- Joined
- Apr 5, 2008
- Messages
- 2,816
- Format
- 35mm
Keeping in mind that even Kodak is having a Dickens of a time bringing back its own Ektachrome after it has only been out of production a few years. One would think they just have to mix up a new batch of goo from their own recipe and let the machines rip.
Not knocking, but I'm afraid that this was the original impression which Ferrania gave, doubtless and with hindsight inadvertently. Kodak and, especially, Adox seem much more conservative in their predictions and suggested timetables.
there was a small window of opportunity in which to achieve making one last batch of Chrome from the "goo"
But Shirley making a film from old "Goo" would have been far worse for the bigger picture? Can you imagine the reams of complaining comments from the braying morons of 'teh internets', moaning how their film made from old stuff lying around in a disused factory, gave them slightly odd and/or less than perfect results straight out of the can?In the time taken to safely remove the asbestos, the "goo" expired.
But Shirley making a film from old "Goo" would have been far worse for the bigger picture?
Not knocking, but I'm afraid that this was the original impression which Ferrania gave, doubtless and with hindsight inadvertently. Kodak and, especially, Adox seem much more conservative in their predictions and suggested timetables.
OTOH, I believe that Ferrania contributed to the misunderstanding by suggesting that machinery, film,chemicals and knowhow were all on hand, ready-and-waiting to produce rewards within months, without any indication of possible problems in fulfilling this part of the program.
As for chemicals, you just recrystallize them and purify them. Simple to a chemist. These arguments don't sway me.
PE
But Shirley making a film from old "Goo" would have been far worse for the bigger picture?
Interesting that they have just changed the Shop page to say that: The Shop will Return in Fall 2018.
Great, thank you and looking forward to it already.We have some really good news (finally) and we'll be posting a public update shortly.
I read it as soon as you posted the link to his page! He repeats what you have said - constant gentle agitation - but he used repeated inversions whereas I tried to copy exactly the process you said Ferrania (meaning Nicola?) used, by using the same model of Jobo processor. Maybe thin-looking shadows are ok, as member Urmonas wrote in post #3985 on Saturday.RE: D96, you might check this article by our friend Scott Miccichey.
This link is to Version 2.0, from Feb 12, which is what I used for timing and temperature - if you have updated since then, it is not yet live.We also updated our Dead Link Removed using his timings and techniques,
Thanks for noticing!
We have some really good news (finally) and we'll be posting a public update shortly.
I'll add a link here when it is posted.
(...) our E6 kit, which, being powder only, can be shipped anywhere via air mail...
I want a pony.Dreaming is still free, right?
Mmmm... i'm still hoping for the bright day where the news update say:
"...and will look excellent when developed with our E6 kit, which, being powder only, can be shipped anywhere via air mail..."
It does not matter if it is powder or liquid. It can´t go by airmail/postal if it´s a hazmat substance.
Not sure, Mirko. I’ve seen many stores shipping powdered C-41 kits, but not liquid ones. I am not sure which component in E-6 is hazmat, though.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?