Hand Made Azo? Is it possible?

Aggie · Nov 28, 2005

wouldn't the canadian machines be closer to us? Or do we know of anyon e in Brazil who would know how to do the coating? It could be for more than just azo.

Just think the same people who helmed Hewlet Packard into the mess they were driven into, are now at the helm of Kodak. All they think is computers not cameras, so it was ineviatable that it would be the death of traditional materials for kodak. How lopng before Kodak ends up being either a small player with marginal sales, or they go bankrupt?

Photo Engineer · Nov 28, 2005

Daniel Lawton said:
Hmmm. Why doesn't APUG start a pool to purchase some of this coating equipment from all the Kodak plants that are closing down? Once a year ,with PE at the healm, we could all get together and coat extinct emulsions till our collective heart's are content. In all honesty though what does Kodak do with their equipment from defunct plants like Brazil?

Got an update on EK from a friend over lunch today. There are quite a few research coating machines going out to pasture nowdays. Anyone want to buy one? Some nice ones already gone, but there are some really good 10" bargains out there at EK.

They are shutting down some mid scale emulsion labs as well. Anyone interested in some kettles and pumps?

Reasonable prices, you haul! Just scrape up about $50,000 or so. Maybe less depening on condition. To be honest though, I have seen none offered for sale. I think they are scrapping them.

And yes, Kodak makes mistakes, but they are trying to make a reasonable reduction in a market that is dying back much faster than anyone in the entire industry predicted. Remember, this same thing has hit Agfa and Ilford harder than EK, and Fuji is not having a smooth time either.

Some of the figures I have indicate that parts of conventional photography are dying at a rate 3x faster than any market forecast predicted.

PE

Christopher Nisperos · Nov 28, 2005

jdef said:
There are still contact speed papers in production. . . . Jay

Jay,

Can you telll us which papers those are?

roteague · Nov 28, 2005

mark said:
Good book on this subject is The Portable Radio in American Life by Michael B Schiffer

Well worth the read

Haven't seen that one. Here is a website I recently came across:
http://www.uwsa.com/issues/trade/japanyes.html. It is a bit dated, but make what you will out of it.

Annie · Nov 28, 2005

Photo Engineer said:
To be honest though, I have seen none offered for sale. I think they are scrapping them.
PE

Scrapping them!! Kodak should donate them to APUG and take the tax break!

David A. Goldfarb · Nov 28, 2005

Annie said:
Scrapping them!! Kodak should donate them to APUG and take the tax break!

Maybe APUG better hurry up and become a 501c3 non-profit corporation, in case any such offers come our way. Meanwhile, they can donate the coating machines to RIT or some such institution.

roteague · Nov 28, 2005

Photo Engineer said:
Reasonable prices, you haul! Just scrape up about $50,000 or so. Maybe less depening on condition. To be honest though, I have seen none offered for sale. I think they are scrapping them.

My question is: Is it not possible to create smaller, less expensive coating machines today, or has no one tried?

Christopher Nisperos · Nov 28, 2005

Originally Posted by Photo Engineer:
David, I disagree with McPhotoX. This is important to APUGGERS!

It is an issue that will become more pressing as the situation with digital progresses and this forum should address the issues as they come up.

But then, maybe I'm getting to wrapped up in it.

PE

McPhotoX said:
I agree also. It is very important that it be discussed here on APUG. A good portion of AZO users are here on APUG, and many do not check the AZO forum that often. However, it was requested to me that I have that thread removed. I dont see anything wrong will still discussing the matter tho.

... me, three.

David, I'm a relative newbie in this forum, but just yesterday I took the time to transcribe information from a very old photo book to answer a question in a thread on ferrotype plates. This information is not easy to come by, but I took the time to do it because I believed that I was passing on valuable information to the exact people who need it and want it, in a relatively secure repository... that is to say, this forum. Now, after the deletion of PE's thread, I'm not so sure I'll ever devote too much energy to contributing more info than what's in my head at that moment (usually, not much).

I realize that an internet forum is not the same as a printed book or magazine, but I'm really disappointed. I was really looking forward to reading PE's info.
The irony occurs to me that this has happened in a forum which promotes the benefits and interests of "old technology" . . .ie: analog vs digital, which can be likened to 'books vs the web' !

David A. Goldfarb · Nov 28, 2005

I agree, too, but it wasn't my decision. It wasn't PE's thread originally, but Ryan's, though PE had some valuable posts there. See Sean's post above, since he's the one who deleted the thread.

If PE would like, I could port those posts over to this thread from the deleted thread.

Christopher Nisperos · Nov 28, 2005

David A. Goldfarb said:
If PE would like, I could port those posts over to this thread from the deleted thread.

...'pretty-please, with sugar on top? (Ron, please say yes!)

Alex Hawley · Nov 28, 2005

roteague said:
My question is: Is it not possible to create smaller, less expensive coating machines today, or has no one tried?

I've never seen a photo paper processing line, but I've see several wet paper process lines and several other types of continuous processing (aka sausage and beef processing) lines. In general, this is not the type of machinery that one picks up and moves to another building. It is situated very precisely and anchored permanently to a floor strong enough to withstand the various loads placed on it from the machinery. Alignment in all three planes is critical; so is the balancing of the the rotating elements which are rotating at fairly high speeds.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the only real change in the technology over the last century has been in the control systems. Modern digital (please excuse the French) controls allow far more precise control that did analog electronics or mechanical systems. Other than that, its the same basic machinery that was used a hundred years ago.

Bottom line is that unless the processing line is disassembled with reassembly in mind, all you get is a pile of non-useful metal. Even a methodical disassembly would require much effort to get operating again.

Nice idea to do if someone has several million dollars to contribute to the effort.

Aggie · Nov 28, 2005

Bostick and Sullivan are now a 503c.... as well as having the regular business end. Dick even mentioned that soone silver gelatin would be an alt process.

I don't beleive the doom and gloom. You have a mega company who has decided it will go digital damn everything else. It's marketing has been all about digital and not the traditional products. When the hype you feed people says film is dead, you had better get rid of that part of your business as well. They made their business choice.

Film is not dead. It will be around, maybe not as much of a variety, but it will be there. We do not need to address digital at all. Let every other forum do that.
What we need to do is watch the market for our products and support those who are keeping us going. Ilford is a good example, as well as J&C they are are part of our sponsors.

David · Nov 28, 2005

What's a 503C?

David A. Goldfarb · Nov 28, 2005

A 501c3 corporation is a US designation for a tax-exempt non-profit corporation. The idea of donating analog manufacturing equipment for a tax writeoff depends on the equipment being donated to a tax-exempt charitable organization.

Photo Engineer · Nov 28, 2005

David A. Goldfarb said:
I agree, too, but it wasn't my decision. It wasn't PE's thread originally, but Ryan's, though PE had some valuable posts there. See Sean's post above, since he's the one who deleted the thread.

If PE would like, I could port those posts over to this thread from the deleted thread.

David, I'm really caught in a dilemma here.

The owner of the thread seems to be the owner of all of the posts? Or do the posting individuals own them? If the former, then I am not part of this decision, if the latter, then how can the owner have them removed?

I think this was part of another thread on the same subject. The ownership and control of posts and threads.

As far as I really know, the moderators own APUG and can do what they wish when they wish to any post.

I am also caught in the problem of trying to remember if the posts had any value taken out of context with Ryan's original post. They addressed issues which probably will not 'speak' to the reader properly if taken alone.

So, I cannot decide on the value of replacing my comments here. In addition, others said valuable things and leaving them out smacks of discrimination or censorship of some form or another. Why are my comments more valid or true than others and why should they be rescued from their 3 days in Limbo?

PE

David A. Goldfarb · Nov 28, 2005

The moderators don't "own" the forum, Sean does.

Personally, I don't agree with the prevailing policy that the thread owner can ask that a thread be closed, for precisely the reasons you've mentioned (i.e., that others post in the thread, and it's no longer the initiator's call), but it's not my decision.

I'm also not sure what Ryan's motivation was for asking that the thread be closed, but he mentioned that he was asked to have it closed (by whom I can only guess), so I'm suspecting that there may be more here than meets the eye, perhaps more than Sean or I or the other moderators know.

There were actually not that many posts in that thread, and I think yours made some sense out of context. If you or anyone else who posted in the deleted thread would like me to port them over here, just send me a PM.

Photo Engineer · Nov 28, 2005

David A. Goldfarb said:
The moderators don't "own" the forum, Sean does.

Personally, I don't agree with the prevailing policy that the thread owner can ask that a thread be closed, for precisely the reasons you've mentioned (i.e., that others post in the thread, and it's no longer the initiator's call), but it's not my decision.

I'm also not sure what Ryan's motivation was for asking that the thread be closed, but he mentioned that he was asked to have it closed (by whom I can only guess), so I'm suspecting that there may be more here than meets the eye, perhaps more than Sean or I or the other moderators know.

There were actually not that many posts in that thread, and I think yours made some sense out of context. If you or anyone else who posted in the deleted thread would like me to port them over here, just send me a PM.

David, I leave it in the capable hands of the Moderators and the other contributors here. You do what makes sense and / or what they ask of you.

PE

David A. Goldfarb · Nov 28, 2005

In that case, PE, I think the most interesting post you made in that other thread, setting aside issues of loyalty to M&P or Kodak, etc., which probably don't need to be repeated after we've all had a good venting, and not quoting something that was posted on another forum without permission, was this response to Robert Teague's query about the coating process--

PE said:
making and coating is an art as much as a science. An associate of mine who was chief engineer on type ""R" paper died suddenly. It took his assistant over 6 months to be able to duplicate "R" paper properly. This was with the two of them having worked side-by-side and the assistant having all of the notes and formulas.

Coating science has gone through evolutionary steps from the first years of photography and todays coating equipment at the major companies is a marvel of automation and precision engineering. And, they all work in the dark (that is what Mr Perez CEO of EK marvels about) at very high speeds.

I doubt if much could be done to improve what is going on today in production around the world. Fifty years ago, your Velvia either would have been impossible to manufacture or would have taken days to make. Today, it is made in one continuous operation on one machine in less than a day / master roll.

PE

Photo Engineer · Nov 28, 2005

Alex Hawley said:
I've never seen a photo paper processing line, but I've see several wet paper process lines and several other types of continuous processing (aka sausage and beef processing) lines. In general, this is not the type of machinery that one picks up and moves to another building. It is situated very precisely and anchored permanently to a floor strong enough to withstand the various loads placed on it from the machinery. Alignment in all three planes is critical; so is the balancing of the the rotating elements which are rotating at fairly high speeds.

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the only real change in the technology over the last century has been in the control systems. Modern digital (please excuse the French) controls allow far more precise control that did analog electronics or mechanical systems. Other than that, its the same basic machinery that was used a hundred years ago.

Bottom line is that unless the processing line is disassembled with reassembly in mind, all you get is a pile of non-useful metal. Even a methodical disassembly would require much effort to get operating again.

Nice idea to do if someone has several million dollars to contribute to the effort.

Alex, I have posted this elsewhere, but the coating machinery today is vastly different than that used just 50 years or so ago.

In the 40s and 50s, festoon drying was used, but today they use chill set and heat set with precise control. 50 years ago, they used rollers, and today they use air bearings with air bearing turns and undercut selvedge rollers.

In the 50s they used single layer extrusion hoppers that required one hopper or pass per layer and today they use slide and curtain hoppers which coat up to 15 layers or more at one time, and last but not least 50 years and even 30 years ago, some companies coated at 100 ft /min max. Today, that is the minimum. And it is far below the max.

No, coating has changed a lot. And, to prevent misalignment, the larger machines are anchored far into the ground with heavy anchor posts to prevent or eliminate alignment problems. Even a tiny error would lead to nonuniformity.

Yes, coating has changed a lot just in the 30+ years I worked at EK. As did emulsion making. The smallest machine is about the size of a two car gargage requiring one bay for the machine and one bay for facilities such as air conditioning. It would coat 5" wide film or paper at about 100 ft/min, one layer at a time.

PE

MattKing · Nov 28, 2005

Daniel Lawton said:
Hmmm. Why doesn't APUG start a pool to purchase some of this coating equipment from all the Kodak plants that are closing down? Once a year ,with PE at the healm, we could all get together and coat extinct emulsions till our collective heart's are content. In all honesty though what does Kodak do with their equipment from defunct plants like Brazil?

Caution - irony ahead!

Now that we have decided how PE is to spend his retirement time, what is our next step? :rolleyes:

Now if PE wants to volunteer....

Alex Hawley · Nov 28, 2005

Thanks for the update PE. Most of those changes you talk about are improvements to the basic design, such as the air bearings and the drying method. Makes no difference though because this machinery is far from the set-it-down and plug-it-in type. It takes a vast amount of expertise to set up, operate, and maintain.

My main point is that this is not something that one throws a few dollars at and hires someone off the street to run on the weekend. T'would be nice if it was, but it ain't.

Photo Engineer · Nov 28, 2005

MattKing said:
Caution - irony ahead!

Now that we have decided how PE is to spend his retirement time, what is our next step? :rolleyes:

Now if PE wants to volunteer....

Matt, I am making hand coatings every night practically.

With a machine, it would be so much easier, especially with someone like you as lead coater, right? You did volunteer along with me, right?

PE

Photo Engineer · Nov 28, 2005

Alex Hawley said:
Thanks for the update PE. Most of those changes you talk about are improvements to the basic design, such as the air bearings and the drying method. Makes no difference though because this machinery is far from the set-it-down and plug-it-in type. It takes a vast amount of expertise to set up, operate, and maintain.

My main point is that this is not something that one throws a few dollars at and hires someone off the street to run on the weekend. T'would be nice if it was, but it ain't.

Alex, it takes a crew of at least two people to run even the smallest slowes machine, and they are highly trained.

PE

removed account4 · Nov 28, 2005

from what i remember reading, when GAF went bye-bye all of their equipment was pretty much destroyed. i hope EK's equpment doesn't suffer the same fate. if it does --- what a waste!

MattKing · Nov 29, 2005

Photo Engineer said:
Matt, I am making hand coatings every night practically.
With a machine, it would be so much easier, especially with someone like you as lead coater, right? You did volunteer along with me, right?
PE

PE:

I'm ready, if called upon!

Photo Engineer said:
Alex, it takes a crew of at least two people to run even the smallest slowes machine, and they are highly trained.

PE

Oops, I'd have to be trained (i.e. know what I was doing??)?? :confused:

Matt

Hand Made Azo? Is it possible?

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Moderator

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency