The Last Roll Of Kodachrome: Memories Of Our Beautiful World
Richard and Rachel Gray photographed at home, on Kodachrome in 1986.
Kodachrome was a popular, high quality slide film manufactured by Kodak. I’ve worked in the photography industry for over forty years, eight of them at Kodak. Here's my opinion of Kodachrome film and it’s amazing legacy in the history of photography.
The last roll of Kodachrome, Kodak's most iconic film, was announced in 2009. The first version of Kodachrome was released in 1935 and the last production of its final incarnation occurred in 2010. Despite low sales the discontinuance of Kodachrome was not well received by the photography community.
Famous Photos Made On Kodachrome
Much of the history of the 20th Century was recorded on film. Here’s some of the most memorable images recorded on Kodachrome.
Hindenburg's fireball explosion in 1936.
Edmund Hillary’s successful Mount Everest expedition in 1953.
President Kennedy's assassination, recorded by amateur photographer Abraham Zapruder with Kodachrome 8mm (standard 8 as opposed to super 8) movie film.
The Afghan Girl, considered to be the most iconic National Geographic front cover image in the magazine’s history.
Kodachrome and Photographer Steve McCurry
The very last roll of Kodachrome manufactured was given to renowned National Geographic photojournalist Steve McCurry.
Here's an excellent short film from National Geographic that illustrates McCurry's approach to making the images on that precious, last roll of Kodachrome.
McCurry is a legendary National Geographic photojournalist who's photographs record and preserve fleeting moments that underpin the more poetic nature of life.
Most famous for his December 1984 iconic image of Sharbat Gula, commonly referred to as The Afghan Girl, the then 12 year old Pashtun orphan McCurry photographed in the Nasir Bagh refugee camp near Peshawar, Pakistan.
McCurry created the image with Kodachrome 64 film on a Nikon FM2 35mm camera with a Nikkor 105mm f/2.5 lens.
The Nikon FM2 was a classic 35mm camera. While not has solid or heavy as earlier models favored by photojournalists (such as the Nikon F, F2 and F3), the quality and relatively lightweight nature of this camera proved very popular with photographers all around the world.
I had a Nikon FE2 camera at the time. It served me well, but I would have preferred the higher specifications and improved ergonomics associated with the FM2 model.
Likewise the Nikon 105 mm lens McCurry employed to create his renown image of Sharbat Gula is a classic focal length considered ideal for head and shoulder and half length portrait photography. The lens offered a range of advantages, including the following:
Draws the average face in a flattering manner. Specifically this focal length shortens the nose and thins the face in a photo.
Provides a comfortable camera to subject working distance.
Produces a very shallow depth of field when used at or near the len’s maximum aperture of f/2.5.
If you’d like to see more portrait photos created in this way take a look at my post And What Is Wisdom Father?
McCurry described Kodachrome as his "mainstay film", using it for 30 years and having "about 800,000 Kodachrome transparencies in my archive".
McCurry first traveled to India in 1974 and his photos, on the very last roll of Kodachrome film, included images from India, as well as New York and the town of Parsons, Kansas, where the film was eventually processed.
Textures at Tidal River in Wilsons Promontory National Park, Australia.
What Made Kodachrome Special
Normally color films have dyes incorporated directly into their emulsion. Kodachrome film, and the process designed to develop images recorded onto it, was different.
In simple terms Kodachrome contained three black and white emulsions, each sensitive to a primary color, coated onto a single film base. These emulsions are described as follows:
Red sensitive emulsion
Green sensitive emulsion
Blue sensitive emulsion
The actual color dyes were added to the film during the development process.
Now that was revolutionary.
It must have been amazing to have seen huge vats of chemicals in Kodak laboratories, three of which were particularly pure and vivid in color.
Cyan dye for the film’s Red sensitive layer
Magenta dye for the film’s Green sensitive layer
Yellow dye for the film’s Blue sensitive layer
Why Photographers Loved Kodachrome Film
Kodachrome had long been favored by National Geographic as the film of choice for their pool of photographers.
Kodachrome’s key attributes, which made it a staple of many amateur and professional photographers alike, are described as follows:
Longevity (i.e., long term keeping), particularly when stored in the dark under archival conditions.
Rich color reproduction
Fine grain
High sharpness
However, the glory days of Kodachrome started to fade, for professional and amateur photographers alike, with the arrival of other high quality films which offered faster processing turnaround.
Significant advancements associated with image quality, long term storage and an explosion in the popularity of non-Kodak photo processing labs saw Kodachrome fall from grace.
In time Kodachrome was replaced as the film of choice by other transparency (i.e., slide) films, but also by color negative/print film.
The advent of in-store, one-hour photo processing at camera stores and pharmacies further quicken the demise of slide films, particularly Kodachrome.
The glory days of this legendary film and, with it, grandpa's slideshow were well and truly over.
Kodachrome motion blur of a girl swinging on a Tarzan rope.
My Relationship To Kodachrome
The story of the last roll of Kodachrome is a great story for me to have followed.
As an ex-Kodak employee (January 1990-December 1997) and long-time user of Kodak products I felt a connection with the film.
I started my photography career in 1979 and within a few years gravitated towards weddings and portraits, where the majority of work in my small country town was concentrated.
As a result I worked almost entirely with color negative film. That was the easiest way by which I could supply the range of prints required by my customers for their wedding albums and framed portraits.
My very first full-time job was in a busy camera store and, even then, Kodachrome sales were few and far between.
Despite working in a very busy photo store I can remember a pack (i.e., brick) of 20 rolls of 35 mm Kodachrome 25 film going out of date on the shelf.
Actually I probably only used Kodachrome film a couple of times in my life. I didn't really use much transparency film until 1986, when I enrolled in an undergraduate program in photography.
During the first semester we had to use Agfachrome 100. It was an affordable film, but lacked the vivid color reproduction that most enthusiast level photographers preferred.
In subsequent courses I dabbled with a variety of Kodak Ektachrome films for portfolios and assignments.
However, most of my work, in camera and in the darkroom, was with Kodak T-Max 100 Professional black-and-white film and a range of color negative films, such as Kodak Portra 160VC, from the Kodak Professional range.
After my time at Kodak I returned to the very first college at which I studied, this time as a tutor.
It seemed right that, if I was going to teach color transparency photography, that I dedicate myself to gaining a degree of expertise with the medium in question.
I undertook to produce my own range of portfolios and assignments, in much the same way that students I taught were required to.
I've always believed that the best tutors are down there, in the trenches, with those for whom they are responsible.
My deadlines would be the same as those of my students. I didn't make a big thing about it and didn't share the images I produced, except in the form of very handy and relevant teaching resources.
It just seemed like the right thing to do. After all you can’t really understand someone else’s difficulties and concerns until you experience them for yourself.
Over time I produced a fairly significant amount of 35mm transparencies, particularly on the following emulsions:
Kodak Ektachrome Professional 100VS
Kodak Ektachrome Elite Extra Color 100 film
For my medium format work, whether portrait or landscape based, I preferred color negative stock.
That’s largely because I printed those images myself and I far preferred printing color negs compared to color transparencies.
I guess I have almost thirty x 3 ring binders full of images from that period, many of them travel based, and many of them on 35 mm Kodak Ektachrome film.
It's a long term project to have many of those film based images scanned and then published in blog posts on this site. I guarantee the quality of the scans will be much higher than what you see in the images reproduced in this post.
Interestingly, somewhere along the way, my absolute loyalty to the Kodak brand disappeared. It came about during a time when I made a lot of panoramic images with Hasselblad X-PAN and X-PAN II cameras.
To my mind Fuji Velvia 100F was, by far, the best transparency film for that sort of work. After using it I knew there was no going back to old yellow (i.e., Kodak).
My days with Kodak Ektachrome transparency film, at least for landscape photography, were gone.
X-PAN panoramic image on Fuji Velvia 100F transparency film.
brand Loyalty Is a Funny Thing
During my time at Kodak, and for a few years afterwards, I used to feature often as a guest speaker and judge at camera clubs.
Without fail the first question I'd receive was "is it true that Kodak is about to discontinue Kodachrome?"
I would reply that sales had been dropping for many years and that, as Kodachrome had come to represent only one or two percent of film sales (which excluded the film’s then dominance in the Motion Picture marketplace), "it would likely die with its users".
They got the message, though they didn’t like it. They were what remained of the Kodachrome's once huge user base and, once they moved onto that great slideshow in the sky, the demand for the film would also die.
I would then ask how many of them still used Kodachrome regularly. Often none would raise their hand.
"So, why the concern?" I would ask.
"Because you're Kodak" they would reply.
This speaks to the pressure Kodak, the behemoth of the time, was under from the general public. And I refer here to a widely held perception across the marketplace, from a wide gamut of photographers, many of whom no longer used Kodak products.
When asked to judge camera club photo competitions, I was often amused at the age of the slides submitted.
The rounded edges of the slide mounts, as much as the subject matter, suggested the images had been created twenty to thirty years earlier.
Now clearly camera clubs did and still do contain very active members. But not all of them! Some are more a venue to socialize, which is fine. In fact it's important.
But please, let's just keep things in perspective. Why would folks get so caught up in a product that you and hardly anyone else still use?
An emotional bond to a product is wonderful, but that can prove taxing on a company that continued to produce it decades after it began to decline in popularity.
Despite this fact, the very notion that the possible discontinuous of Kodachrome caused such outrage was, to my mind, problematic and one of the signals that the continuation of Kodak, as a major force in the photography industry, was under threat.
It’s hard enough for an old, legacy company to keep ahead of a changing marketplace. But when your customers are even less adaptive and you’re unable to diminish the fears they hold for the future and how it will affect their only photography practice, change occurs too slowly and too late.
Kodak: It’s Not Easy Being Yellow
Prior to my product management roll at Kodak I worked in the Kodak Information Centre (KIC) which contained the Kodak Photo Information Department and Kodak Pro Passport, supporting both our Consumer and Professional Imaging Divisions.
In fact I think it's correct to say that the budget for our small group was around AUD $1,000,000 per year. A substantial amount of money at the time (mid 1990’s), particularly given that we were a technically orientated support group that didn't directly generate income.
It's amazing how many calls and letters were received from people demanding assistance.
While we were very glad to help, it needs to be said that a percentage of those inquiries came from folks who, strictly speaking, weren't even our customers.
They were using, for example, Fuji film and Agfa paper but, nevertheless, came to us for assistance.
When I asked why they would always answer, "Because you're Kodak".
This expectation for service was bizarre, given the fact that these callers were not even using Kodak products.
Yet it’s a testament to the respect with which the Kodak brand was held and a realization that, perhaps, we were no longer producing the products that people wanted.
There is a cost associated with the provision of customer service and, in this part of the world (Australia), Fuji and Agfa weren't required to play the game, at least not in the same way as old yellow.
Part of our roll in KIC was to produce a range of technical information pamphlets to support our broad range of products. I always made sure the ones I produced were written with the user in mind.
Rather than loading up on the product’s features and benefits, that marketers so loved, the publications I wrote explained how to use the products to achieve the best possible results.
I was, after all, a photographer and long time user of Kodak products. Perhaps where we really lost the war, before the days of digital, was our inability to properly market many of our products.
Becoming so big Kodak’s customer focus, outside of major TV advertising campaigns, shifted to retailers and film processing laboratories. They held direct accounts with Kodak so, naturally, they were referred to as customers.
That’s fair enough, but I feel that, somewhere along the way, much of the company forgot how to communicate directly with the end user.
Kodak Gold print film and Kodak Express laboratories were a major success, but so many of our other products and services remained largely unknown to emerging photographers.
Yet we continued to manufacture and warehouse them. And our professional film and paper products were stored, at significant cost, in a huge refrigerated warehouse.
Australia's Great Ocean Road explored in a panoramic image made on film.
Kodak's Loyalty to Its Customers
Yet Kodachrome hung on, not so much due to popularity, which remained largely with a mostly ageing and declining base of camera club members, but due to Kodak's loyalty to its history, its culture and its ever shrinking customer base.
To survive a company needs to invest in new technologies and products that better serve the needs of its customers. At the same time it’s necessary to discontinue products and services that are no longer profitable.
That’s what Apple did after Steve Jobs returned to run the company.
As a former Product Manager at Kodak (Australasia) Pty Ltd I have a fairly unique understanding of this situation and the push/pull tensions that come about at times of significant technological change.
In fact duality is a major theme in my own photography. Take this panoramic image I created along Australia's Great Ocean Road. It explores notions of solidity and fluidity; rock and water; warm and cool and, needless to say, the passing of time.
Indeed Kodak Australia was still selling, albeit in minuscule quantities, 127 and 620 roll film up to 75 years after the last box cameras, for which the film was produced, were discontinued.
Photographers used to love beating up on Kodak, but you'd be hard pressed to find a more loyal company.
Think about it! Tried buying tapes or getting customer service for that old Beta video machine lately?
Despite the debacle Kodak made of the patent infringement brought on it by Polaroid, Kodak provided customers with new cameras or film, in replacement for their old Kodak Instant Picture cameras, such as the Kodak Handle and Colorburst, at no charge.
And they did so for well over a decade after the case had been decided and settled.
What’s more Kodak didn’t discriminate, passing these benefits onto anyone who approached us, including folks who were given or picked up old Kodak Instant Picture cameras in so-called Op (i.e., Opportunity) shops.
Memories Of Kodachrome: I Remain a Romantic
No doubt my time at Kodak, as much as the rest of my career in photography, has impacted my opinion of the Kodak brand, and its legacy.
While sentimental over the demise of Kodachrome I remain a realist.
I was really happy to be able to purchase a few special tee shirts that commemorated the product and the last roll exposed by legendary photographer Steve McCurry.
In fact I even met Steve at a book signing in Sydney.
That last roll of Kodachrome film was processed by Dwayne's Photo in Parsons, Kansas on December 30, 2010.
The text on the tee shirt reads as follows:
“The best slide and movie film in history is now officially retired.
Kodachrome
1935-2010
Dwayne’s Photo
December 30, 2010”
“Kodachrome
Paul sang about it.
A state park was named after it.
National Geographic shot their most famous photos on it.
And we developed the last roll.
Dwayne’s Photo
We made history December 30, 2010.”
Kodachrome is Dead! Long Live Digital Photography!
I’ve very much enjoyed writing this post and, after all these years working exclusively with digital cameras and post processing software like Adobe Lightroom and Photoshop, I still feel nostalgic about my days at Kodak and the many years I spent as an avid user of Kodak products.
However, while it’s fun to look back on bygone days, it’s important to remember that we live in a wonderful age with incredible improvements in photography coming our way each and every year.
This really is the Golden Age of photography. And I don’t doubt that, in years to come, many of us will look back with great fondness on the products and processes we employ today to make and share our photos with an ever wider audience.
Kodachrome was an incredible product that helped bring photography to the masses. It’s color fidelity, sharpness and longevity were legendary. But its time has no passed.
Let’s celebrate the long history and significant contribution to photography made by Kodachrome film, but not at the expense of embracing the tremendous opportunities digital photography offers us today.
