I was a little shocked when I read that Kodak is rebranding two iconic film lines. Portra is being renamed Ektacolor Pro and T-Max is being renamed Ektapan. Portra (in particular) isn’t just a brandname, it’s a look that everyone knows (or at least thinks they know). When you see Portra, you know it’s Portra. Why change the name?
The answer is both simple and complicated. Back in 2012, Eastman Kodak went through bankruptcy, and in order to survive, the company split parts of its business. One result of that was Kodak Alaris (a brand-new company that began in 2013), which took over much of the consumer side of film, including distribution, sales, and branding. Meanwhile, Eastman Kodak retained manufacturing. This meant that the film itself was made by one company named Kodak and sold by another named Kodak. The name printed on the box wan’t entirely controlled by one single Kodak company.
That arrangement worked—until it didn’t. Two separate companies with two interests that are sometimes at odds with each other working together can become tiresome, and I think that’s largely what happened. So recently Eastman Kodak began working to bring more of its film business back under its roof and control; however, one practical problem is that even though they make the film, they don’t necessarily have the rights to use the name that they invented. Some of Kodak’s trademarks are tied up in past agreements. That leaves Eastman Kodak with two options: buy back the rights to use the names, or move on from them. In the case of Portra and T-Max, they have chosen the latter.
Renaming film stocks and recycling old brandnames is not new for Kodak. Ektacolor and Ektapan are actually old names—part of Kodak’s long history—now given new life. Previously, Kodak used the Ektacolor name for color inks and paper. It’s also similar to Ektachrome and Ektar, both iconic film lines within the company. Ektapan was the name of a discontinued B&W film. Kodak has been renaming its film stocks for decades; for example, Kodacolor VR-G later became Gold and Ultramax was previously named Max Versatility.
The problem with this rebranding is that Ektacolor Pro is not nearly as strong as Portra. It’s like Burger King renaming The Whopper to Grilled Meat Burger. It doesn’t have the same ring, not even close. Kodak is going to have a rough transition, but maybe they see it as temporary, and they hope to get the rights to Portra in the near future. The T-Max to Ektapan transition won’t be quite as difficult, but it is certainly a step backwards, as far as branding goes.
The film itself hasn’t changed. Ektacolor Pro 160, 400, and 800 are Portra. Ektapan 100, 400, and P3200 are T-Max. It’s the same emulsions with the same rendering. The box just looks different, as does the name on it. The photographs will look just as you’d expect them to, and from a practical standpoint, that’s all that matters. From a marketing standpoint, this is a tough spot that Eastman Kodak has put themselves in. My guess is that we’re nearing the end of Kodak Alaris, which is probably the power play that Eastman Kodak intends.
For those with Fujifilm X-series and/or GFX cameras, this might not seem important. Who cares, right? I suppose there is a chance that it could cause some confusion for those using Recipes, if (say) someone is looking for an Ektacolor Pro 160 look, but doesn’t realize that it’s called Kodak Portra 160 v2 (as an example). However, the name is secondary to the aesthetic that the Recipe produces. For instance, my Kodak Pro 400 Recipe has a Portra-like look, but it doesn’t have Portra in the name. Whether it’s film or a Fujifilm Recipe, the goal isn’t to chase a label or specific brandname, it’s creating photographs that feel right to you.
Genius’s at work. Why can’t they just leave it alone. They had nothing else to do but to sit around the table and reinvent what already exists. I got a feeling they’re going to get beat up over this.
I think Eastman Kodak would have loved to keep the names if they could. It’s a legal issue, I’m pretty sure.
Is it dumb? Sure.
But I’m going to blame the Alaris side of things (particularly post venture capitalist buyout). Damnation do I hate middlemen who insert themselves into an economic transaction that would work fine without them, and jack up the price so they can get a cut of the action.
Anyhow, Ektapan might be growing on me.
Ektacolor probably never will.
On second thought, I’m tempted by the troll power of Ektacolor. There’s often a lot of gatekeeping and sacred cows in photography, and the goofier new name kind of appeals to me as an antidote to that.
PolarPro just did their “Portra” filter? Let’s see K&F Concept do a combo gold mist and warming filter, and call it Ektacolor.
Or an Ektacolor film sim that isn’t quite the same as a Portra film sim. But not all Portra film sims are the same anyhow; there’s dozens of versions out there.
There are not only a bunch of versions, but each can look different depending on a whole host of factors. Maybe this is a good opportunity for new Recipe??
I have a hunch that Alaris is more of the problem than Eastman Kodak.
I’m finding my response to this interesting. It has a certain guttural, passionistic feel to it. Perhaps it goes back to 2011 when first introducing myself to social media. I was a part to those knock down drag out film verses digital arguments that were intern futile. As a long time passion filled photographer of 42 years, film has an endearing place in my heart like many. We knew all the film stocks their characteristics and knew how and when to use them. I suppose when there’s a change in the atmos with film it conjures up fears of losing film altogether. Thanks to Ritchie and Fuji X weekly we get to celebrate all this in reliving and refining our understanding the characteristics of films and so many of these recipes are really amazing. The digital transition to me was slow, but now a real joy, yet there’s still this organic frame of mind, frame of reference the loading a roll of film in my old Nikon F3, or FM3a. Obviously it changes the approach to the day with camera over the shoulder. I’ve learned not to have a preference but to simply feel appreciative that we have a choice, or choices. Imagine the alternative?
I appreciate your comment. While I wasn’t necessarily making the arguments on social media, I was also one of those passionate film guys who disliked digital. So I totally get it.
Like I’m going to remember that, no problem though imma black and white only guy on film