'My initial reaction to the news is to hurl as many dark star expletives in the direction of Rochester as I can muster,' says veteran Kodachrome user, pro photographer and BJP contributor Jonathan Eastland.

'What the penny pinchers at Kodak do not seem to appreciate is the thousands of photographers worldwide who make up the less than 1% of Kodachrome users are a special breed with a head full of Kodachrome colour. We see things differently. In the world of colour photography, the Kodachrome palette is unique. There isn't another emulsion remotely like it and no amount of reviewing, trialling other stock or embracing the digital substitute and trying to kid myself I can get close to what Paul Simon sung about, will ever persuade me it can be replaced; never mind its long term storage qualities.'

'The whole point of Kodachrome from the beginning was that Mannes and Godowsky had an idea of how the recorded memories of life could be lifted, given an artificial fillip so viewers might be moved by what they saw on the printed page or on the movie screen. They were creative people, accomplished musicians with an ear for the sweet note. They also knew how difficult it was to capture the drama and grandeur of life in a colour photograph, to record the effect impressed in our mind's eye at the moment of exposure, especially when these events are mostly reduced to a small two-dimensional image. They wanted to make a film stock that simply rocked the viewer's socks when the image was projected. I think those guys were real magicians.

'Younger generations of photographers without the knowledge or experience of using Kodachrome will have no idea what this rant is about. A pity, they have missed so much. New technology brings the notion of greater convenience, and in the minds of many, it must therefore be better. Wrong; different yes, but not better.'