Kodachrome in 127

[DLawson]

Is there any chance that someone has a reference for when Kodachrome was last available in 127?

I just got a "new" camera (Balda Baldi, 1930s German folder) that I opened to find contained a roll of film. All I have for ID is half of the tape that once held the roll closed. That has something ending in "CHROME" (white letters on red block) with "Kodak" (red letters on white background) under that. The leader paper is pink/plum and doesn't say much -- "kodak" on the edges and "127" at the lead.

I'm assuming Kodachrome.

The slightly odd thing is that it wasn't used. It's on the dispensing spool, not the take-up.

Is there any way of knowing what sort of KC it was? My investigations certainly ruined the first several inches of film, so this is really just intellectual curiosity. I assumed that anything before the last crop would be impossible to get processed anyway.

 

[AgX]

The fact that `Kodak´ is printed below the film name does not hint at Kodachrome at all.

What about `Verichrome´ by Kodak?

 

[Alex Bishop-Thorpe]

I'd think Verichrome would be far more likely. I've seen references to kodachrome in 126 (instamatic format) but never 127. If it was kodachrome, it'd be the old variety that could no longer be processed to colour. Have a crack at developing it and see what comes out.

 

[DLawson]

The fact that `Kodak´ is printed below the film name does not hint at Kodachrome at all.

What about `Verichrome´ by Kodak?

You know, despite the (repeated) recent threads on the etymology of Verichrome, somehow that completely slipped my mind.

I blame Friday evening braincell deficiency.

In other words, "oops."

 

[railwayman3]

Could also be Ektachrome, which was available in 127. "Original" Ektachrome (with no suffix, -X or -64, etc.,) might be from the late 50's or early 60's?.

 

[mattmoy_2000]

The plum coloured paper suggests the 1970s to me - that's the colour of the paper on my 70's Plus-X.

 

[Ian Grant]

Verichrome Pan had a plum coloured backing paper, it was the first film I used, in a Kodak Brownie 127. It was Kodak's highest selling B&W film at one point.

Ian

 

[DLawson]

Verichrome Pan had a plum coloured backing paper, it was the first film I used, in a Kodak Brownie 127. It was Kodak's highest selling B&W film at one point.

Ian

Cool, then I think I'll just have a try at shooting it. The memory is fuzzy, but I think this will be the first roll of Verichrome that I've developed.

 

[DLawson]

FYI, the "exposed" tag at the other end confirmed Verichrome. I'm not expecting much, but it would be cool if some of it worked -- decades old film in a ~70 year old camera, shooting hundred year old architecture (with the occasional microwave tower intruding).

 

[nworth]

Kodachrome was never available in 127. Ektachrome was available, however.

 

[IloveTLRs]

According to here and here, Kodachrome was available in 127. Not straight from the horses mouth, but ...

 

[railwayman3]

According to here and here, Kodachrome was available in 127. Not straight from the horses mouth, but ...

I think those links may include mis-prints. In the first "VP-127" is the Kodak code for Verichrome Pan. Ektachrome was certainly in 127...my late father had a "Baby Rolleiflex" for a while, but I've no 127 Kodachrome transparencies from his collection in that size, and I know he liked Kodachrome for most of his 35mm work.

 

[BradS]

seems like Kodak did not stop selling 127 size film until sometime in the mid to late 1990's. I remember Ektachrome and even Kodacolor were quite commonly available in 127 size in the 1960's and 1970's and it seems like they were still available for those who went looking well into the 1980's.

 

[MattKing]

I know that it was certainly available in 828, because my father used to shoot it in his Bantam RF.

I would be surprised if it wasn't available in 127.

Matt

 

[nickrapak]

It was available in 828 because it was 35mm wide. From the mid 50s to the mid 80s, there was no Kodachrome wider than 35mm.

 

[Brac]

According to here and here, Kodachrome was available in 127. Not straight from the horses mouth, but ...

I think the authors of those quotes were incorrect in their memories. When Kodachrome came out it was available in 35mm cassettes and 828 roll-film, which as someone else has pointed out are both the same width. In the early forties it was available in sheet film for a few years. Later at various times it came out in 126, 110 & last of all, for a few years, in 120. I have never seen it 127, nor seen it listed in an old Kodak catalogue in that size, or ever come across any reliable reference to it being available in that size. Ektachrome was however available in 127 and I still have a couple of rolls in the freezer.

 

[railwayman3]

I think the authors of those quotes were incorrect in their memories. When Kodachrome came out it was available in 35mm cassettes and 828 roll-film, which as someone else has pointed out are both the same width. In the early forties it was available in sheet film for a few years. Later at various times it came out in 126, 110 & last of all, for a few years, in 120. I have never seen it 127, nor seen it listed in an old Kodak catalogue in that size, or ever come across any reliable reference to it being available in that size. Ektachrome was however available in 127 and I still have a couple of rolls in the freezer.

I think this is confirmed by the point that (after sheet film had been phased out in favour of Ektachrome), the remaining films were of a width that could be processed in one size of continuous machine...i.e. 126 and 828 are 35mm wide, and 110 is 16mm, as in 16mm or double-8 cine.

120 seemed to be a bit of an afterthought in later years perhaps to try to capture or re-capture some of the professional market, maybe when a lot had swapped to the later entrance of Fuji?