Autochrome, Kodachrome and home made high speed films

Photo Engineer · Feb 28, 2009

Sal;

Good information but not applicable in "all" cases as you say. In Eastern Europe, where labor is cheaper, the photo people there are getting older as we all are, and are not training replacements either in formal education or through apprenticeships. Here in the US, photo schools never did teach the basics of product design and emulsion making and coating, nor did they try doing some hard experiments, just simple ones.

Japan is about the only country that had a good sound education in photography from the ground up. In fact, Japan no longer sends exchange students to the US to RIT or any other photo school as theirs are so much better.

I think that other demands on our time and the expense are part of the situation as I said in the OP. Nevertheless, someone was building his own coating machine, and someone else promised us a 400 speed film and we see nothing more from them.

PE

accozzaglia · Feb 28, 2009

Of course there are. And the point made with irony was lost on anyone who read into it seriously.

Harry Hollis said:
Plenty of people making daguerreotypes now.
http://www.newdags.com/

Ray Rogers · Feb 28, 2009

doitashimashite said:
French photographer Frédéric Mocellin seems to be well on his way recreating the autochrome technology:

http://www.autochromes.fr/english/def.html

Doitashimashite san,

Link ALIGATOU .

リンクありがとう！

Prest_400 · Feb 28, 2009

Too bad that color film is a complicated and expensive business, specially the long lasting types. Lately I'm getting (obsessed) onto the world of archival proprieties of films, B&W can last and last; Kodachrome is the only long lasting tested Color film, just because it's very similar to B&W. As far I recall, the most stable E6 films may last 100 years without much dye fading. One of my main interests of Kodachrome is the archival quality.
Do you think that there is a way to make a colour emulsion that has good dye stability? Could the dyes of E6 emulsions be changed for pigments, that are more stable?

Ray Rogers · Feb 28, 2009

Martin Reed said:
The starting point of the thread reminded me of of a research project that an institute was kicking off a few years ago... The idea was to gather together unexposed examples of every discontinued silver emulsion film material, with the intention of creating an 'ark' of film technology, which would possibly enable these films to be retro-engineered at a later date. There's no project of theirs currently in hand related to this, so maybe the idea died.

As the institute in question wouldn't cover the shipping cost, I've still got approximately a cubic metre of a hundred or so different film...

So my question, is there any point in hanging onto material like this for posterity?

Can any form of retro-engineering be possible, given sophisticated equipment and skilled technicians?

Hello again* Martin!

Are you sure there is no project currently?
It may be on hold, but my guess is that it continues, and they will funnel their findings at some point down the road.

I think you misunderstood the nature/purpose of the collection/research; there is not nor ever was any intention of "recreating" old stuff... it was a conservation project, and less transparent, it is/was a security project.

But to answer your question,
Can any form of retro-engineering be possible, given sophisticated equipment and skilled technicians?
...the answer is both yes and no.

Analysis usually can only tell you what is there now, not how it got there.

Photography or photographic process characterization is essentially a results oriented endever... if you can duplicate a product's behaviour, you have in effect duplicated the product... for most purposes. The interesting thing about photography is the same end can be achived by several different methods. In this sense, detailed analytical data is unneeded.
It is only when you become stuck and can NOT duplicate a particular behaviour that analytical data becomes potentially very helpful.

On the other hand, in cases of possible fraud, such analytical data is good to have on record somewhere.

About them paying shipping, yes that was a grey area... they would pay only in certain cases depending upon their needs. Donors were asked to cover those costs themselves.

Again, to answer your question about "hanging onto material like this for posterity" the main area where this will be helpful, is in characterizing specific materials for security and conservation.

There still is info on their site, btw.
Also of interest is the new project underway in Rochester...

-----------
*We almost met a few months ago when I poped in unannounced thinking I might see you, my eye being attracted immeadiately to your old equipment display (up, behind sales staff, in the corner to the right of the counter-from custermers POV) ; It was very interesting! I know you have more somewhere, but that was eerie enough to make me want to take a snapshot... so I asked permission and the sales lady did not seem to like that idea at all! It was lunchtime and you were out and I was on my way to the airport. I think she was happy to see me leave.
I think it was just a misunderstanding that came from my being a little bit too "gung ho".

Previous to that I had spoken to you on the phone about your yet to be released Silver Gelatin... You did say keep in touch and now I have!

Ray Rogers

Ray Rogers · Feb 28, 2009

Prest_400 said:
Do you think that there is a way to make a colour emulsion that has good dye stability? Could the dyes of E6 emulsions be changed for pigments, that are more stable?

Do you mean an E-6 process to produce pigment instead of dye?
or a whole new process ?

There are good stablility pigment processes... the problem is to make them into film would be very vey costly, besides, arn't most pigments opaque?
So why film based?

I would REALLY love to see a movie done in tricolor gum!

Ray

PHOTOTONE · Feb 28, 2009

Prest_400 said:
Too bad that color film is a complicated and expensive business, specially the long lasting types. Lately I'm getting (obsessed) onto the world of archival proprieties of films, B&W can last and last; Kodachrome is the only long lasting tested Color film, just because it's very similar to B&W. As far I recall, the most stable E6 films may last 100 years without much dye fading. One of my main interests of Kodachrome is the archival quality.
Do you think that there is a way to make a colour emulsion that has good dye stability? Could the dyes of E6 emulsions be changed for pigments, that are more stable?

Are you really concerned about your color images lasting well past your lifetime? Do you have images that are worth preserving that long?

I can tell you, that in almost 50 years of photography, my slides from the late
1960's to the present are in plenty good shape, good enough to scan and print excellent properly balanced images. These were Ektachrome, Anscochrome and Agfachrome images, not Kodachrome..and they weren't stored in Optimum conditions. (Closet). If you have images of historical value, you can always make b/w separations, if the color content is important. I think modern color transparency film exceeds my archival needs.

nickstreme · Mar 1, 2009

wait... so has anybody done K14 at home yet?

nickandre · Mar 1, 2009

nickstreme said:
wait... so has anybody done K14 at home yet?

Yes. Has it worked? That depends. It is quite possible to get a color image but much more difficult to get a correctly colored image. The results I saw were next to terrible, but we'll see how far I get. If you cough up for proper filters and chemistry, your odds are greatly improved but I have a life and I don't have money.

BTW at this point in time E6 films roughly equal kodachrome films in accelerated tests, but these really are inconclusive. Kodachrome has been tested to work at least 75 years.

Photo Engineer · Mar 1, 2009

E6 products were designed to keep and to survive projection. Kodachrome is known to fade with projection, but some of the dye image regenerates afterwards in a "relaxation" phenomenon. This is not well characterized.

PE

E76 · Mar 1, 2009

Photo Engineer said:
Last but not least, it is difficult to start an apprentice program in today's environment. This is "just not done". We would have to build a whole new social structure to accept it. And, I'm not sure I'm the person to do this or perhaps not the best, but that is beside the point. I do know that a lot of the early work was done by lone individuals.

We need some first growth trees out there making emulsions and doing R&D to keep this art alive.

As an additional note, Kodachrome was indeed processed by dip and dunk.

Now, lets hear from those who are interested in actually doing the work and who have stated so here on APUG. How about it guys, where do you need help? What is bogging you down?

Thanks.

PE

I'm glad you mentioned this, PE. I'm currently a high school student and will be attending RIT this fall. Currently my major is Imaging and Photographic Technology, but I can easily see myself moving into Imaging Science. I choose Imaging and Photo Tech because Imaging Science was heavily oriented toward digital (which is completely understandable) and with the Imaging and Photo Tech program I'll be able to choose "photographic chemistry" as a concentration.

My main problem is determining if I'm doing the right thing, and if I'm in the right program. I realize specializing in analog photography may not be the best career move, but it absolutely fascinates me in every way and, like you said, "we need some first growth trees out there making emulsions and doing R&D to keep this art alive." Don't get me wrong, I want to learn about digital imaging as well, but knowledge concerning analog photography is hard to come by and it's what truly interests me.

Looking at some of the co-ops available, there certainly seems to be some interesting opportunities out there for imaging scientists, but when it comes to analog photography there doesn't seem to be anything. (Maybe if Ilford participated in the co-op program things would be different. )

So, I guess my question is, what, in your opinion, would be the best way to get into the industry/started?

Thanks.

DarkroomExperimente · Mar 2, 2009

I'm one of those that did kodachrome at home...just once...I have always wanted to try it again, but haven't yet

The results weren't great, but since I was trying to do something that people told me wasn't possible, I was happy just to get a recognizable color image.

I found out yesterday that a friend of mine developed kodachrome in art school in the 90's -- but they had access to the right chemistry & a professor who knew what he/she was doing ( which is kinda cheating )

which reminds me...I always wondered if one could process IR ektachrome using a similar technique & add extra color coupler when processing the magenta layer to get a more pleasant color. I always loved the look of IR ektachrome EXCEPT the magenta vegetation

aparat · Mar 2, 2009

I think that one of the ways to raise the necessary capitol is through grants. The types of grants that I have some experience with are national/cultural/historical heritage preservation grants. A lot of the current focus is on digitization of cultural heritage, but grants are also allocated to various other types of initiatives. However, it would be necessary to demonstrate that historic materials and processes are indeed part of national heritage and are worth preserving. In theory, this could be done as long as the initiative is not for profit and concerns objects that are in free domain.

bdial · Mar 2, 2009

E76 said:
...So, I guess my question is, what, in your opinion, would be the best way to get into the industry/started?

One really good way would be to become PE's apprentice when you get to Rochester. (assuming he still wants/needs one).

Academic schooling is great, but most people learn more in the "school of hard knocks". When you can combine them your knowledge is more than doubled.

AgX · Mar 2, 2009

Prest_400 said:
Too bad that color film is a complicated and expensive business, specially the long lasting types. Lately I'm getting (obsessed) onto the world of archival proprieties of films, B&W can last and last; Kodachrome is the only long lasting tested Color film, just because it's very similar to B&W. As far I recall, the most stable E6 films may last 100 years without much dye fading. One of my main interests of Kodachrome is the archival quality.
Do you think that there is a way to make a colour emulsion that has good dye stability? Could the dyes of E6 emulsions be changed for pigments, that are more stable?

There are quite stable dyes: Azo-dyes which are used in the Silver-Dye-Bleach process.

A colour film based on this principle is on the market since decennias, `Ilford Microgaphics´.

But as you indicated, the stability of chromogenic films is increasing; and among these Kodachrome is not the best. (Refering to accelerated test, which of course are questionable.)

AgX · Mar 2, 2009

Ray Rogers said:
There are good stablility pigment processes... the problem is to make them into film would be very vey costly, besides, arn't most pigments opaque?
So why film based?

I would REALLY love to see a movie done in tricolor gum!

Ray

I also use the term `pigment´ for something opaque.
But the actual differenciation between dyes and pigments seems to be the solubility in the medium. Something which is hard to say in a complex matrix as colour film. Though the general term used in this field is `dye´.

Tricolor Gum: The Technicolor print film was made by an imbibition process via separation matrixes, so you can consider it as something similar.

Photo Engineer · Mar 2, 2009

E76 said:
I'm glad you mentioned this, PE. I'm currently a high school student and will be attending RIT this fall. Currently my major is Imaging and Photographic Technology, but I can easily see myself moving into Imaging Science. I choose Imaging and Photo Tech because Imaging Science was heavily oriented toward digital (which is completely understandable) and with the Imaging and Photo Tech program I'll be able to choose "photographic chemistry" as a concentration.

My main problem is determining if I'm doing the right thing, and if I'm in the right program. I realize specializing in analog photography may not be the best career move, but it absolutely fascinates me in every way and, like you said, "we need some first growth trees out there making emulsions and doing R&D to keep this art alive." Don't get me wrong, I want to learn about digital imaging as well, but knowledge concerning analog photography is hard to come by and it's what truly interests me.

Looking at some of the co-ops available, there certainly seems to be some interesting opportunities out there for imaging scientists, but when it comes to analog photography there doesn't seem to be anything. (Maybe if Ilford participated in the co-op program things would be different. )

So, I guess my question is, what, in your opinion, would be the best way to get into the industry/started?

Thanks.

You seem to be doing all the right things, but remember that you will not get a lot of analog information at RIT nowdays. Bruce Kahn, a friend of mine who taught there, left a few years back and I believe that he was their last real emulsion maker. The instructors are good, but they don't seem interested in analog much.

Best of luck. Keep in touch.

PE

Prest_400 · Mar 2, 2009

Ray Rogers said:
Do you mean an E-6 process to produce pigment instead of dye?
Ray

Yes, just that what I thought.

PHOTOTONE said:
Are you really concerned about your color images lasting well past your lifetime? Do you have images that are worth preserving that long?

I can tell you, that in almost 50 years of photography, my slides from the late
1960's to the present are in plenty good shape, good enough to scan and print excellent properly balanced images. These were Ektachrome, Anscochrome and Agfachrome images, not Kodachrome..and they weren't stored in Optimum conditions. (Closet). If you have images of historical value, you can always make b/w separations, if the color content is important. I think modern color transparency film exceeds my archival needs.

Hmm, I think that I've been reading too much fade horror stories

AgX said:
There are quite stable dyes: Azo-dyes which are used in the Silver-Dye-Bleach process.

A colour film based on this principle is on the market since decennias, `Ilford Microgaphics´.

But as you indicated, the stability of chromogenic films is increasing; and among these Kodachrome is not the best. (Refering to accelerated test, which of course are questionable.)

Ah, now I remember. If I'm not wrong, Cibachrome/Ilfochrome processes uses that kind of dyes in the process.
I've seen/heard somewhere that dyes were generally less stable than any pigment.
I just know almost nothing about chemistry, just what I've been taught until today, since I am something like the middle of all my studying period; So please pardon my ignorance about it.

AgX · Mar 2, 2009

Prest 400

As I indicated in my answer to Ray I am as ignorant as you concerning some kinds of terminology. Yes, I also consider pigments more stable than dyes. But this is because then I have mineral pigments on my mind, but there are more.

nickandre · Mar 2, 2009

DarkroomExperimente said:
I'm one of those that did kodachrome at home...just once...I have always wanted to try it again, but haven't yet

The results weren't great, but since I was trying to do something that people told me wasn't possible, I was happy just to get a recognizable color image.

I found out yesterday that a friend of mine developed kodachrome in art school in the 90's -- but they had access to the right chemistry & a professor who knew what he/she was doing ( which is kinda cheating )

which reminds me...I always wondered if one could process IR ektachrome using a similar technique & add extra color coupler when processing the magenta layer to get a more pleasant color. I always loved the look of IR ektachrome EXCEPT the magenta vegetation

Right. You were that guy. Do you by chance have those coupler mixing sheets for the couplers from Rockland Colloid? They don't give them out anymore because of "inconsistencies" but they would still be useful.

I'm quite confident that if I had the original chemistry and filters it would take me about 3 hours to process a roll of film. Calibration would be unnecessary beyond measuring the light output and calculating the number of seconds required.

Adding any selective re-exposure to ektachrome is asking for absolute HELL. The layers are developed simultaneously. Adding couplers to the developer would smear them into all the layers.

nickandre · Mar 2, 2009

All the "dyes" in E6 are formed from color couplers. In order to make the film more stable you have to find better couplers. You can't dump pigments in to the best of my knowledge.

Why does the presence of unused couplers in the emulsion lessen the archival stability of the dyes? I heard the purpose of the stabilizer was also to bind with the extra color couplers rendering them inactive(?) and somehow increase stability. I also heard that this was why Kodachrome was more stable--because there were no couplers remaining in the emulsion after processing. If this were the case modern kodachrome using modern couplers would have better stability than E6 films using same generation couplers, right? If I'm ever rich and lack a purpose for my money I will develop K-16 and Kodachrome 100.

EDIT: When I'm rich and lack a purpose for my money. Just thought I'd clarify that

AgX · Mar 2, 2009

Couplers are able to destroy a dye, formed by the (intended) reaction of that coupler and the oxydised developer.

Photo Engineer · Mar 2, 2009

Unused couplers can react with dye to partially reverse the reaction forming leuco dyes and can also decouple the color developer forming a staining agent. In addition, couplers can react with each other to form the bis coupler which is highly colored and objectionable.

PE

DarkroomExperimente · Mar 2, 2009

ah...glad to know that!

when I did my kodachrome experiment I used extra couplers in the developer AND added an extra step: before each color development I soaked the film in a coupler-only solution

re: ektachrome...I was thinking of attempting re-exposure to light with filters...so I'd re-expose & develop 2 layers...then re-expose to IR and develop the last layer

Yes...I have the mixing sheet....I think I bought the polytoner kit around the time I joined APUG:

desired color................%blue...................%yellow...................%red

blue.............................100..........................0..........................0
green............................20..........................80.........................0
orange............................0..........................80........................20
med. red.........................0..........................50.........................50
purple...........................40...........................0..........................60
magenta.........................0...........................0.........................100

A few years ago I emailed rockland colloid and told them what I was doing & asked if i could buy the couplers w/o buying the complete polytoner kit ( since I don't use the developer or bleach they include ). They were willing to sell them separately....but I got distracted by a shiny obect and didn't follow up on it.

I recall at least one other company had a similar product that included couplers, but I don't remember what it was & was unable to find it last time I tried

btw...I found APUG as a result of googling kodachrome& couplers...someone had a post wondering if Rockland colloid's couplers would work with kodachrome...so I thought "GMTA....I've found the forum to hang out in"

nickstreme · Mar 2, 2009

Post results or perish

Autochrome, Kodachrome and home made high speed films

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency