KODACHROME a question for photo engineers.

[PKM-25]

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..

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.

 

[Photo Engineer]

I don't know the answers to any of your questions Terry, but I do know that if different support is involved in any of the products you want, it will involve a master roll of EACH!

PE

 

[Fredrik Sandstrom]

The main purpose of this Kodachrome offering would be for 8&16mm Movie formats.

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.

It could also be offered in 120 and Sheet if Dwayne's has the ability to develop these 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.

Wittner has the ability to cut up and perforate Film, and package it in Super8mm Carts or 16mm Reels

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?

Hi Fredrik,
I was thinking of the old ASA 10 Movie Film. I'm not sure if it was offered as photographic Film.

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.

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:

Well yes, a super slow but modern Kodachrome would be interesting, but it'd be a completely different product and likely need a lot of research. Not gonna happen! Consider that in spite of being faster, Kodachrome II and Kodachrome 25 were really finer grained than the original ASA 10 Kodachrome.

But actually, last summer when I was shooting with a primitive 8mm camera that didn't have an adjustable shutter I became annoyed that the 25 speed film was too damn fast! In bright daylight I had to stop down to f/11 when I would have preferred to use a larger aperture. ASA 10 would surely have been nice then. (ND filters would have worked too...)

 

[TerryM]

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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 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.

... Consider that in spite of being faster, Kodachrome II and Kodachrome 25 were really finer grained than the original ASA 10 Kodachrome.

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.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Ron, I was just curious as to whether K25 Emulsions were thicker than K64. I can't think of any logical explanation for a 50% spoilage rate other than too little gelatin to hold the Layer together. Since K25 stuffed more Halides into the Layers it would require more gelatin to provide the same degree of cohesion as K64. It would be good to find out the answer. Is there an approximate spoilage rate for Film in general -- like 10% or so?

 

[Fredrik Sandstrom]

Fredrik, have you contacted Wittner in the past few months? They had bought a whole bunch of the remaining K40 (16mm) Stock from Kodak.

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.

 

[Matt5791]

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.

Further to this there are many Super8 cameras of the more basic variety which wont meter with 64ASA film - this has caused problems when kodak introduced Ektachrome 64T in Super8.

Most Super8 and 16mm shot today is used as a capture medium only - most serious users will telecine transfer the results after processing for digital edit and release in a digital format (especially with the vast improvements in digital projection in recent years). And if you are doing this it makes a lot more sense to use the Vision negative films which Kodak has made available for some time now in both 200 and 500ASA. You get a lot more control in telecine, not to mention the massive latitude and hugely increased speed over tradition kodachrome material. Plus, the process ECN-2 is very widely available - I can shoot 16mm colour neg and have it processed overnight in London at 0.10p/ft. with an ultrasonic clean (or Leeds for that matter....Dead Link Removed )

I gave up shooting K40 well before it was discontinued and moved onto negative emulsions.

Matt

 

[TerryM]

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 prism-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.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Guys;

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.

PE

 

[nickandre]

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 prism-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.

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" 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 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.

You can get super 8 negative stock printed to a positive for projection. This looks cool, I have yet to try it. This means we can shoot the Vision2 50D stock (finer grained than kodachrome and with much greater latitude) and make prints for projection.

PE, I assume that means that K25 stock cannot be processed with K64 nor with K40, correct? That must be a pain for dwaynes who receive very few rolls of K25.

 

[PHOTOTONE]

For years and years the photo dealer was Kodaks contact with the public. The dealer sold the film, and promoted using Kodak film. Of course Kodak backed up the dealer with Ad materials, in-store displays and national advertising, but Kodak generally didn't directly have contact with the end-user. (for Still films). Now the remaining "dealers" couldn't care less about film, rarely keep much inventory, and are reluctant to order in film for customers. Kodak has made ordering harder by only selling to regional distributors who then re-sell to dealers. Years ago a small Kodak dealer could place his order directly with Kodak, not anymore. I still get the professional films I need, and chemistry, but it is much harder, I have to control my inventory much better, and be a better "guesser" at my future needs so as to have film onhand, as my vendors do not stock much if any, and they have to order when I order.

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.

 

[Photo Engineer]

All daylight films take the same balance, IIRC, just vary the intensity and therefore the films can be intercut with proper machine instructions and leader between groups, but the tungsten needs a different balance. IDK, in the new processor, if this is merely a matter of a change in intensity or a change in time.

It may be automated but I assure you that something must be done for the different Kodachrome films. I'm amazed that the K25 and K64 went through the same process at all due to the differences in thickness. I guess that was all considered at design time. I know that with the original process, thickness was critical as it was a diffusion related process and thickness goverened the entire thing.

PE

 

[geoferrell]

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.

 

[PHOTOTONE]

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.

I think most if not all of your questions can be answered by this Wikipedia entry on Kodachrome:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kodachrome

 

[Matt5791]

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"

Yes - I'm sure you must have used a filter, maybe without knowing it. The colour cast is really serious without it.

I may not explained myself very well - I liked Kodachrome with 8/16mm, and the results could be amazing, but it is just SO slow at 25ASA with the 85filter.

I know amateur "shoot and project" is very popular in Germany, but this market is very small indeed and they are not adverse to using neg film and editing digitally - if I am wrong then I would expect a company like Wittner to commision a roll of kodachrome from Kodak.

The bulk of super8 film used today is for later telecine by professional productions. I can think of countless TV programmes, adverts and movies which have utilised Super8. This is why Kodak took the trouble to release the negative emulsions and why Pro8mm in Burbank has been so successful.

In the end the biggest problem is the fact there is only one lab in the world processing, and that really kills the whole thing, even if Kodak gave a mother roll to Wittner or someone for free!

I do use Super8 / 16mm for home movies and for this I shoot neg film too because I want sound, I want to edit digitally and I want to distribute to my friends.

Last time I went sking I spent most of the time with a Beaulieu R16 in a back pack loaded with Fuji 64D - it was a pretty extreme (and expensive) home movie, but the results are just astounding! Espcially if you can get to master snow boarding and holding the camera at the same time......

So, for me, Kodachrome has been overtaken, well and truly, for motion picture.

Ironically, if it wasn't for the digital revolution and cheap editing software I believe Super8, as a format, would have been consigned to history probably in the mid '90s.

 

[Fredrik Sandstrom]

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.

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.

Also, Dwayne's have stated that they will continue to offer processing of Kodachrome movie film (most of which is tungsten balanced K40) for as long as they process Kodachrome slides, precisely because the process is the same. You're now telling us this is not true? :confused:

And in practice, the turnaround time for Dwayne's K40 processing is the same as for normal slides (i.e. same day, ignoring shipping), even though the amount of K40 they receive must be miniscule by comparison. I have a hard believing they make a "tungsten run" every day and don't just run all the film together.

 

[TerryM]

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.

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.

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. ...

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.

... 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. ...

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.

... 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.

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?

Feb. 1/07 E-Mail to Kodak:
" One thing Qualex does offer is free delivery to Dwayne's for Kodachrome customers. Kodak should inform all of its Kodachrome Customers that they can drop their Film off at Wal-Mart or any Qualex photo store, and Qualex will deliver it to Dwayne's and back to their local Wal-Mart without shipping charges. Postal Fees (not to mention delays) for mailing Kodachrome would be a major reason why Photographers stop using Kodachrome. The minimum Parcel Rate in Canada is $6 dollars plus tax! ...You might suggest to Qualex that they run Ads on Photo Websites to inform Photographers about Qualex. Qualex also delivered the Kodachrome Super8mm and 16mm Film Cartridges for free to the Swiss Lab before it closed, but almost nobody knew about it. I saved $6.84 on Postage for the S8 Cartridge with Qualex, and this also saved Kodak $6.84 in return Postage since Qualex returned the developed Film back to my local Wal-Mart. I don't know why nobody at Kodak thought of telling your Customers about Qualex way back when it was founded in 1988. What Kodak should start doing is use Qualex as a delivery service for your direct product sales to your Customers such as Super8mm and 16mm Movie Film and Slide Film. This is safer than mailing undeveloped Film, and will save Kodak plenty of money on Postage Fees. Qualex has the potential of giving Kodak a competitive advantage."

 

[TerryM]

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

 

[Matt5791]

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

Well its definitely cloudy here a lot!

I'm sure it is possible to obtain acceptable results without an 85 filter, but I dont think it is all that practical, most of the time.

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. Apparently it almost did get the chop back in the 90's as it was then part of the consumer stills division (or whatever it is/was called). Motion Picture heard about it and enthusiasts there persuaded the transfer of control of the product to come to them, hence it lives today.

In case anyone was interested, in the UK the best place to buy Super8 film is direct from Entertainment Imaging in Hemel Hempstead.

http://motion.kodak.com/GB/en/motion/index.htm Click on "Vision" to get download with contacts etc. Dan Clark was the guy I dealt with last.

Likewise, Fuji 16mm is best obtained from direct from Fuji motion picture:

http://www.motion.fuji.co.uk/misc/meetteam.html

Always interesting to see what has been shot on the various emulsions. Slumdog Millionaire seems to have opted fro Fuji.
http://www.motion.fuji.co.uk/misc/productions.html

Matt

 

[Fredrik Sandstrom]

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.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Terry;

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. For tungsten films, the ratios change as well as the intensity. IDK the exact change needed. Sorry. I just know that you must be versed in this to accomplish proper reversal.

PE

 

[Matt5791]

I cannot imagine that, and I'd really like to see some scans. The difference between 3400K and 5500K is huge.

Well I agree with you, but I guess a sunset would be an opportunity to try.

But as I say, it is hardly practical to try to survive without the filter. I always used it with K40.

Matt

 

[TerryM]

... 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. ...

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!

I'll try to get my K40 scanned in the next week so you can see it for yourself. I have one comparison scene of about 20 seconds where I started with the Filter in, and then put it out. I definitely like the images with it out.

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. ...

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.

Attached below is Kodak's Document.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Terrry, the Green and Red sensitive layers have blue sensitivity which increases as the speed goes up. 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.

I'm familiar with that document, but you have to consider that the filters are not perfect and the films have some overlap. The Yellow filter layer is only reliable to a certain point, and you can punch through. I have seen it happen.

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!

PE

 

[TerryM]

... 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!

Dwayne needs to make sure.
Yes you're right, there is some Red Spectral Sensitivity overlapping into Green above LOG 0. K200 seems to be the worst.

However, wouldn't it be a better developing process to first re-expose the Red Layer with Red Light (perhaps 2 minutes) through the Base. Then re-expose the Green Layer with Green Light (2 minutes) and then White Light (1 minute) through the Base. Finally, just re-expose the Blue Layer with White Light (3 minutes) through the Emulsion Side. This would provide a much better guarantee of full exposure of the Red Layer (with less time) without contaminating the Green, and the Green and Blue Layer exposures would also be guaranteed. This all but eliminates the problem caused by loss of Red Absorber Dyes.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Terry;

I guess I cannot even muddle through what you propose. It looks like more work and the potential for more, not less, contamination. Sorry. It seems to me that what you propose is untenable. And, I'm sure that if there is a problem, the machine is automated to the extent that it works properly, but then, we don't have to worry, there is only K64 out there now.

PE