The film isn’t something we often cover, but Kodak has announced that their changes to Vision three-color negative films are worthy of attention. After more than eight years of development in Rochester, the company has replaced its long-used Remjet backing with a new Halation Undercoat (AHU). This is Vision3’s first major structural change in the first decades.
See previous works for the context of Kodak’s larger pictorial struggle. Kodak faces fade-out. Is this the final call?
From Remuet to Ahu
Remjet has been part of Kodak’s stock for almost a century, protecting it from halation, scratches and static. However, it also required extra water and energy to attract and remove dirt during treatment. Kodak’s answer is the new AHU design. It is a permanent anti-static and scratch-resistant back layer and a protective undercoat underneath the emulsion that is washed away during development.
The raw AHU stock looks different in shiny dark brown rather than Remjet’s matte black, but once processed, the performance is the same. This update will be deployed on all Vision3 staples (500t, 200t, 250d, and 50d) in Super 8-65mm format.
Kodak Vision 3: What Filmmakers and Labs Get?
For filmmakers, the transition is seamless. Vision3 remains the same appearance, but the results are cleaner and have improved protection against dust and half. Meanwhile, labs save water and energy. Because the removal of Remjets is no longer part of the bus sequence.
Film vs. digital
Digital continues to climb with new sensors and codecs, but Kodak’s updates are about film refinement for today’s workflow. Performance and sensitivity measurements have not been changed, AHU and Remjet stocks can be mixed, and the new anti-static layer should clean the scans.
Efforts may seem like an overkill. David Lynch once called the film “Dinosaurs,” suggesting that digital is easier and better. But in many cases, its incredibly complexity provides the look that people still chase. If you want to see what’s being made in today’s film, Kodak keeps the list here: Filmed in the film.
For more information on how Film compares to digital now, check out Film vs Digital in 2025.
Conclusion
Kodak simplified the film structure, reduced the complexity of the lab, and kept Vision3 visible as is. It’s a small but meaningful update, proof that even though digital controls most of the dialogue, the film is still evolving.
Do you think the film looks good when it’s filmed in film stock or do you think it prefers a digital look? Leave your thoughts in the comments below.
