Future Kodachrome Colour Developing

Photo Engineer · Nov 6, 2012

People;

You have been complaining about Kodachrome being "retired" and wanted to restart the line at literally any cost. Well, here is your chance and no one wants it.

I think that this thread should close soon, as there seems to be a consensus, and that all related threads be closed. In addition, I think that there should be no similar threads allowed on APUG. It is a totally dead issue IMHO.

You know the price, I guessed high, others hit closer. It will never be less expensive.

PE

Poisson Du Jour · Nov 6, 2012

polyglot said:
I'm not in the market at any price but geez people, stop whingeing about the price. You're paying for a couple of days work by a skilled and qualified (chemistry) lab technician, procurement of annoying-to-find chemistry in annoyingly small+expensive quantities, probably consumption of some other Kodachrome film-stock for process-control purposes, not to mention manufacture of some specialised equipment to perform the reversal exposure. Plus overheads on the commercial lab space where this is occurring.

Frankly I'm surprised it's that cheap. I don't expect Steve to get (m)any takers while E6 is still around but the price is remarkably low for what's involved. Maybe it'd get cheaper if someone scraped together 100+ rolls to run in a batch.

I suspect that in 10-20 years, 3D printing will be passe which means there will be open-source designs for coating machines and film processors, including for Kodachrome. At that point, I expect to see homemade Kodachrome or similar (since the chemistry seems simpler than E6) re-emerge as an ultra-premium LF material, e.g. for bespoke portraits at the very high-end. Same market as the dudes wandering around with 20x24" cameras and charging $10k for a sitting.

Quelle horreur!
"... $260 dollars per roll for Colour Kodachrome processing with a minimum of 5 rolls per order ..."

$260 * 5 and what do you have?
And that is still cheap? Kodachrome was not the only film on the planet, and with many films expiring by the wayside each year, we are here debating resurrecting Kodachrome "at any price"?

Ken Nadvornick · Nov 6, 2012

polyglot said:
Frankly I'm surprised it's that cheap. I don't expect Steve to get (m)any takers while E6 is still around but the price is remarkably low for what's involved. Maybe it'd get cheaper if someone scraped together 100+ rolls to run in a batch.

On the contrary, this is a great thread! How many ever really thought there might be another chance at Kodachrome, however once-in-a-lifetime it might have been?

And actually, I agree with 'polyglot'. Everyone and everything in the world has a price. Just because most can't or won't met that price does not mean that everyone can't or won't. It's an awfully big world. There is always somebody out there somewhere. In another context, that's why eBay works.

I have my one roll of souvenir K64 sitting lonely in the freezer next to my stash of glycin powder. It was saved for nostalgia and the chance to still thaw, open and smell once every couple of years. (Yeah, seriously.)

I therefore can't make the minimum rolls required by myself. But perhaps for the sake of having possibly shot the true final roll of Kodachrome, I might be game. I mean, how many photographers will ever be able to show Kodachrome slides that were truly hand-processed? (Other than maybe PE, of course.) And wouldn't it be nice to validate all of Stephen's hard work?

Gawd. Where would one point the camera? What would one shoot? How much more opposite from spray-and-pray could one possibly get?

Are there another four of you out there???

Ken

polyglot · Nov 6, 2012

Poisson: I'm not claiming it's a good value-proposition for the buyer (and clearly it is not while E6 processing is still available for $10), only that the costs are quite reasonable for what goes into providing that service.

If you've ever had custom manufacturing and/or chemical-testing done, you will understand. Consider that a middling chemical engineer can pull $150/hour consulting, consider how long this process will take, plus the custom equipment required to run it, plus chemistry.

paladin1420 · Nov 6, 2012

Brian C. Miller said:
That's $7.22 per frame for 36 frames.

8x10 color processing ranges from $6 to $8 per sheet.

Man up or move over!

This makes plenty of sense. I could envision a market where someone can sell the chance to shoot (or have your portrait taken on) individual frames of Kodachrome for 10 bucks a pop.
Lots of people spend $10 or more on things less worthy that a frame of Kodachrome so it's not so far out of the question if you look at it like that. Not saying this will happen, but it's interesting to think that it might be possible, especially after all the time we spent mourning that it was gone forever.

I couldn't spring for a whole roll, let alone 5 rolls, but I'm in for a half dozen frames.

edibot42 · Nov 6, 2012

Maybe we could use Kodachrome for the next five "Let's All Shoot One Camera" cameras, take one or two frames each, and all split the cost.

Ken Nadvornick · Nov 6, 2012

edibot42 said:
Maybe we could use Kodachrome for the next five "Let's All Shoot One Camera" cameras, take one or two frames each, and all split the cost.

That is an EXCELLENT idea!

And what good publicity it would be for both Stephen and APUG. A brand new Kodachrome project where lots of people get to contribute. How unique would that be?

Ken

dsmccrac · Nov 6, 2012

Photo Engineer said:
People;

You have been complaining about Kodachrome being "retired" and wanted to restart the line at literally any cost. Well, here is your chance and no one wants it.
PE

1+

MARKNABIA · Nov 6, 2012

if nobody wants...I think I should say good luck to your stocks on the freezer, that will be a collector item still anyway....

wlodekmj · Nov 6, 2012

Ken Nadvornick said:
On the contrary, this is a great thread! How many ever really thought there might be another chance at Kodachrome, however once-in-a-lifetime it might have been?

Are there another four of you out there???

Ken

I'd be happy to be counted as another 1 - my best roll of Kodachrome from its last few months got overlooked when I was mailing my last batch to Dwayne's and I _want_ to see it developed. Aren't there a few other people in a similar situation? I would spend months enjoying looking at each frame, at under $8 a frame.

hoffy · Nov 6, 2012

Pfft – there is more value in the conceptual artistic merit of the ‘Mystery roll’.

Put it on ebay – with the description:

FOR SALE – 1 x roll of exposed Kodachrome, taken by a mystery photographer.
Who was the photographer? Was it your next door neighbours grandfather, or was it shot by the dude who took ‘Afghan Girl’…..
What are the images? Do we have pictures of Aunt Bettie’s cat, or do we have the evidence that it was the person on the Grassy knoll
Revel in the wonder. You may just have the most important photographs in the world sitting on your shelf.

I think if we start at $1000/roll, surely we could get at least $500,000?

(kinda like selling pieces of the real cross, hey…)

PKM-25 · Nov 6, 2012

How about $250 a roll for 4? I would strongly consider that, wife agrees...

PM me if serious...

nickrapak · Nov 7, 2012

edibot42 said:
Maybe we could use Kodachrome for the next five "Let's All Shoot One Camera" cameras, take one or two frames each, and all split the cost.

+1. I would be willing to part with a few bucks to get a handful of frames. Of course, we'd need to make sure we have good K-Chrome, a good camera, and most importantly, a reliable financial intermediary.

spatz · Nov 7, 2012

edibot42 said:
Maybe we could use Kodachrome for the next five "Let's All Shoot One Camera" cameras, take one or two frames each, and all split the cost.

+1 from me as well. this actually caught me as a truly unique and awesome idea. i never got the chance to shoot kodachrome despite my families boxes of slides being exclusively full of it. :munch:

EdoNork · Nov 7, 2012

The question is: CAN you develop a roll of KODAKCHROME at that price if I put the money on the table?

TexasLangGenius · Nov 7, 2012

Yikes, I'm back after months of an intense stage of therapy for my vision (long story) and I come back and see this thread.

Unless someone would come up with a way to bring that cost WAAAAAAY down, I couldn't afford it. If I could afford it I would. Such is the consequence of people wanting to save a dime here and there and not wait, now we have lost that special film for what maybe forever.

Forgive my ignorance (and what may be interpreted as a somewhat snarky tone), but if two freaking musicians with chemistry training could invent this stuff by themselves in the 30s, why can't anyone figure out how to make small batches of it now? Sorry if I sound like I'm ranting. I know the Kodachrome horse has been beaten a lot, but I am genuinely curious. Kodachrome was awesome, and it would be cool to recover it like how the formula for Greek fire was rediscovered recently. Where is the inventive spirit of God and Man? In any case, I hope that at least E6 will survive.

Please don't gather around me in a circle and stone me.:eek: And please, especially you PE, don't be mad at me for poking the carcass of this horse with a stick.

AgX · Nov 7, 2012

TexasLangGenius said:
Forgive my ignorance (and what may be interpreted as a somewhat snarky tone), but if two freaking musicians with chemistry training could invent this stuff by themselves in the 30s, why can't anyone figure out how to make small batches of it now? Sorry if I sound like I'm ranting. I know the Kodachrome horse has been beaten a lot, but I am genuinely curious.

Beating that horse again and again: it is not an issue of technology and competence but economics.
In the past 7 manufacturers aside of Kodak made such type of film.

TexasLangGenius · Nov 7, 2012

AgX said:
Beating that horse again and again: it is not an issue of technology and competence but economics.
In the past 7 manufacturers aside of Kodak made such type of film.

I, for the most part, understand that it is all a problem of making batches economically (especially small ones). I wonder what God and Man did to make the original formula in small batches before signing with Kodak.

Unfortunately, I feel that beating the horse is going to be inevitable for the foreseeable future (not just me and my occasional musings on it), until future generations become mostly ignorant of Kodachrome (and the concept of film) altogether. I can see kids 20 years from now scratching their heads when hearing Paul Simon singing that song.

For now, I will still stick with E6 and whatever else is left (I'm happy to have even that). And at least I can talk about my passion for film here. I went on a rant last year on the Pentax Forums after I read a statement by one of the former Kodak employees who stated he wished that film would disappear (while commenting on our favorite horse carcass). I faced an onslaught of criticism from the mostly digital people after venting, so I exiled myself from there. Yikes...

AgX · Nov 7, 2012

TexasLangGenius said:
I wonder what God and Man did to make the original formula in small batches before signing with Kodak.

Mannes and Godowsky were subsidized by different sources.

And there is no source stating they ever made a complete film. To the contrary: even after the joint work at the Kodak laboratories had begun the first result was only a 2-layer film!

TexasLangGenius · Nov 7, 2012

AgX said:
Mannes and Godowsky were subsidized by different sources.

And there is no source stating they ever made a complete film. To the contrary: even after the joint work at the Kodak laboratories had begun the first result was only a 2-layer film!

Cool, thanks for letting me know.

AgX · Nov 7, 2012

What they well did was the invention of both "controlled diffusion" as well as "selective re-exposure".
But from this and basic experiments to a working film was still a long way.

EASmithV · Nov 7, 2012

If we send the money and the film, would processing be done when the lab reached a certain amount?
It's not like turnaround for this is critical. I have one exposed roll I forgot about and one unexposed roll. I'd like to see the images and i'd consider paying $250 a roll for it.

Photo Engineer · Nov 7, 2012

Mannes and Godowsky had custom coatings and custom synthesized chemicals made by EK even when they lived in NYC. When they moved to Rochester, their labs expanded and they got more chemicals and coatings. Steve here has had to replicate all of this with a fixed film base to work with and some rough formulas in patents that represent an amalgam of K14 and the previous process, as the product we knew was still in development.

PE

dsmccrac · Nov 7, 2012

some folks are wishing it would cost $20-30 a roll. They are basically asking for it to be what it costed (with inflation) in the 80's ;-)

I was a student then and loved slides but on the long run i could not afford it. I did a quick search and found an article from 81 where a guy was complaining that it cost $8.15 to process http://tinyurl.com/kodachromeprice According to a handy inflation calculator that is $23 now. I bet, as a Canuck, I was paying more. Even in its heyday it was not cheap - which is why my film archive suffered when I stopped the 'chromes until I started BW stuff a few years later.

MattKing · Nov 7, 2012

In 1980 I was working in the camera department of a Canadian department store (Sears Canada). We sold lots of Kodachrome. As it was in Canada, each roll included processing by Kodak.

Working back into the mists of my memories, I think a 36 exposure roll of Kodachrome 64 was a couple of bucks more than $10.00 ($11.99 plus 7% sales tax?) and a 24 exposure roll was just under $10.00.

If you dropped your film off at a Kodak dealer, it would generally be returned to that dealer within 2 days, processed and mounted, without charge. A very small number of dealers were then making noises about charging a small handling charge, but most weren't

Otherwise, you would mail the film in to Kodak in the handy pre-addressed envelope.

The fact that processing was pre-paid was inscribed on the cannister itself - the mailing envelope had no monetary value.

It was more expensive to shoot negative film and have it processed and printed - thus a fair number of people would shoot slides when they were traveling.

Future Kodachrome Colour Developing

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency