Silly little Kodak History question.

From: fotoobscura ^lt;[email protected]>
Date: 07/13/05-09:58:19 AM Z
Message-id: <>


The other day at a Flea Market I picked up a severely outdated box of
unopened Kodachrome color movie film (for 16mm magazine camera) (exp.
3/61). There is a long notice on the side of the box that talks about
defective in manufacture, etc but the part that piqued my interest was
the part that read:

"The magazine is the property of Eastman Kodak Company, and film price
includes a deposit on the magazine."

I suppose what I don't get is how you can put a deposit on a magazine
and why Kodak is trying to retain ownership of a product that may never
even be processed by their labs? (likely not!) This is not a film that
couldn't be processed at almost any photo/camera shop. What is it about
the magazine? What are they afraid of? Bulk loading the magazine
repeatedly? Ripping them off?

This area in ownership seems to have crossed my path many times. e.g.
the idea that you have bought something that you don't actually own.

Its a silly little question but I'd be interested in an answer :)

p.s. Now is good as any to remind anyone with severely outdated C22/E4 and *any* K11/K12/K14 process film that I will likely buy it. Namely interested in non-motion picture film. 120 a big plus (620 too).


Alex Swain
Washington, D.C. - Burlington, VT
Received on Wed Jul 13 09:58:30 2005

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : 08/25/05-05:31:51 PM Z CST