kodachrome 120 expression of intrest?

[Venchka]

OK, forget sheet film. I am fully aware of the different base materials used for sheets, 120/220 and 35mm. I also remember Tri-X film packs. It was the film of choice in the US Army when I was assigned to a photo unit in Germany. I'm familiar with the disadvantages of that film.

On the other hand, if a company knows in advance and is paid in advance for it's entire production run, why not sell the product? Kodachrome may be an extreme example. However, Panatomic-X in 3 formats shouldn't be too hard to produce and sell by special order.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Have you tried contacting Kodak?

PE

 

[Venchka]

I think I shall. I have an email address somewhere for someone who may be able to get the idea out in the open.

 

[PHOTOTONE]

On the other hand, if a company knows in advance and is paid in advance for it's entire production run, why not sell the product? Panatomic-X in 3 formats shouldn't be too hard to produce and sell by special order.

I think that they would make it for you if you would purchase a whole emulsion run. You would need about $250,000.00 I think up front or possibly more. It is much more expensive than just a custom cut of an existing film.

But, you are talking about 2 different concepts here...First, you are talking about pre-paying a whole production run of an emulsion, and secondly, you are talking about a product to be sold by special order. If you ordered and payed for a complete production run, YOU would be the owner and have to inventory the film and sell it yourself. Kodak won't do it for you. Kodak will not coat an emulsion run on spec, warehouse and inventory the finished product to fulfill "special" orders. That was in the long past.

Even the smaller commercial companies that come out with "new" films, such as Rollei/Maco are just having custom cutting and packaging done to existing "industrial" films still produced by Agfa/Gevaert and Filmotec.

Firms such as Freestyle and Ultrafine Online just purchase enough existing product to have it private labeled for them.

 

[nickandre]

I think you would be better off finding old coating machines and doing it yourself. That's what Efke did.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Efke is far from capable of making Kodachrome with their old machines.

Kodak had problems moving Kodachrome production to their newest machine.

PE

 

[nickandre]

I was talking about the Panatomic X. But isn't kodachrome much simpler to coat than other color films?

 

[railwayman3]

I find these ideas fascinating, and admire your enthusiasm in to keep Kodachrome going if or when Kodak ceases production.

However, speaking for myself, I shall continue to use K64 whilever it's available, I love the color and consistency of the results. Clearly Kodak coat the film to their highest standards and surely monitor Dwaynes as a Kodak licencee.

But can anyone else ever expect to match that quality in a small substitute operation, maybe with substitute equipment and chemicals?

Wonderful ideas as an experiment, but I think that many photographers will move, reluctantly, to what works as nearly as possible from the rest of the Kodak or Fuji ranges. For myself, I don't take a huge number of slides, maybe 40-50 films a year, and the subjects such as holidays, pictorial and distant places are too precious to me to worry about reliability of film and processing. My experimenting is all done at home or with local repeatably subjects.

Sorry, I'm trying not to be negative.

 

[AgX]

tiberiustbiz,

Basically you need three layers. They have to be controlled concerning their relative thickness.

(In the first chromogenic Kodachrome process the thickness of the dividing layers was of importance too.)

(At the same time the late researcher behind Agfacolor stated that he did multilayer colour film test coating on a homebuilt machine...)

 

[michaelbsc]

I think that they would make it for you if you would purchase a whole emulsion run. You would need about $250,000.00 I think up front or possibly more. It is much more expensive than just a custom cut of an existing film.

I don't know, since I have no connection with Kodak, but I'll bet this estimate is too low to get a special production run of a non-current product. Yes, a custom cut and packaging of something already existing will be far cheaper.

MB

 

[nickandre]

But can anyone else ever expect to match that quality in a small substitute operation, maybe with substitute equipment and chemicals?

No.

With substitute chemicals, that is. If I were able to get the real deal and I had the proper exposure filters, I see no reason why not. Remember, this process can be drawn out. There's nothing stopping me from taking an entire day to process one roll (save my impatients) . If the chemistry was mixed fresh and was kept in working condition, I'm doing the exact same thing as dwaynes, right? The first development is just as critical as the E6 equivalent. The re-developers don't need absolutely precise control. You need to develop as much as possible of the exposed layer, but as little of the remaining negative image in the other layers. The magenta developer develops to completion. The rest of the process is the same as any other color process.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Kodachrome has a minimum of 6 precision coated layers. It may be 9 or more in some of the line. I have forgotten.

Basically, these layers are B&W film emulsions but coated individually based on color sensitivity.

The development can be halted and the film washed and dried and kept in the dark after the 1st developer or after any of the color developers, but ----- the color developers are more critical than the E6 single color developer. The E6 color developer goes to completion, but the Kodachrome color developers each must go to just the right peak development level to prevent cross contamination of colors.

The Kodachrome process is therefore more critical and sensitive than E6.

PE

 

[railwayman3]

No.

With substitute chemicals, that is. If I were able to get the real deal and I had the proper exposure filters, I see no reason why not. Remember, this process can be drawn out. There's nothing stopping me from taking an entire day to process one roll (save my impatients) . If the chemistry was mixed fresh and was kept in working condition, I'm doing the exact same thing as dwaynes, right? The first development is just as critical as the E6 equivalent. The re-developers don't need absolutely precise control. You need to develop as much as possible of the exposed layer, but as little of the remaining negative image in the other layers. The magenta developer develops to completion. The rest of the process is the same as any other color process.

It would be a fantastic exercise if you could make it work, and I would be happy to entrust one or two experimental K64 (particularly 120 and if nothing else were available).

I think my point was, however, that, would people entrust their special films to you as a semi-commercial exercise? (Not sure if that is your intent). e.g. I shot a lot of K64 at my daughter's wedding three years ago but had that film not been available, I would have used only the freshest and nearest E6 substitute and the most reliable processing.

I can only think that any long-term future for Kodachrome outside Kodak support can be no more than small-scale enthusiast/experimental, but I really would love to be proved wrong.

 

[AgX]

In a textbook text by S. Welford on the Kodachrome processes I found this (seemingly having overlooked this passage up to now…):

“Other intermediate processing stages may be employed in similar processes and may include black & white developers, the purpose of which is to complete the development started in one of the colour developers before proceeding to the next.”

What was the idea behind such a competing/assisting development?

 

[wogster]

It would be a fantastic exercise if you could make it work, and I would be happy to entrust one or two experimental K64 (particularly 120 and if nothing else were available).

I think my point was, however, that, would people entrust their special films to you as a semi-commercial exercise? (Not sure if that is your intent). e.g. I shot a lot of K64 at my daughter's wedding three years ago but had that film not been available, I would have used only the freshest and nearest E6 substitute and the most reliable processing.

I can only think that any long-term future for Kodachrome outside Kodak support can be no more than small-scale enthusiast/experimental, but I really would love to be proved wrong.

I think your right, if Kodak wanted to end Kodachrome, and someone offered to buy the process, formulae, machinery, and set up their own processing system, which could simply be sub-contracting to Dwaynes, as done currently, they could keep Kodachrome going.

The real issue is that Kodachrome is unique, and unique makes it expensive, expensive is fine when you make massively huge batches, and most importantly, sell those batches before the film expires, making something on each roll. Of course the more units you can sell, the less you need to make on each unit in order to make a decent profit on the product.

Yes you can make smaller batches, but some of the costs are fixed, and some are volume discounted, so the smaller batch does not result in a linear reduction in cost, at some point the costs simply get too high to continue. Not only is the film production designed for high volume, but in the case of K14, so is the processing.

Film has a point where you will pick one film you like, over a film that's cheaper. For example if you can buy E6 film and get it processed for $15/roll, and K14 film costs you $20/roll (processed), maybe you choose the K14, would you still choose the K14 film if it was $40/roll or $80/roll, what about $160/roll?

 

[PHOTOTONE]

You all are aware that Kodak does not have a separate manufacturing plant and coating line just for Kodachrome aren't you? AFAIK they use their mostly same equipment as used to coat and finish other films...therefore if they did "sell" Kodachrome it would not come with equipment.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Well, for AgX, see my last post up above on Kodachrome. The color developers do not go to completion and can be "adjusted" by using B&W developers to finish off a layer. This is not currently in use!

For Paul, Kodak has abandoned the Kodachrome patents, so they are free for use by anyone. Fuji can coat Kodachrome film (and did), but left the market as it was too tiny. Same went for Konica. Their Sakuracolor was Kodachrome at one time.

So any major film company CAN coat Kodachrome, but no film company WANTS to coat Kodachrome. No market. Kodak makes it as a flagship product but I would guess at a loss.

PE

 

[Fredrik Sandstrom]

Well, for AgX, see my last post up above on Kodachrome. The color developers do not go to completion and can be "adjusted" by using B&W developers to finish off a layer. This is not currently in use!

Could this potentially be used to eliminate the magenta shift that one gets in outdated Kodachrome? Develop the cyan and yellow layers to completion using B&W developers, so no magenta dye can form there in the last step. Do I understand this correctly? If so, it would be great if Dwayne's could start doing this, as there's a lot of outdated Kodachrome out there...

 

[nickandre]

There are other ways to correct the magenta cast. By increasing the re-exposure time to fog the rest of the halide when it has a relatively reduced speed or using a green filter instead of a fogging developer or straight white exposure, one could reduce or eliminate the cast. The two issues with kodachrome degredation are background fog and speed loss. You will still have the first, but if one knows there is a speed loss and knows just how much, it would not be hard at all to compensate.

 

[nickandre]

If I started with a generic B+W film developer, added CD4 and couplers, would the varied PH effect the development? If I corrected the PH to the proper level, would this be solved?

 

[2F/2F]

I am NOT sending ANY film to be processed by someone who learned how to do it on an Internet forum.

 

[Photo Engineer]

The special processing of outdated film would have to be handled by Dwaynes or the individual who attempts to do this. Using a generic B&W developer would probably not work. I would have to see what you intend doing and the formula to make even a guess.

PE

 

[nickandre]

I am NOT sending ANY film to be processed by someone who learned how to do it on an Internet forum.

I'm going on the fact that nobody else CAN process it.

 

[Cinevision]

K-14 120 processing

This thread got a tad off track, is there anyone who will raise their hand in interest to having a new service launched which processes Kodachrome 120 format?

Stephen; If you're willing to try it, I'm willing to buy it (the service, that is..)

I have a CASE of K120 in the deep freeze that I'd love to shoot.

let me know if this is still on the burner..

I KNOW it can be done, others have done it by hand. I'm even willing to try myself, but can't get the chemicals easily.

Tony

 

[accozzaglia]

Ditto. I have a few unexposed PKR120 rolls in the freezer. They were bought very cheaply. I know someone who has offered to practically give away to me a few more PKR rolls they gave up using years ago.

I feel the cost of developing a test roll, even at the $50 suggested unit price, is worth it once proof of concept is presented to this forum, replete with detailed notes on tiberiustibz's path to getting there as well as processed frames- good, bad and ugly. It shouldn't be just a learning experience for him, but for anyone else interested. It means we're in this together.