Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Media

Kodak Ends Production of Acetate Base For Photographic Film 137

McGruber writes "According to a report by Rochester, NY CBS affiliate WROC Kodak has ended in-house production of the cellulose acetate base that is the primary component of photographic film. Popular Photography magazine adds that, for more than 100 years, Kodak has made the acetate in house in bulk, providing the structural basis for the company's film. Now, with Kodak in bankruptcy, the company is firing 60 workers and shutting down the acetate machinery. Citing the decline in interest in film photography as a primary cause, Kodak will no longer undertake the time intensive process of acetate production. Thankfully, the company has large stockpiles of the material, and once that runs out they will source it from elsewhere."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Kodak Ends Production of Acetate Base For Photographic Film

Comments Filter:
  • Sad, but inevitable. (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday June 13, 2013 @03:45PM (#43999737)

    Film has a wonderful look, but the convenience of digital just means this has to happen.

  • Comment removed (Score:4, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Thursday June 13, 2013 @04:01PM (#43999991)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by kevkingofthesea ( 2668309 ) on Thursday June 13, 2013 @04:07PM (#44000095)

    I agree. There's a quality to film that digital has yet to produce.

    As a medium for documentation, digital photography is superior, but for artistic purposes, film is still a strong contender. There's something charming about the darkroom process, as well.

  • by BlackHawk-666 ( 560896 ) on Thursday June 13, 2013 @05:36PM (#44001205)

    And I guarantee you could tell the difference with black and white film. A digital shot will look like the sensor used to take the shot. Unless you use Photoshop to apply 'grain' and tonal changes to the shot it will lack character. That's not to say it will be a bad shot, just that it will be clean, the grain will be digital in nature, and it will have fairly predictable tonal characteristics.

    When using film I have massive amounts of control over how my image is reproduced. Using combinations of negative and developer, push and pull processing or even cross processing I can achieve effects that you can only achieve in Photoshop and only as a reasonable approximate assuming it even has an analogue for the process I've used. I can further vary this via my selection of printing paper and even toners within the development baths.

    Photoshop has only very basic settings for applying a 'film' grain to an image. B&W negatives on varying film stock developed at differing temperatures in varying developer baths can produce a vast array of results you can only dream of.

    e.g. Ilford Delta 400 Pro developed with Rodinal at 20 degrees and printed onto a matte paper stock.

Thus spake the master programmer: "After three days without programming, life becomes meaningless." -- Geoffrey James, "The Tao of Programming"

Working...