19 months later...

Kotobukicat · Nov 2, 2025

Hi,

It has been 19 months since my last post. At that time, I was contemplating my old Minolta wind up Auto 800 126 camera. It was my second camera that I received for Christmas when I was ten. (My first camera was an Argus seventy five with a flash gun.) I asked about what the readers thought about the possibility of 126 film being revived.

Today, 19 months later, the Film Photography Project now has raw film properly perforated for 126 cameras. I believe that the FPP film is properly pre-exposed with frame borders and frame numbers. There is a reusable cartridge available. And there is an Italian film company that is at least open to the idea of making 126 film again. Whether they do or not is anyone's guess. We can only hope.

When I last posted, I had just obtained a Yashica 44. I love that square format. Just like 126. I have since found a Ansco Viking 6.3 that shoots 120, A Konica C35 that shoots 35mm, and a Minolta waterproof camera that is currently getting new seals (110). So I have two 110 cameras that work great (a Minolta 110 Zoom SLR and a Minolta Auto Pak 450E.) I have shot about twenty rolls of 110 total. I love them both. I cannot wait to try the Weathermatic 110.

So in the course of 19 months, I went from having only 35 mm in my film freezer to having 35 mm, 110, 120 and 127. I still think that film is coming back. Sure, I use my canon DSLR and maybe keep an image or two. As long as the computer does not crap out. But I keep adding shots to my series of photo albums that I started around 10 or so. I had my Minolta Autopak 800 CLAed, and cannot wait to use it. I even found some NOS Sylvania flash cubes.

So what is the current thoughts on the future of 126? Apparently, the afore mentioned Italian film company still has the machinery to produce 126 film cartridges, including
the dies for the cartridges. I hope that they will produce them again. I love old cameras and film technologies. And I want to shoot my old autopak 800 with commercial 126 carts just like I did when I was a little boy decades ago. I know it is just a nostalgia thing. But that is OK. Dwayne's processes my film, and I still like to add images to my collection of photo albums. I keep every negative that I shoot, and have those from when I was a kid, all safely stashed away in archival sleeves. I have also heard from an insider in the film photographic industry (I of course cannot vet this as being true) that there is an east European company making noises about a "Kodachrome analog", whatever that means. Now that would be awesome! I wont hold my breath though... that stuff was infinitely complex and difficult to make, let alone process. But it would be cool though, no?

Sorry for the rambling post. Digital has its place. I even use it occasionally. But I long for the days of well stocked camera stores, print magazines (shutterbug and photographic), a slower pace of life without instant everything of questionable value, and Aerochrome

Best,

Joe

MartinCrabtree · Nov 2, 2025

While digital (I too shoot it sometimes) film feels more involved to me. Unfortunately Kodachrome is dead...kaput. And likely to remain so.

cgw · Nov 2, 2025

Fine but reality rules. Fabulism gets you nowhere. The FPP scratches the itch you and a sufficient number of others have by supplying orphan film formats. Whether 35mm or 120, the film ecosystems--film materials, chemistry+paper, pro labs, repair techs--have collapsed in many areas. Film prices are the strongest evidence that the "film revival" remains a mirage. I seriously doubt the Kodachrome fantasy. Shoot what you can while you can.

webestang64 · Nov 3, 2025

Funny, I found a "Minolta 110 Zoom SLR Mark II" in the trash at work. Works great but I doubt I'll shoot film through it as I have a mint Pentax 110 SLR for 110 film.

I do have maybe around 20 Kodak 126 104's but I also have this beauty for 126.
Yep, found in trash at work. I love my job.

Kotobukicat · Nov 3, 2025

Well, I may or may not be a fabulist, but I can observe business trends. I realize that if I and every other film photographer went together as a group to certain giant corporations (such as one of the largest located in Rochester once known to be the leader in all photographic technology as well as for making horrible business decisions) and asked for a certain film to be revived, they would slam the door in our faces. I am not stupid. That said, I also know that the era of mindless genuflection in front of the altar of the digital deity are over for many, both consumer and provider. And it is just not old cats like myself that when I pay money for a product, (such as a magazine subscription), I fully expect a something that I can hold in my hands that is mine, and will not disappear at the whim of hackers, Amazon, an X-4 sun CME or a crashed computer/device. It is a lot of folks of all ages and strata that are moving somewhat away from the digital sludge of the internet. BUT, it is also not because of these people of which I am one, that this shift is occurring. Here is the real mover of this trend: Madison Avenue. Yes, that bastion of modern consumerism, the advertisement agencies and the companies that pay them collectively billions of dollars a year to pitch their goods/services. Why is that? Easy, it is because the success of digital media itself at making things instantaneous and convenient. contrary to popular opinion, I am not a Luddite. I use technology to a degree, though nowhere the level that kids do today. However, rather than sitting down to watch a TV program when it airs, I record it on a DVR. Then at some later time, I sit and watch it, remote in hand. Then, when the ads come on, I simply fast forward through them. I wont be sold when I am relaxing. Same on the internet. IF some website insists on sending me pop ups, spam, etc, I will not visit. I simply ignore the advertisements and will not even waste my time viewing them. However, when I was a young man, I would buy a magazine off the stand or in the case of photography magazines, subscribe to them. The advertisements therein were well produced, interesting and relevant to the subject matter of the magazine, The grammar was flawless and not full of typos like most web advertisements are today. I read the ads with as much interest as I did the articles. I am not the only one who felt like this. In fact, a whole bunch of folks feel the same way. I have seen some of the stats on this topic. I can assure anyone that this phenom has not been lost on the ad agencies nor their clients. And magazines, make the majority of their revenue on advertisements. The subscription revenues mainly went to mailing costs, and I doubt that the subscription fees completely covered shipping.

Digital has its place. And there are some excellent digital photographers, content creators, and products. It is perfect for instant results. If I am not mistaken, all modern professional movie cameras have a digital output so that the days filming can be reviewed before the emulsion is dry from the processing. I do not hate digital. I just do not really enjoy it like I do taking my time with each film exposure. Digital is really quite vulnerable. Our digital infrastructure is very vulnerable. I keep nothing of value in the digital domain. I do not want to spend the thousands and thousands of dollars on a printer that can make a decent photo from the digital. Same for a good negative scanner. I do not like to use computers that much. Film requires discipline... I know that I have 24 or 36 chances per roll to get the "money shot". I take a slower approach to film photography. All that said, I am not denigrating anyone's gig. If someone likes digital, go for it and make the best images that you can. I love my Canon Rebel Xti. But not as much as I like my mid sixties Mamiya Sekors, Vivitar screw-mount glass, or my mid seventies Canon A1.

It is my profound hope that Rochester will make some deals with other manufactures to license some of their old products.... Pan X, Plus X, Aerochrome (Oh please God). We can only hope I guess.

Peace.

Joe out.

webestang64 said:
Funny, I found a "Minolta 110 Zoom SLR Mark II" in the trash at work. Works great but I doubt I'll shoot film through it as I have a mint Pentax 110 SLR for 110 film.

I do have maybe around 20 Kodak 126 104's but I also have this beauty for 126.
Yep, found in trash at work. I love my job.

That is Beautiful! Where do you work? I'm retired, but I think that I would be tempted to volunteer to take out the trash where you work!

webestang64 · Nov 4, 2025

Kotobukicat said:
Where do you work?

I work in the lab at Schiller's Camera.... Welcome to Schiller's!
Last camera store left here in St. Lou.

Kotobukicat · Nov 4, 2025

I really like my Konica C-35. I bet that Rollei is a far better camera than my C-35! If only there were proper mercury batteries still available... and flash bulbs, Cibachrome, etc. and etc. (My old Jobo machine is longing to process Ciba again...)

BTW, I live in West Missouri About ten miles from the Kansas border and 50 miles north of Kansas City. There is a Fujifilm store near me, but I buy most of my photographic supplies from B&H, the FPP, Lomography and the like. I will check out your website tonight.

Best,

Joe

webestang64 · Nov 4, 2025

I miss Ciba as well. Of course just like Kodachrome Ciba is dead, forever. I had a Jobo for a few years to process BW for Schiller's but it kept dying and replacement parts are getting hard to find. I use steel tanks and reels now including a tank that holds 14 rolls of 35mm. Which is great as I develop around 150-200 rolls of BW a month. My forearms sure get a work out. LOL

Kotobukicat · Nov 4, 2025

Another truly amazing photographic process was dye transfer printing. Unlike most other aspects of darkroom "wet" processes which require very careful attention to times and temperature, dye transfer took true artistic talent. A well made dye transfer print was a glorious work of art. Better than Ciba in my opinion. But it took real talent to pull those things off. I used to make wonderful Cibas. I did not even consider trying dye transfer, knowing that my artistic abilities end with stick figure drawings of cats and people. The chemicals are no longer made. There was some noise made a few years ago that the chinese were going to make the dyes again, but of course that never materialized. I think that Ciba and Kodachrome have a better chance of coming back that the dye transfer process. Its a shame, really.

Joe

cgw · Nov 4, 2025

Demand rules. Kodak filed for bankruptcy in 1/2012. Going concern alarms recently. When was the last time you saw film production figures? It's a residual market now--at best, sadly.

Kotobukicat · Nov 4, 2025

What about artists' paint? I am sure that is somewhat of a niche market. They are not cheap. Yeah, there are student grade paints available that are not too terrible expensive... Sort of like Arista 100 EDU. But the good stuff, it is brutally expensive. Why should the companies who make artists' paints still make them? I mean, all you need is a computer and the proper software, and voila! Instant art. And you do not even need to let the paint dry. No gesso, no varnish, no terps, just instant art. As I said before, I am not an artist who can draw or paint. I can compose a half decent photograph when I really set my mind to it, but no Ansel Adams am I. I am sure that the companies that make artists colors will not all go out of business. Every generation, there are a few painters that will become masters. Every couple of centuries, there will be the next Dali, Picasso or Caravaggio. (BTW, there is one of the few Caravaggios on public display in the U.S. in Kansas City's very own Nelson Gallery. When it is not on tour I might add. Absolutely glorious work of art. Young Saint John the Baptist in the desert. I recommend everyone who can to go see it...) No, Artist paints will never go away. Even the ones that are hand made by grinding the raw ingredients on a traditional grinding setup.

I am well aware of Kodak's abysmal financial position. I have a hunch that they might go bankrupt again. They might even have to liquidate this time God forbid. (I hope not...) This is not because they make film. It is because Kodak never missed and opportunity to make a bad business decision. They actually pioneered digital. They developed (no pun intended) a thermal transfer printer that made excellent prints, and one did not need a second mortgage to buy it. Of course they killed it..

For a company to be successful, they must first make what the customer wants. Then, if it is a public company, must take care of their shareholders in a fiduciary sense. Then everything else. If Kodak cannot compete due to inertia, overwhelming debt, employee dissatisfaction, bad bussines decisions or burdensome regulations, then they will go away. I hope that is not the case. But it is an outcome that I fear may be in the future. I only hope that if they go for a liquidation bankruptcy, that the judge presiding over this would mandate the sale of their film IP to other companies that do take care of their customers needs and shareholders. Sadly, I am almost positive that George Eastman is rolling over in his grave over what has become of his legacy.

Joe

Kotobukicat · Nov 4, 2025

What about artists' paint? I am sure that is somewhat of a niche market. They are not cheap. Yeah, there are student grade paints available that are not too terrible expensive... Sort of like Arista 100 EDU. But the good stuff, it is brutally expensive. Why should the companies who make artists' paints still make them? I mean, all you need is a computer and the proper software, and voila! Instant art. And you do not even need to let the paint dry. No gesso, no varnish, no terps, just instant art. As I said before, I am not an artist who can draw or paint. I can compose a half decent photograph when I really set my mind to it, but no Ansel Adams am I. I am sure that the companies that make artists colors will not all go out of business. Every generation, there are a few painters that will become masters. Every couple of centuries, there will be the next Dali, Picasso or Caravaggio. (BTW, there is one of the few Caravaggios on public display in the U.S. in Kansas City's very own Nelson Gallery. When it is not on tour I might add. Absolutely glorious work of art. Young Saint John the Baptist in the desert. I recommend everyone who can to go see it...) No, Artist paints will never go away. Even the ones that are hand made by grinding the raw ingredients on a traditional grinding setup.

I am well aware of Kodak's abysmal financial position. I have a hunch that they might go bankrupt again. They might even have to liquidate this time This is not because they make film. It is because Kodak never missed and opportunity to make a bad business decision. They actually pioneered digital. They developed (no pun intended) a thermal transfer printer that made excellent prints, and one did not need a second mortgage to buy it. Of course they killed it.

Kotobukicat · Nov 4, 2025

I some how lost the lat paragraph in that post...

I really hope that Kodak does not go bankrupt again. But if they do liquidate, I hope that they at least sell their film IP, both present and past products, to other companies that are able to make film. And I do not even mean Fuji, though they make excellent products. There are smaller European and Asian companies that actually exist to make film. And not as a side line either. I cut my teeth on Plus X and Old School Tri X. I learned my darkroom chops with those films. (I never was able to master Pan X though... no fault of the film, rather my lack of skill.)

My favorite film of all time BTW, was not Kodachrome. No, it was Aerochrome! Talk about a niche market. Yet one of the most iconic Jimi Hendrix album covers was shot with Aerochrome. If it came back, I would fly to where ever I had to to buy several cases and stash in the freezer for future reference.

Joe

MartinCrabtree · Nov 5, 2025

Ciba is in hospice but not dead...yet.

Hardus Nameous · Nov 5, 2025

Kotobukicat said:
If only there were proper mercury batteries still available...

Check out a company called WeinCell; they make replacement batteries. I use the PX625 replacement in my Nikkormat FTN and they work great. If my Google results are right you'd need a PX675 replacement in yours.