OK, this is a good idea. I have even been thinking about getting both motion picture and 3D involved with the Kodachrome Project. I am getting the 3D rig this week.
Keep us posted..
Keep us posted..
The main purpose of this Kodachrome offering would be for 8&16mm Movie formats. It could also be offered in 120 and Sheet if Dwayne's has the ability to develop these formats. I imagine that Qualex still has a 120 developing machine somewhere. It wouldn't be necessary to offer it in 135 since this is already available from Kodak. Just to give you an idea of how much Film is used by Movie customers, one single 50 foot Super8 Cartridge uses the equivalent of 11.4 feet of 135! It wouldn't take long for Movie customers to use up a Master Roll of Film. If Kodak seriously wanted to keep Kodachrome viable, they would be selling it in all formats. Wittner has the ability to cut up and perforate Film, and package it in Super8mm Carts or 16mm Reels -- they wouldn't need to rely on Kodak to do this. The only problem is expense for European customers in sending Film to Dwayne's for processing. That Swiss Lab was really important for European Kodachrome users.
This is really exciting, I hope you're successful! I use K40 in 16mm and regular 8mm myself, and have a dwindling supply of film in my freezer.The main purpose of this Kodachrome offering would be for 8&16mm Movie formats.
Dwayne's have never processed 120 Kodachrome. And unless I'm mistaken, Kodachrome sheet film was only ever processed in Rochester, and not since the 1950s.It could also be offered in 120 and Sheet if Dwayne's has the ability to develop these formats.
I have previously talked to Wittner about offering recut and reporforated K64 in movie formats, and they told me they they'd like to but can't because Kodak does not offer it in long unperforated rolls. (Fuji does offer Velvia 50 and T64 in such a way; that is why you can find those emulsions in 16mm, 8mm, and even 9.5mm!) So I'm sure you'd have the support of Wittner in this undertaking - have you talked to them about it yet?Wittner has the ability to cut up and perforate Film, and package it in Super8mm Carts or 16mm Reels
Yes, you're talking about the "pre-1960" Kodachrome. It was ASA 10 in its daylight version, and was offered in both still and movie formats. Since Kodachrome II was introduced in 1960 it was all ASA 25 and faster.Hi Fredrik,
I was thinking of the old ASA 10 Movie Film. I'm not sure if it was offered as photographic Film.
If I had to choose between 10 or 25 for a modern Kodachrome version, I would certainly prefer 10 ISO. It would be much better for 8&16mm users. :rolleyes:
Dan, are you referring to photographic (still) 3D, or Movie 3D? Movie 3D had three main types: two cameras, and one camera with the L&R Frames on one Filmstrip either over/under or side-by-side.OK, this is a good idea. I have even been thinking about getting both motion picture and 3D involved with the Kodachrome Project. I am getting the 3D rig this week.
Fredrik, have you contacted Wittner in the past few months? They had bought a whole bunch of the remaining K40 (16mm) Stock from Kodak. Check their Website to see what's for sale.Fredrik Sandstrom said:This is really exciting, I hope you're successful! I use K40 in 16mm and regular 8mm myself, and have a dwindling supply of film in my freezer.
120 would only be possible if a developing machine still exists somewhere for Dwayne to get a hold of. I believe that Sheet Film can be developed manually in a tray. The only delicate part is the Blue Light exposure. The Red Light exposure is not so risky.Dwayne's have never processed 120 Kodachrome. And unless I'm mistaken, Kodachrome sheet film was only ever processed in Rochester, and not since the 1950s.
Wittner told me the same thing when I suggested it to them last Fall. I'm more familiar with dealing with North American companies, and so I could get the ball rolling for them. European and Japanese companies are of course more customer-service oriented than Anglo-Saxon companies. That's why Fuji is much more cooperative.I have previously talked to Wittner about offering recut and reporforated K64 in movie formats, and they told me they they'd like to but can't because Kodak does not offer it in long unperforated rolls. (Fuji does offer Velvia 50 and T64 in such a way; that is why you can find those emulsions in 16mm, 8mm, and even 9.5mm!) So I'm sure you'd have the support of Wittner in this undertaking - have you talked to them about it yet?
Wow, that's interesting. I would have thought that K10 would have been super fine. Was K10 out of the 1930s? I have a super old Brownie 8mm wind-up Movie Camera that used K10 16mm.... Consider that in spite of being faster, Kodachrome II and Kodachrome 25 were really finer grained than the original ASA 10 Kodachrome.
Most of that is gone. There's some Super8 and Double Super 8 still available. (But I don't do those formats.) They ran out of 16mm in March last year IIRC, and regular 8mm in January this year.Fredrik, have you contacted Wittner in the past few months? They had bought a whole bunch of the remaining K40 (16mm) Stock from Kodak.
Hi Matt,Terry, as a long time Super8 and 16mm enthusiast and small time amateur cinematographer, I can see issues with offering K64 for MP. As I'm sure you know, the now discontinued Kodachome for MP was a 40ASA tungsten balanced stock, because this makes sense - use the 85 filter when outside as there is likely to be more light, leaving the film at full speed for use under artificial (and cheap) tungsten light.
...
I gave up shooting K40 well before it was discontinued and moved onto negative emulsions.
Hi Matt,
It doesn't sound like you were using Super8 for "home" movies -- as I do. The Negative S8 Stocks are only for Telecine which is fine when you're only doing filming for video transfer. The Ektachrome 64T Stock, as you note, is not exactly suitable. For my part, I never used the Filter when shooting K40 outdoors, and I got excellent images. The Camera's Auto Aperture worked fantastically in providing the proper f-stop. A lot of S8 users are paranoid about blue tinge outdoors, but I never suffered this. If you did use the Filter I can see why you might not have been impressed with K40. The Filter causes degradation of the light image. Additionally, if your S8 Camera uses a p-type viewfinder -- which my Sankyo does not, you suffer further degradation of the light image caused by the prism. I intend to get a few still scans of a few of my K40 Frames, and I'll show you them. I think you'll be surprised at how great Kodachrome can be. For their part, Wittner mostly serves Germany, and Germans absolutely loved S8 Kodachrome!They are not happy campers without Kodachrome.
The main purpose of this Kodachrome offering would be for 8&16mm Movie formats.
Just wondering, when was the last time they made Kodachrome in sheet film sizes? I used one roll of K64 in rollfilm, but everything else on 35mm. And, wondering, when did Kodachrome first go public and who invented the film and process? I guess that's too many questions.
Yes, the speeds are off for super 8 use.
Are you sure you never used a filter? The effects of not using a filter are more properly characterized by a "severe color cast"
I can't understand this. Isn't the point of the reexposure steps to expose ALL the thitherto unexposed silver halides in each layer? K40 has higher blue sensitivity than K25, so in the blue re-exposure step, the K40 will be "finished" a little sooner, but so what? That must surely be the case when processing K25 and K200 together too! I can't see that affecting color balance.Just as a side note, Tungsten Kodachrome cannot be processed along with Daylight Kodachrome. The reason is rather easy to explain. The ratios of R/G/B speeds are different, and therefore the re-exposure steps differ. If you re-expose Tungsten Kodachrome as if it were Daylight, it is as if you exposed it using Daylight. (kinda - it is not exactly the same for the reason that the magenta layer always gets the same level of fog to finish it up.
Ron, wouldn't the only difference be the re-exposure time for the Blue Layer? If the "daylight" Films have the Blue Layer expose a bit slower than the R&G, this would only require the Blue Light re-exposure during the developing process to be a bit longer. I don't think a longer Blue exposure would matter for "tungsten" Films, would it? The Kodak summary I read specifies K-14M process for 25, 64&200, but doesn't mention K40.Just as a side note, Tungsten Kodachrome cannot be processed along with Daylight Kodachrome. The reason is rather easy to explain. The ratios of R/G/B speeds are different, and therefore the re-exposure steps differ. If you re-expose Tungsten Kodachrome as if it were Daylight, it is as if you exposed it using Daylight. (kinda - it is not exactly the same for the reason that the magenta layer always gets the same level of fog to finish it up.
So, you have 2 settings on the machine or 2 machines dedicated to the two films.
I use a bolt in the Light Socket to keep the Filter out. The concern outdoors is the Rayleigh effect, but this really should only be a problem when it is cloudy or overcast. If you're in a contained scene where the background does not go back more than a few hundred metres, you shouldn't suffer this problem. I wish I had a scan of my outdoor images to show you.tiberiustibz said:Are you sure you never used a filter? The effects of not using a filter are more properly characterized by a "severe color cast" which underexposes a layer (red I think in daylight w/ tungsten film) of the film and is irreversible by digital correction/filtration means. Most cameras have automatic internal filters which pop into the path of light when a tungsten cartridge is inserted via a pin system which is also used to indicate ASA such that you won't notice. ...
The Prism reduces the sharpness / resolution of the light image. A Filter does the same. Sankyo must have had a Patent on their viewfinder idea which involved a 'mirror' just below the Aperture which reflected a 'parallax' image to the viewfinder. Later Models used a Prism (still below the Aperture) to split this image with the Light Meter. It gives you the same view as an external viewfinder on top of the Camera, but more accurate since it is behind the Zoom Lens.... The prism type viewfinder causes a loss of about a stop of light. I don't think it degrades the image. The old 85A filters which are built into the camera will though to some extent; this varies by camera. Some cameras have a TTL finder which flickers as it films as it uses a mirror when the shutter is closed to reflect light, and in this case you will get no light loss and no image degradation and have the advantage of the TTL viewing. ...
On February 1st, 2007 I sent Kodak the following E-Mail suggesting that they inform their customers about Qualex, and also start using Qualex as a 'delivery service' to their customers. They did nothing, and in an incomprehensibly stupid act are closing down Qualex. I gave them that good advice for free. How much do they pay the worthless Executives mismanaging that company?PHOTOTONE said:... Kodak should figure out a way to more directly connect with the end user of their film products, since their dealers are not providing this service anymore.
Hi Matt,Yes - I'm sure you must have used a filter, maybe without knowing it. The colour cast is really serious without it.
Hi Matt,
I can assure you that my Filter was out.Remember, it's more cloudy in Britain which makes blue tinge a bigger problem. The distance of the background in the scene also matters.
Here is an important page I wrote on the Clutch in Super8 Cameras. It ran in Smalformat Magazine last year. Below is another one on the Cartridge you'll find interesting.
http://www.geocities.com/filmanddigitalinfo/index_s8_camera_maintenance.html
http://www.geocities.com/filmanddigitalinfo/index_s8_cart.html
I cannot imagine that, and I'd really like to see some scans. The difference between 3400K and 5500K is huge.I'm sure it is possible to obtain acceptable results without an 85 filter,
I cannot imagine that, and I'd really like to see some scans. The difference between 3400K and 5500K is huge.
I take the opposite view. I think that Kodak should thank its customers -- not the other way around! Fuji still makes sound Straight 8 Cartridges after their customers complained when they tried to discontinue it a couple years ago. What is it, 10 years since Kodak scrapped Sound Super8? Why should Kodak's Super8 customers thank them? They could have given us the 16mm K40 when they scrapped the 8mm K40. There would have been plenty of demand between 16&8mm customers for the 16mm K40. They could have also offered K40 to their 135 customers as well. That's the problem with Western / Anglo Companies: they don't respect their customers!Matt5791 said:... All in all I just think that Kodachrome for Super8 is just dated now and we should thank Kodak for continuing to support the format at all. ...
Ron, are you saying that the Yellow Filter is not completely reliable? Why would Red Light possibly affect the Green Layer? Green Light (no longer used) of course would affect the Red Layer.Each Kodachrome takes a different level of Blue and Red re-exposure to prevent punching light through to the adjacent layer, but the ratios are the same for all daylight films. ...
Dwayne needs to make sure.... If you apply too much Blue light re-exposing the Blue layer, you risk exposing the Green layer. In addition, the Green layer sensitivity is broad enough that overexposing the red layer may cause Green exposure and this would degrade film quality....
Now, the absorber dyes may add some protection, but I doubt they would be there by that time, and film sensitivity goes down during processing, so there may be some equalizing factors in play, but I remember that the re-exposing lights had several settings on them.
Lets just say that you better make sure before you try!
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?