countries. I take mine along every few months, or whenever I need to get rid of something else that can't go in my regular, re-cycling or garden waste bins...


Last edited by BigMackCam; 11-19-2023 at 04:24 PM.
11-19-2023, 02:17 PM - 2 Likes   #8
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
disconnekt's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: SoCal/I.E.
Photos: Albums
Posts: 1,656
For anybody that's interested, Photo Systems Inc is the company that has been makeing the Unicolor E6 and C41 kits since the 70's (or so)
11-19-2023, 03:48 PM   #9
Pentaxian
Michail_P's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2019
Location: Kalymnos
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 3,003
Good news, I hope that will bring down some prices. Chemistry availability has been an important parameter of the expense.
11-19-2023, 05:30 PM - 2 Likes   #10
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Rochester, NY
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 5,273
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
I Ďm surprised that Kodak didnít find a way to continue these. They are basically a chemicals company, afterall.
Not anymore. When they spun off Eastman Chemical in the mid 1994 they essentially took a loaded shotgun, stuck it in their mouth and pulled the trigger. It was all part of their hip new strategy to become an electronics based company. It seemed that every person at Kodak saw the insanity of this but the president of the company. I am convinced that the last president of Kodak was put there to kill the company. Nobody with a job performance record like his would have stayed employed there as long as he was.


He was equally shocked when the first thing that Eastman Chemical did once they were independent of Kodak was raise the cost of the chemicals used to manufacture film by 30%. Prior to the spinoff EKC had to sell these chemicals to the film manufacturing division at cost.


I still get mightily PO'd at how the senior management of Kodak destroyed it. It was not fun to live through.
11-20-2023, 07:31 AM   #11
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter




Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Dallas / Yucatan
Posts: 1,726
QuoteOriginally posted by gaweidert Quote
Not anymore. When they spun off Eastman Chemical in the mid 1994 they essentially took a loaded shotgun, stuck it in their mouth and pulled the trigger. It was all part of their hip new strategy to become an electronics based company. It seemed that every person at Kodak saw the insanity of this but the president of the company. I am convinced that the last president of Kodak was put there to kill the company. Nobody with a job performance record like his would have stayed employed there as long as he was.


He was equally shocked when the first thing that Eastman Chemical did once they were independent of Kodak was raise the cost of the chemicals used to manufacture film by 30%. Prior to the spinoff EKC had to sell these chemicals to the film manufacturing division at cost.


I still get mightily PO'd at how the senior management of Kodak destroyed it. It was not fun to live through.
Having gone to work for a set of enormous corporations after government work, I've seen that exact same dynamic play out so many times. Executive compensation is typically based on stock prices and a few other lesser considered parameters, which in the US style of mismanagement leads to extremely short-term decision-making, like quarter by quarter and rarely anything more than five years at the most.

I retired from a company where the president and CEO (huge mistake combining those, but we're back to the puzzlingly accepted mismanagement in the US) had, first, lost $4B in cash when a merger move he made didn't come through and the target company got a nice juicy check due to his gamble. I've never seen a company take a $4B cash hit and the president and/or CEO not get fired immediately. That speaks to the inbred nature of US corporate boards and more.

Next, not having learned his lesson, he went on a series of smaller merger purchases, costing billions over and over. As soon as he retired, the new president/CEO set about reversing all the past president/CEOs decisions! Immediately. Selling off companies purchased at high cost for pennies on the dollar!

The kind of turmoil and whiplash that corporation are put through, not to mention the target companies & all employees, is nearly criminal. Kodak, like so many other companies, had an egocentric president who was aiming for self-enrichment, not preservation and continuation of a legendary company so much beloved by generations of people.

I could go on for days about the ways that US companies have poor corporate governance, but we need to stick with photography. All this is a long-about way of saying how much I agree with you. "Original" Kodak (and Kodachrome and more) should still be with us today. Photography would be much better off for it.
11-20-2023, 07:33 AM   #12
Pentaxian
Jonathan Mac's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Madrid, Spain
Posts: 10,541
Good news for film photography. Having option will help keep prices down.
11-20-2023, 07:54 AM - 1 Like   #13
Pentaxian
reh321's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: South Bend, IN, USA
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 22,726
QuoteOriginally posted by yucatanPentax Quote
I could go on for days about the ways that US companies have poor corporate governance, but we need to stick with photography. All this is a long-about way of saying how much I agree with you. "Original" Kodak (and Kodachrome and more) should still be with us today. Photography would be much better off for it.
As one who used Kodachrome almost exclusively at one time, I believed that Kodak was edging it out {presumably for environmental reasons} {and I was trying alternatives},before digital killed it off.
11-20-2023, 08:52 AM   #14
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
ChrisPlatt's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Rockaway Beach NYC
Posts: 7,604
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by reh321 Quote
As one who used Kodachrome almost exclusively at one time, I believed that Kodak was edging it out {presumably for environmental reasons} {and I was trying alternatives},before digital killed it off.

Fujifilm discontinued original Velvia transparency film for similar reasons.
A reformulated replacement was later introduced under the same name.

Chris
11-20-2023, 07:55 PM   #15
Site Supporter
Site Supporter




Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Central Coast, CA
Posts: 1,286
In days of yore when Kodak had labs they recycled the silver from chemicals and used it to make new film. Now silver is hazardous waste.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
film, kodak, photography
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The bad news and the (mostly) good news. Nightwatch Pentax KP 8 02-09-2020 04:59 PM
*RUMORS, careful!*Good news and bad news (K5 going, something else coming) masloff Pentax News and Rumors 252 01-07-2012 12:20 PM
Cityscape Good news--bad news-my panorama photo charliezap Post Your Photos! 13 08-17-2011 06:44 AM
Good news, bad news. Lloydy Pentax DSLR Discussion 13 05-06-2009 03:05 PM
Great news, bad news, great news! Marc Langille Photographic Technique 49 03-01-2008 08:35 AM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:42 AM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top