SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the film-is-dead-long-live-film! dept.
According to a recent article on PetaPixel, Kodak Ektachrome film will be brought back into production.
It's not every day that you hear about a classic film line being brought back from the dead, but that's what's being announced today. Kodak Ektachrome film is coming back for film photographers.
The announcement was made today at CES in Las Vegas by Kodak Alaris, the separate company owned by the Kodak Pension Plan in the UK that runs Kodak's old Personalized Imaging division.
The original Kodak Professional Ektachrome color reversal film line was killed off by Kodak back in 2012 after years of sales declines and a drop in usage by photographers. It seems that trend has reversed.
"The reintroduction of one of the most iconic films is supported by the growing popularity of analog photography and a resurgence in shooting film," Kodak Alaris says. "Resurgence in the popularity of analog photography has created demand for new and old film products alike."
[...] The new Ektachrome will be available in 35mm and will hit store shelves in the 4th quarter of 2017.
In addition this press release from Kodak Alaris indicates that it will also be released in the Super 8 Format.
(Score: 2) by bzipitidoo on Saturday January 07 2017, @11:31PM
JPEG is nearly 25 years old, and the world hasn't stood still on image compression. We could really use an update. Unfortunately, the reason we won't is political, not technical. Might step on a bunch of patents. JPEG2000 was pretty much stillborn mainly for that reason. No one much cared whether there actually were any patent problems, just the fear that some could pop up later was enough to chill everyone away.
One of JPEG's biggest flaws is that it is too aggressive with compressing the color. Some years ago I saw a magazine article inviting readers to compare two photos of the same scenery shot, one taken with a digital camera and the other with a film camera, and try to figure out which camera took which photo. For me, it was easy. The picture with the more vivid coloring was done with film. JPEG washes the color out, makes everything grayer and duller. Now if the digital camera had a setting to store the picture uncompressed, and they'd used that, it would've been a challenge.
(Score: 2) by Jerry Smith on Sunday January 08 2017, @11:25AM
Lossless PNG should be an option, I agree. Free and open source.
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to die.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Sunday January 08 2017, @04:22PM
i guess you know about cams' raw output options and were discussing web formats? darktable and rawtherapee have many output options, btw.
Account abandoned.