Kodachrome home developed!!!!!! (not me)

[Rudeofus]

Although rockland's couplers might be completely crap compared to Kodak's, I assume they offer fairly long-lasting dyes. People have been using this product on black and white prints, so I assume it's not that bad and will last a decade or two at least. The old films and whatnot did not have very good couplers, yet they still last quite some time, albeit with some fading.

Some last, some don't. My in laws have a stash of slides, 30-50 years old. Some Ektachromes are ok, most are faded beyond recognition. Kodachromes look like new.

@AgX: color film products changed a lot, even when the process itself didn't. Therefore color developer itself may be important, but choice of coupler definitely affects longevity of final product, too.

 

[trendland]

+1. I really can't see why some people seem to want to make harsh posts....unless it's indigestion through too much booze and food over Christmas, or a need to get out for some fresh air ?.

The OP has drawn our attention to a link, which may be of interest. If it's not, or if you don't believe it, just click your mouse and move on to something which does interest you ?

If you asking me it does not go about
making harsh post ?
Kodachrome is a little more complicate than all other processing. (to the most - including me.....I have to say. ..)
If you are asking me it goes about to respect a post and to respect the oppinium of an OP.
And the best way to do this isn't to state : Great work...fine results...you are an expert...I like this....+1 like it also...pretty
work - go ahead with this fine and informative examples.....how did you practice such impressive investigation.....
Kodachrome is just nice. ...+1 great work out....good job - well done...pls. update with additional information soon. ....
just pretty nice....I love this nice pictures
+ 1 (me too) AND SO ON !
The best way to respect an opinium is to
take somebody seriously but therefore you have to discuss sometimes.
And to approach it is a need to state different positions.
So the OP can live with this ?
Would he be more glad without critical response ? Or with less response ?

with regards

 

[trendland]

Yeah, I had my doubts as to whether the images on the site were actually kodachrome or not, but I will trust them for now. You are quite right, trendland, that this will not work on black and white film. However, I believe that this will work on black and white paper with a two color red and green process, similar to the original two color kodachrome. As multigrade paper has two layers of differently sensitized film one could possibly expose one layer, develop it, then expose the second layer and develop it to give a color image.

Yes - I noticed my mistaken idea (to work out experimental with simple bw emulsions ) just at the beginning. ..
By the time - some colors may couple on
some layers of different other bw emulsions. One have to find out.But these colors wouldn't be with any correctness as with random due to the color sensitivity from layers of different normal films.
There is an other post here where someone wanted "wrong colors" - I just remember.

with regards

 

[Photo Engineer]

Knowing how hard it was for Steven Frizza to do this, I have serious doubts about the quality and longevity of the results here.

PE

 

[railwayman3]

[QUOTE="trendland, post: 2028797, member: 56548".
I have some doubts if a normal female creature is able to fulfill such complicate task......

Hope nothing of such creatures are reading this jet...

with regards[/QUOTE]

Do you know any "normal female creatures" ? My own wife has been a very competent still and cine photographer for many years, including still B&W and color processing, and movie editing. And I have no problem in admitting that her eye for pictures and composition is often quicker than mine. She a has a degree in industrial history and a post-grad in historical research, and, with various medical qualifications, has worked for many years in senior hospital positions. Presumably if you ever need to be admitted in an emergency to her hospital, you will be willing to wait while a more competent creature (presumably male?) is found to treat you ? Unbelieveable...........

 

[railwayman3]

Well - locutus I can't speak for the females you know - of cause I can't..

But to me... (from my experience) -
"Yes SERIOUSLY" !!! ....

with regards

PS : ..glad if it is still alowed to say-
because in some years from now one will
come for years into prisn caused from such statement
....

You are a truly sad creature.....what (if any) females have you known in your life ? In my career I have met many highly qualified (and attractive) women.... smart, humorous and intelligent, and easy and friendly to chat with. My three step-daughters are all highly qualified (MSc's) in medicine, fun-loving and loyal, with husbands in top jobs, and delightful little grandchildren. I guess that I ought to feel sorry for you.

 

[trendland]

Knowing how hard it was for Steven Frizza to do this, I have serious doubts about the quality and longevity of the results here.

PE

Have you noticed the workflow showed on the diagram given on the tumblr page
PE ? It seams to be little different with some steps in comparison to the method you have described/recomanded.
Well - as we should know allways more than one way comes to rome.
But from your expertise is it possible that way would work?
To me - let me short state "There is no respocability to wrong couplers - from anybody" - because labs are closed and Kodak themself stated : They can't say" if it is just allowed from modern regulations to use original agends/couplers if they were able to find them anywhere"
That looks like - it is not very clear (Kodak themselfes have pure speculations) if all compounds needed are still in production by chemical industry.So it looks much much like reformulation if Kodak ever decided to come back to Kodachrome.
But here it is not the issue from stability caused of wrong chemistry (no other way) - we all know it is roulette from characteristics - but let me short ask :
Is the process correct?
(No final wash/no stabilizer mentioned)
bleach is no need in simular K14 method as I remember correct due to colors within the bath (not coming from film).

with regards

PS : A work from bite your teeth - so Kodak decided to let it open (IF OR IF NOT RELAUNCH KODACHROME)

 

[Rudeofus]

Knowing how hard it was for Steven Frizza to do this, I have serious doubts about the quality and longevity of the results here.

AFAIK Steve's main ambition was to use the correct Kodachrome couplers, which were very difficult to obtain and quite expensive. Steve had very high standards, and apparently reached those, albeit with an amount of effort he was unwilling to go through ever again.

Most folks here agree, that Rockland's couplers match original Kodachrome couplers neither in dye hue, nor in longevity, but the overall process appears to be a lot less painful (i.e. buying a toner kit off the shelf vs. jumping through hoops set on fire with wads of your cash to get the real couplers). Sometimes a process has to be easy and cheap enough to be pursued at all, and sometimes a mediocre practical result is worth a lot more than a perfect but theoretical one.

 

[railwayman3]

Well - if you are asking - I should tell ?
Or better not - railwayman3 ????
Hmmm - I don't want that you explode soon - but OK : "not a single one is able to load a simple 135 cassette" ???

with regards

PS : Strange to imagine to be told how
K14 is easily made at home now.

As my old University Professor said many years ago "Don't attempt to argue with idiots, you won't win and they will drag you down to their level......"

My wife was the group expert at loading the Arriflex Super 16mm SR2 camera in her own Uni days, and was a neat shooter with the Pentax LX motor drive for the sports events. She can even still load a 35mm cassette.

 

[Rudeofus]

Well - if you are asking - I should tell ?
Or better not - railwayman3 ????
Hmmm - I don't want that you explode soon - but OK : "not a single one is able to load a simple 135 cassette" ???

trendland, when you posted that original statement, I sort of hoped that we just misunderstood you, that you didn't mean it that way, that you would sort of clear it up, that we would all laugh about it soon, only to end with the slow and painful realization that you were dead serious.

Wow!

ALL the women you have ever dealt with are complete morons, quite contrary to what most of us (including myself) here have experienced! You may want to consider, though, that you are that one common denominator to all these moronic women around you. Not sure, whether I would proudly announce this as you did ...

 

[Ian Grant]

Knowing how hard it was for Steven Frizza to do this, I have serious doubts about the quality and longevity of the results here.

PE

The image(s) shown have no quality, in terms of genuine Kodachromes. I never shot much Kodachrome but the few times I did the quality was superb, the only reason I didn't use it more was the slow postal process system in the UK, and I really only like K25 which was too slow in our dismal UK weather.

Ian

 

[AgX]

@AgX: color film products changed a lot, even when the process itself didn't. Therefore color developer itself may be important, but choice of coupler definitely affects longevity of final product, too.

With a given industrial chromogenic processing standard, only thing one can change is the coupler. But that does not neccessarily mean that such is the ultimate way.

But in any case we should not forget that the films processed were long outdated. It was obviously not intended to follow best practice but to get results.

 

[trendland]

trendland, when you posted that original statement, I sort of hoped that we just misunderstood you, that you didn't mean it that way, that you would sort of clear it up, that we would all laugh about it soon, only to end with the slow and painful realization that you were dead serious.

Wow!

ALL the women you have ever dealt with are complete morons, quite contrary to what most of us (including myself) here have experienced! You may want to consider, though, that you are that one common denominator to all these moronic women around you. Not sure, whether I would proudly announce this as you did ...

I realy expected such response rudeofus!
But special from you I've been suprised - cause I had a feeling you realize what some sentences would tell recived in ironic context.
If it would be indeed this we will find out later?
Now the OP and some others are in suspence what to hold from the mentioned methods with Kodachrome?

What me made a little doubtfull is :
The website (tumblr) refered from its origin to one posting here on Apug
(the Kodachrome threath from PE )
but - so it seams to me PE isn't realy amused about.
I can't say from experience but the chema from Steven Frizza.
with regards

 

[trendland]

With a given industrial chromogenic processing standard, only thing one can change is the coupler. But that does not neccessarily mean that such is the ultimate way.

But in any case we should not forget that the films processed were long outdated. It was obviously not intended to follow best practice but to get results.

OUTDATED Films - wow Agx - I had it in mind but I forget it to state - thats a real
center point.
The most films - Kodachromes 25/200 and (with a little longer avaibility)
Kodachrome 64 are much more than one full decade expired. So where is the problem? Short answer : there is no problem at all (with min. storage standart)
But the stuff we may regarding as
"Funky Kodachrome hype" is often bad Kodachrome SRATCH .......!!!

Tons of Super8 Kodachromes and still films find their way to ebay - as I stated before.
Just some weeks after Dwaynes shot up developing K14.
My last films were going there too (within the last week)
So these Kodachrome Sratch (expired date 1979, 1983. 1993, 1984 a.s.o.)
we realy have no need of original chems.
Often the storage comes worst in addition.
(expired 1992 but stored allways in the dark : $ 19,95 ....?...)
Than means found in the garage Agx?

with regards

 

[Young He]

Let us please keep any possibly offensive comments to ourselves. I am very sure both sexes are equally capable of loading 35mm film cassettes and processing film and whatever, but it does takes quite a bit of dedication (and someone crazy with enough money haha) to process kodachrome. I was not aiming to get into a debate about sexism or whatever this is, I was expecting a debate over the archivability of the film. Of course, the diyed couplers and processing will be very unarchival, but it is very interesting in how she used commercially available products to get a half decent result. To my untrained eyes, I see no obvious problems with the pictures. I have read another thread where people have been quite successful in developing kodachrome with expensive couplers, and that would not be anything I am going to try in the foreseeable future. This development with commercially available products, however, is quite interesting and I will possibly try this.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Have you noticed the workflow showed on the diagram given on the tumblr page
PE ? It seams to be little different with some steps in comparison to the method you have described/recomanded.
Well - as we should know allways more than one way comes to rome.
But from your expertise is it possible that way would work?
To me - let me short state "There is no respocability to wrong couplers - from anybody" - because labs are closed and Kodak themself stated : They can't say" if it is just allowed from modern regulations to use original agends/couplers if they were able to find them anywhere"
That looks like - it is not very clear (Kodak themselfes have pure speculations) if all compounds needed are still in production by chemical industry.So it looks much much like reformulation if Kodak ever decided to come back to Kodachrome.
But here it is not the issue from stability caused of wrong chemistry (no other way) - we all know it is roulette from characteristics - but let me short ask :
Is the process correct?
(No final wash/no stabilizer mentioned)
bleach is no need in simular K14 method as I remember correct due to colors within the bath (not coming from film).

with regards

PS : A work from bite your teeth - so Kodak decided to let it open (IF OR IF NOT RELAUNCH KODACHROME)

I cannot load that page for some reason, so I spoke from experience. Apologies

PE

 

[Photo Engineer]

With a given industrial chromogenic processing standard, only thing one can change is the coupler. But that does not neccessarily mean that such is the ultimate way.

But in any case we should not forget that the films processed were long outdated. It was obviously not intended to follow best practice but to get results.

You can change coupler and developing agent. Both have a profound influence on stability and development.

PE

 

[trendland]

I cannot load that page for some reason, so I spoke from experience. Apologies

PE

Aha ....I unterstand - me too - just concerning the original home page.
On the tumblr. site is a nice ilustration of full process. 3 steps per color with reversal exposure a.s.o.
The time of color developer is just a view seconds. First bath just 1 second (or 2 just from mind ) - a K14 machine (just in that worst condition we remember and with electronic from the 70th) is easily able to manage this short time.
Because of adjustments. ( after 0,8 seconds from film being in color bath - the film can come into a water step and reaches it after 1,25 seconds)
So just theoreticaly it comes to 1 second - because of little drops of color bath onto the film to further 0,xxx seconds. before color bath definitive is stoped from water step.
So I felt it should be nearly impossible to REACH only little corectness with drum development.

Thanks for answering

with regards

 

[AgX]

You can change coupler and developing agent. Both have a profound influence on stability and development.

In said so above, as I hinted at the fact that both, coupler and developing agent are of influence on dye stability.

But as long we have have standardized processes it is more likely for a film manufacturer to exchange/modify a coupler than for a processing bath manufacturer to change/modify a developing agent.

 

[dwross]

What, seriously!?

+1
As seems to be the case far too often lately, I don't know whether it's best to laugh or cry, or wonder if I'm missing a joke. Regardless, my thanks to all the good guys who push back. Appreciated. Respected.
d (a female)

 

[trendland]

+1
As seems to be the case far too often lately, I don't know whether it's best to laugh or cry, or wonder if I'm missing a joke. Regardless, my thanks to all the good guys who push back. Appreciated. Respected.
d (a female)

A female - fine lets make a test?
If you would read this sentence - what is your first reaction :
" I have some doubts if a normal male creature is able to fulfill such complicate task" posted frome a girl ?
A smile - isn't it ?
Next test : are you thinking it was seriously my serious meaning?
......A joke or a bad joke should be the answer

with regards

PS : of cause a bad joke I know - But remember - what about your smile

 

[bvy]

This is off topic and stupid. Take it somewhere else please.

 

[winger]

That's indeed true ....

RAILWAYMAN3 - isn't it ?

......I spoke about N O R M A L female creatures. But to fulfill such task
you realy need genius female creatures.
This lady the OP refered has obviously such good genes....
The issue that we (male) here on Apug are mostly with absolute genius talents is well known worldwide.
But railwayman3 - would you agree with
that female genius creatures -obviously they are still living on this earth (I followed with interest your versions) -
are a little underrepresented in darkrooms? OR what else?

with regards

PS : I stated it - in some years one come into prisn for that

#1 - Genius doesn't care if you have two X chromosomes or an X and a Y.
#2 - It doesn't take genius from either sex to do proper chemistry. Women are obviously just as capable as men when it doesn't require lifting something 100 pounds.
#3 - 'Til this thread I've given you credit for not being primarily an English speaker.
#4 - Your posts will now be reported to the mods. All you're doing is digging yourself deeper.

Another woman here, btw. And a chemist. (who doesn't give a cr@p about Kodachrome, but was interested enough to see what someone else was doing with chemistry)

 

[Cholentpot]

#1 - Genius doesn't care if you have two X chromosomes or an X and a Y.
#2 - It doesn't take genius from either sex to do proper chemistry. Women are obviously just as capable as men when it doesn't require lifting something 100 pounds.
#3 - 'Til this thread I've given you credit for not being primarily an English speaker.
#4 - Your posts will now be reported to the mods. All you're doing is digging yourself deeper.

Another woman here, btw. And a chemist. (who doesn't give a cr@p about Kodachrome, but was interested enough to see what someone else was doing with chemistry)

Your post needs more emoji.

 

[Wayne]

I've had about enough of it too.