Film is not something we cover often on CineD, but Kodak has announced a change to their VISION3 Color Negative films worth noting. After more than eight years of development in Rochester, the company is replacing the long used remjet backing with a new Anti Halation Undercoat (AHU). It is the first major structural change to VISION3 in decades.
For context on Kodak’s bigger picture struggles, see our earlier piece: Kodak Faces the Fade Out – Is This the Final Call?
From Remjet to AHU
Remjet has been part of Kodak stocks for nearly a century, protecting against halation, scratches, and static. But it also attracted dirt and required extra water and energy to remove during processing. Kodak’s answer is the new AHU design: a permanent anti static and scratch resistant backside layer plus a protective undercoat beneath the emulsion that washes away during development.
Unprocessed AHU stock looks different, glossy dark brown instead of remjet’s matte black, but once processed, performance is the same. The update will roll out across all VISION3 staples: 500T, 200T, 250D, and 50D, in formats from Super 8 to 65mm.
Kodak VISION3: what filmmakers and labs gain
For filmmakers, the transition is seamless. The look of VISION3 stays the same, but results are cleaner, with better protection against dust and halation. Labs meanwhile save water and energy, since remjet removal is no longer part of the bath sequence.
Film vs digital
Digital keeps climbing with new sensors and codecs, while Kodak’s update is about refining film for today’s workflows. Performance and sensitometry are unchanged, AHU and remjet stocks can be mixed, and the new anti static layer should lead to cleaner scans.
The effort might seem like overkill. David Lynch once called film “a dinosaur” and suggested that digital was easier and superior. But often that very complexity is what delivers a look people still chase. If you want to see what is being made on film today, Kodak keeps a list here: Shot on Film.
For more on how film compares with digital right now, check out Film vs Digital in 2025.
Bottom line
Kodak has simplified their film structure, cut down on lab complexity, and kept the VISION3 look intact. It is a small but meaningful update, proof that film is still evolving even as digital dominates most of the conversation.
Do you think movies look better when they are shot on film stock, or do you prefer the digital look? Leave your thoughts in the comments below.