... It would be nice if a few reasonably priced processing runs could happen, so that all previously exposed film could be dealt with.
To this day the film remains in the camera, the roll unflipped, in my Camera Room.
Yes I also remember well these ugly days as Dwaynes began the final processing.I gave several rolls of Super8 and all other Kodachrome stuff I was able to find to Dwaynes.It was exposed over the last weeks the latest roll was 4month exposed.With the exeption of one Kodachrome 64 (18 years old) - sure this was too much for Kodachrome stability - but I wonder about some colors wich were indeed remaining.with regardsSome people should suffer the consequences of their stupidity or laziness.
An idiot whom I won't name travelled from Los Angeles to Portland in 1977 and used 25 feet of double 8mm Kodachrome II. The plan was to flip the roll over and finish the film within the next few months.
That never happened.
So the film sat in the camera, year after year, decade after decade, even though the images on that film, from that period of time, would be pretty nice to see. When K II was discontinued, the film still remained in the camera. When Dwayne's began the final processing, this film never made that journey.
To this day the film remains in the camera, the roll unflipped, in my Camera Room.
Kodachrome (if it ever comes again) would have no need to be an exact clone of its original.Sure there would be a need of little reformulation. The same is to the machines. If we remember K14 lab equipment we have this monsters out of the 50th/60th in remind.Kodak was able to serve this machines only with the help of fine technicians who gave their souls to let them run decade to decade.Todays technology let make it more smart.So thanks for this example.with regards .....PS : I strongly belive :"Everything is still possible"......there is just the need of some simple million USD....."K-Lab - one of these machines which were much smaller than the normal K-14 processors:
View attachment 198390
Kodachrome (if it ever comes again)
And I felt bad because one of my Super Rollex backs has a roll of Kodachrome still in it, unexposed.Some people should suffer the consequences of their stupidity or laziness.
An idiot whom I won't name travelled from Los Angeles to Portland in 1977 and used 25 feet of double 8mm Kodachrome II. The plan was to flip the roll over and finish the film within the next few months.
That never happened.
So the film sat in the camera, year after year, decade after decade, even though the images on that film, from that period of time, would be pretty nice to see. When K II was discontinued, the film still remained in the camera. When Dwayne's began the final processing, this film never made that journey.
To this day the film remains in the camera, the roll unflipped, in my Camera Room.
Maybe, but it would still be nice if they could be forgiven, and get their film processed.Some people should suffer the consequences of their stupidity or laziness.
It was very well known when processing would cease, using film which you know cannot be processed is pretty stupid - more so when it's an "important project".Maybe, but it would still be nice if they could be forgiven, and get their film processed.
It might be a bit much to hope for K-12 (Kodachrome II) though.
It was very well known when processing would cease, using film which you know cannot be processed is pretty stupid - more so when it's an "important project".
Never say never! with regardsIt's not coming back. You are delusional if you think there is even a 1% chance Kodakchrome is coming back.
Half a dozen fans of a long dead film won't bring it back.
Yes you are right. I would guess a new Kodachrome film would more than possible be with highest riscs to a manufacturer. But in case of EK there have been so many totaly wrong decisions in the past that I realy would not care so much about riscs.But from my point the volume of production has to be a much higher one in comparison of Ektachromes calculated demand.As far as we can't know the real demand to Ektachrome today - We just have to wait.But it is a real long way to make Kodachrome alive again - that is absolute true.with regardsI believe that the original experimental versions of Kodachrome were developed by a couple of musicians using more or less improvised methods and equipment. Does Kodachrome or Kodachrome equivalent really need a high volume production environment to succeed on a technical level? This question is not asking the second question of whether it could survive in a low volume environment on a financial level, but the second question necessarily comes after the first and not the other way around.
It's not coming back. You are delusional if you think there is even a 1% chance Kodakchrome is coming back.
Half a dozen fans of a long dead film won't bring it back.
To me it does not go to have Kodachrome back and pay every price for having it.It is indeed in regard of nearly same characteristics to the original.If our focus seams to be in regard of the color look - there might be no urgent need to reanimate this emulsion (because one should be able to live with other films and their nice colors).But (just from my point) it is this special combination of Kodachrome color look AND enormous resistance against aging.We all may acept that Kodachrome should not be projected so often and - (more important) not so long because of temperatures - therefore.I am not sure if Steve Frizza's method can hold on that promise from original K14 process (true colors for ever)?All of you complainers............. Go out and develop them yourselves. After all, Steve Frizzza did it! You can too.
PE
Initiating a Kodachrome revival project would be a Kodak move so stupid it would make many of Kodak management's previous stupid moves over recent decades look positively reasonable, if not ingenious.Bringing back Kodachrome...would be a smart move for Kodak...
Initiating a Kodachrome revival project would be a Kodak move so stupid it would make many of Kodak management's previous stupid moves over recent decades look positively reasonable, if not ingenious.
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?