Kodak used their nostalgic, trusted, and much loved name Kodachrome to promote their new periodical.
In kind of the same way that I used the name to promote this video.
Hi, I'm Azriel Knight and today I'm going hive you my first impressions on Kodachrome Magazine.
When I first heard that Kodak was putting out a magazine, I absolutely wanted to get my hands on one, but that proved to an incredible challenge, and more on that later.
For this review I bought the first two issues and made sure to go through each one.
Front to back to ensure I got a complete impression of what Kodak is trying to accomplish here.
I'm gonna give you my impressions on each issue on it's own and any improvements made from the first to the second issue.
I'll look at it's content, aesthetic, and availability.
They used a heavy cardstock for the cover of the first issue and a thick smooth paper for the contents.
I get what they're trying to do here but it won't lay flat, and I've been reluctant to crease it even they've made allowances for it.
The issue starts off with editors letter saying, "Grab a camera. Put on a record and go out and shoot something."
That doesn't make any sense.
Why would I put on a record and leave the house?
Now if you said, put on a cassette.
The magazine celebrates musicians, actors, artists, photographers, and videographers that choose analog over digital.
As you read you may notice a pattern though.
Just about every article has that same voice saying: hey, just in case you didn't know films not dead.
Hey, guess what? Film is not dead.
By the way, films not dead. Just so you know.
In total there are 16 pages over several articles talking about the resurgance of analog.
I get it Kodak. I bought your print magazine about film. Now let's talk about film instead about talking about talking about film.
The issue feels padded and little all over the place.
The only real spread of anyhting close to fine art photography was a 10-page feature on their Ektraphone.
I can't really say I have any takeaways from their premier issue. It was a lot of fluff.
I'm pretty sure I wasn't the only person with these problems though, because I noticed an improvement as soon as I picked up the second issue.
The quality or at least the choice in paper was better. A slightly thinner stock for the cover so it peeled back easier.
Also it has this really nice and very subtle texture to it. The cover was way more enticing with an actual photo on there.
Diving into it I found a couple of great articles. One on nitrate film and another on the moon landing,
Finally by issue 2 page 50ish I see some fine art photography shot on film.
The second issue is much more polished and I'm curious to see how they carry on from here.
Now that I've had a thorough look at each issue here's what I think.
The magazines are beautiful and though the stock they used is a little thick for my taste it did grow on me.
I could identify their magazine in a pile with my eyes closed. Which has a lot of marketing value.
A magazine about everything analog should give a unique tactile experience. So it makes total sense.
The content itself it can be a little bit dry at times. Especially since so much of it just relates back to Kodak.
It's hard to feel enthusiasm in the writing when so much of it is just them talking about themselves.
It kind of makes it seem like a thick promotional flyer more than a magazine.
Still there's some solid content to be had. It's well written and well presented.
Now let's talk about my biggest gripe, it's availability.
The first issue, it was only available in the US for a while. And now that second issue is out it's available in the US, the UK, and Germany but not Canada.
Why not Canada? Surely it's gotta be cheaper to ship it to Canada than to Germany.
I had to have an American friend buy it then ship it to me just so I could get a copy. And that doesn't come cheap when the magazines are already 20 US dollars.
I just don't understand why you wouldn't let us decide if we want to pay for the extra shipping or not.
Come on Kodak! Just ship it to anybody who wants it.
Kodak continues to disappoint me with stuff like this and I find myself defending them less and less these days.
The other thing that really annoys me is Kodak's habit of reusing old names.
Just off the top of my head: box cameras, folding cameras, and bakelite cameras over decades have used the brownie name.
More recently the Ektraphone. Like, why? Why do that? Why not innovate something new?
Here we are again with, "Kodachrome's back", but in magazine format.
Seriously. What's next Kodak? Tri-X condoms? A Portra Potty?
Stuff like this makes me wonder if Kodak will actually bring back Ektachrome, or if they're just gonna slap the name on any old roll of film.
I mean if you're a total Kodak fanboy you're gonna get this magazine, whatever. Also if they ship it to you.
But don't expect a ton of photography in there. Though I will admit I did see a fair amount on videography.
But they've also got stuff on painting, on children's books. All sorts of stuff that more relates to Kodak than the idea of analog.
So if you can get past all that and the $20 price tag, this might be a good magazine for you.
That's all for now. I hope you enjoyed this episode. If you did, please remember to like, share, and subscribe. And until next time, Stay Classic.
Stuff like this makes me wonder if Kodak is really gonna bring back Ektachrome, or if they're just gonna...slap a label on.
Stuff like this makes me wonder if Kodak is actually gonna bring back Koda...shi
Stuff like this makes me wonder if Koda, Kodolk...
Stuff likes this make me wo... Stuff like this make me wonder if Kodak will actually bring...FU!
Stuff likes this makes wonder if Kodak will actually bing...bing brack.
Stuff likes this makes wonder if Kodak will actually bring back Ektachrome, or if they're just gonna slap the name on any old roll of film.
Transcript By Andrew Fontana