Re: [Leica] Cohn comments and Kodachome Blues

[chucko@siteconnect.com (Chuck Albertson)]

Sal,

If you had a part in Kodak's intro of the K-Lab, thanks. As you say, a
number of labs (The New Lab in San Francisco comes to mind) who were
committed to Kodachrome sunk a lot of money into their K-14 lines in the
1980's and got burned as a result. Aside from the initial startup costs, you
have to keep an analytical chemist on the payroll just to monitor the K-14
chemistry, and the K-Lab processor reduces a lot of those costs. And I have
not noticed any degradation in the quality of processing. I just hope its
introduction wasn't too little, too late. A good color lab could run a K-Lab
processor, but they would only make the investment if there was sufficient
film coming in the door.

Chuck Albertson
Seattle, Wash.

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "Sal DiMarco,Jr." <sdmp007@pressroom.com>
To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us>
Sent: Monday, February 07, 2000 10:08 AM
Subject: [Leica] Cohn comments and Kodachome Blues


>         The Kodachrome Blues... As someone who had a small part in
> convincing The Great Yellow Father (Kodak) to build a new Kodachrome
> Processor (K-Lab) and been on the edges of its construction, I think I can
> make a couple of useful comments about my favorite film, Kodachrome.
>         The biggest drawbacks to Kodachrome are the processing turn around
> time and the very high quality of the E6 films available today.
>         Most people do not want to wait several days for their pictures.
In
> most big cities, you can get E6 done with a normal turn around time of
four
> hours. In NYC make that two hours.
>         People have lost confidence in Kodachrome, especially in the
> professional area. There are many horror stories of  bad or poor
Kodachrome
> processing. By the time Kodak solved the problems it was to late in the
eyes
> of many. Lab owners are reluctant to invest in Kodachrome machines. Almost
> everyone who did went toes-up. The early machines were one million dollars
> each.
>         The quality of the E6 films doesn't help either. They are getting
> better and better and they are approaching Kodachrome in the previously
> untouchable Kodachrome area, permanence.
>         The new K-Lab solves all the problems of the past. It can work
with
> low volume or high. It does NOT  require a full time chemist. Dry to dry
> time is 45 minutes. There is an eight stop variability  in processing. I
can
> go on and on.
>         Right now, it is a marketing problem for Kodak. Over dinner last
> week, a couple of  Kodachome Kodakers and I talked about the problem. We
> concluded it would cost Kodak between 50 and 100 Million dollars to
> re-launch Kodachrome with no guarantee of success. This included R&D for a
> new family of Kodachrome films. The last Kodachrome alteration in
Kodachrome
> was an improved K-200 to match the color balance of KPR-64 and tighten the
> grain structure around 1988.  How would you like to make a 100 million
> dollar roll of the dice? That is exactly what Dan Carp, the new CEO has to
> decide.
>         If you want to save Koachrome, I suggest going to their web site
and
> show them, there is a real interest in Kodachrome. There are people in
> Rochester ready will and able to help.
>
> Regards,
> Sal DiMarco, Jr.
>
>