Kodachrome in China?

Photo Engineer · Jan 9, 2011

Guys;

I have invested considerable time and money into recreating Azo and Kodabromide type papers, and a Super XX Ortho type film. I offer to teach it and can barely fill a class. Once it was below the "go" level but I taught it anyhow. But, all the time I get mail from APUG and PN members saying "Sorry I had to miss your class. Would you please send me all of your formulas and class notes?"

So, here is my proposition to you using that same paradigm. You all pool your savings and recreate Kodachrome and then give it away!

There are fewer die hard analog photo people who really want to do this than you think, and none of them will take a risk like this. Bet on it! TIP people are learning the hard way. So did I. No one wants to make it, they want to buy it - those that still care at all! Most of you send out your film for processing and don't even want to get your hands wet.

PE

Q.G. · Jan 9, 2011

railwayman3 said:
I dislike the consumeristic world as much as most people of my generation, but marketing is omnipotent if any company wants to make income and profits on an ongoing basis. You can make the finest quality goods at the best price, but, if the consumer doesn't know, and the goods don't sell......

Customers are fickle and illogical, businesses can't live on past glories, and there's always rivals gathering in the background to grab a slice of the action. I, too, don't like it, but I'm afraid it's a fact of the world we live in.

Indeed.

But back to that omnipotency: if the consumer does know, and the goods don't sell...
There's a limit to what marketing can do. Though you wouldn't say so nowadays, at least until recently, consumers did have a mind of their own.

And some still do. Were it up to my effort to keep E6 films alive, i'm afraid theirs would be a very short future too. Luckily (for those who use E6 films), it's not up to my effort, though it does make a tiny difference that i don't help. Add enough of those tiny differences together, and ... That's just the way things go.

michaelbsc · Jan 9, 2011

Photo Engineer said:
Guys;

I have invested considerable time and money into recreating Azo and Kodabromide type papers, and a Super XX Ortho type film. I offer to teach it and can barely fill a class. Once it was below the "go" level but I taught it anyhow. But, all the time I get mail from APUG and PN members saying "Sorry I had to miss your class. Would you please send me all of your formulas and class notes?"

I cannot make the class next weekend, but rather than your notes will you tell us your schedule?

And how much would you charge if I simply show up and stay at a hotel a few miles from you? For a one on one, or maybe one on two? (I know you just lamented about a class below class size.)

I realize the logistics of doing it out of your house may be more difficult than doing it out of a professional building like the Eastman facility.

MB

Sirius Glass · Jan 9, 2011

2F/2F said:
...and BUY SOME EKTACHROME, DAMMMITT!

Good advice, although I always preferred Ektachrome to Kodachrome. As you have pointed out many times in the past, while we will really miss some lost films, we should move on and find a replacement. If we do not use film, the film sales will drop and we will loose another emulsion. As Smokey Robinson said I Second That Emulsion!

Steve

Photo Engineer · Jan 9, 2011

Michael;

I do have home workshops. I had to quit for a while for 2 reasons. One was the problem with liability due to the nature of the course, and the other was due to a family problem. Both are solved so feel free to contact me. I do them few and far between due to the huge load it puts on my wife and I. It is 5 days, 8 hours / day.

PE

railwayman3 · Jan 9, 2011

Q.G. said:
Indeed.

But back to that omnipotency: if the consumer does know, and the goods don't sell...
There's a limit to what marketing can do.

Well, yes...if goods are totally not needed, unsuitable or wrong for the market, they will never sell. I'm thinking of good products which get no chance because of lack of good marketing...arguable it was Kodachrome that started the thread.

As a slightly silly example, I doubt that even Nike could sell many wooden clogs...the customers are just not there. But, while almost everyone knows their name for trainers and other gear, and a large proportion buy their goods, they still think it necessary to advertise direct and through sponsorship deals, just to keep their name in the public eye. I think that they know something.

jon falth · Jan 9, 2011

Photo Engineer said:
Kodak built a modern up-to-date factory in China which is now the property of the Chinese film industry. They have the equipment and the experience for making any Kodak product up to about 1995 or thereabouts.

Kodak had color film made there for a while, but could not get good quality even with their formulas and their equipment duplicated in China. At least that is AFAIK. There were other problems involved as well.

PE

I would only hope that their ability to copy all of the defense secrets we gave them translates into the same failure in producing nuclear weapons, planes, bombs and missles...

Antonov · Jan 9, 2011

bblhed said:
People have built and operated steam locomotives and boats.

All of those things work because there are roads and rails, and lakes to use them on, along with that you can still buy Gasoline, and coal, and wood grows out of the ground, water that can be made into steam is plentiful as well. Those items were made to be operated and maintained by average people and so they were relatively simple machines.

No, you are wrong. Steam machines have simple principle of work, but they are everything but simple machines. If you think that that is so easy, I will just tell you that one of main problems with todays operating steam locomotives is lack of people who have knowledge to properly operate them. Not to talk about maintaining. At least in Europe.

Photo Engineer said:
Antonov;

I did not bring up steam locomotives, you did. I was using disassembly to illustrate two facts. The first is that you can take it apart and put it together again and the second is that taking it apart shows you how it was put together. Neither of these is possible with film unless the film is totally destroyed in the process. And, you learn little by taking film apart!

Also, having made color papers and films, from scratch and by hand and by automated machine, I can assure you and everyone that building the locomotive is much easier than building the film from scratch. Now, if you include in that step of building a locomotive, the hand forging of drivers, and the hand milling of the flanged wheels, or in fact even the making of the steel for the castings of the locomotive, I might begin to agree with you a bit.

For film, you need tentered estar support with rem jet. You need an electron bombarder, you need a coating machine with chill, heat and two stations for holding those rolls. You need a slide hopper, you need silver nitrate, Tetraazaindene, NaBr, KI, HNO3, H2SO4, NaOH, Gelatin, Hypo, Rhodium Chloride, Iridium Chloride, 3 sensitizing dyes, 9 emulsions from the preceding, Di-t-Octyl HQ, Hardener..... etc... And you have to put them together to work with the process chemistry which is just as complex. BTW, this is only a partial list of ingredients. There are literally thousands of ingredients, but with a locomotive, there are not so many.

PE

Yes I did. Making a steam locomotive from scratch is very difficult task, no matter what you think. Steam locomotive is not just a pile of steel you assembly, it is complex machine, and I tell it to you as a railway engineer. If you think it is so easy, why not make one?
What do you think, how do you test locomotive when you make it? Where? What if something gets wrong? How can you inspect it? Lot of simple questions, but this is not forum for this, and I will not further discuss on this matter nor go further into it.
I just wanted to tell you that there is no need to make rocket science from film engineering ( with all due respect ), like I won't do that from railway engineering. Both are complex processes, not to be underestimated.

Diapositivo said:
Now put yourself in the clothes of Kodak managements. You are in the middle of a very difficult transition from analogue to digital imaging.

I agree. But, where was Kodak when Fuji made that step?

Colin Corneau said:
We can go back to the moon, too, if we want to...takes a lot more than wishes.

We all know that you weren't on the Moon. Stanley Kubrick directed it. ( I'm joking )

Photo Engineer said:
Guys;

I have invested considerable time and money into recreating Azo and Kodabromide type papers, and a Super XX Ortho type film. I offer to teach it and can barely fill a class. Once it was below the "go" level but I taught it anyhow. But, all the time I get mail from APUG and PN members saying "Sorry I had to miss your class. Would you please send me all of your formulas and class notes?"

So, here is my proposition to you using that same paradigm. You all pool your savings and recreate Kodachrome and then give it away!

There are fewer die hard analog photo people who really want to do this than you think, and none of them will take a risk like this. Bet on it! TIP people are learning the hard way. So did I. No one wants to make it, they want to buy it - those that still care at all! Most of you send out your film for processing and don't even want to get your hands wet.

PE

PE, why not record yourself and put videos on YouTube or Vimeo? I'm serious about it. I would go to every lesson, if you weren't across the ocean.

erikg · Jan 9, 2011

Antonov said:
No, NOT restoration. This locomotive is built from scratch. Whole new locomotive!

Who says it is so? They said same for Polaroid and what happened? They started to produce it again.

NHF, but people like you are the one killing Kodachrome, with constant bragging about "Kodachrome has lost market" etc.

Yes, I killed Kodachrome by moving on to other products that suited my needs and interests better. But there has been no bragging on my part constant or
otherwise.

My point about the locomotive was that it was funded largely through donations, my mistake for confusing that project with another. I love steam engines, and they were still being built in China not so very long ago, but that has nothing to do with film. Good luck with your project.

2F/2F · Jan 9, 2011

I'd much rather someone bring back T64, EPN, 320T, 800Z, Tri-X 320, Portra 400VC and NC, Pro 160S and C, and a basket full of films other than Kodachrome. The loss of Kodachrome is a very minimal loss to our photographic palettes. The loss of each of these others left a big hole in the palette.

Ray Rogers · Jan 9, 2011

It seems that a retired Kodak Engineer claims to be nearing success creating a garage Kodachrome.

I think the biggest error the nay sayers make is the assumption that large quantities need to be made.

This could be approached as a small scale private group project.

To say it is impossible seems a misjudgement of lengths crazy people will go to when told "You can't!"

Didn't a private company just (sort of) recently win a contest to put man in space or something?

http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0411/Byko-0411.html

If the engineer mentioned above really does succeed, what will the nay sayers say then?

Ozzy says there are no impossible dreams, and I would like to agree.

railwayman3 · Jan 9, 2011

2F/2F said:
The loss of Kodachrome is a very minimal loss to our photographic palettes. The loss of each of these others left a big hole in the palette.

That is just one person's opinion, to which you are fully entitled, of course. Others' opinions are equally valid.....personal preferences, different artistic intentions, differences in color vision, the loss of any choice of film even if we don't use it ourselves, and even good old plain nostalgia are all allowable?

Q.G. · Jan 9, 2011

Ray Rogers said:
It seems that a retired Kodak Engineer claims to be nearing success creating a garage Kodachrome.

[...]

If the engineer mentioned above really does succeed, what will the nay sayers say then?

They'll ask him where they can get their Kodachrome processed.

railwayman3 · Jan 9, 2011

Ray Rogers said:
It seems that a retired Kodak Engineer claims to be nearing success creating a garage Kodachrome.

I think the biggest error the nay sayers make is the assumption that large quantities need to be made.

This could be approached as a small scale private group project.

To say it is impossible seems a misjudgement of lengths crazy people will go to when told "You can't!"

Well, I wouldn't have thought that the first successful attempt by Mannes and Godowsky produced a 25,000 foot master roll.....

And I believe that PE himself has said here that he's seen small tank processing at Kodak...

Many things and projects in life are VERY difficult indeed, but that's not the same as impossible.

2F/2F · Jan 9, 2011

railwayman3 said:
That is just one person's opinion, to which you are fully entitled, of course. Others' opinions are equally valid.....personal preferences, different artistic intentions, differences in color vision, the loss of any choice of film even if we don't use it ourselves, and even good old plain nostalgia are all allowable?

It is a little bit more than an opinion. It is a provable position that we lost more versatility and artistic control with any one of the recent film discontinuances than we did with Kodachrome. E-6 and C-41 films are much more pliable and varied. Any film gone is such a tragedy, but why go through all this work for a film that really wasn't that special, physically speaking? If there is an argument to be made for wanting to make it again, it should be made from the nostalgia angle. That is the only angle that makes sense for me.

What if there was an E-6 film that looked just like Kodachrome? Then would people be happy?

msa · Jan 9, 2011

2F/2F said:
What if there was an E-6 film that looked just like Kodachrome? Then would people be happy?

I would.

I'm not married to the process.

But I do like the look and feel.

'Kodachrome' that I could drop off at my local pro lab and pick up in 90 minutes? In 120 as well as 135? Sold!

Photo Engineer · Jan 9, 2011

Antonov;

If film making were easy, then there would be more small house shops making simple films. I've built model locomotives, so I challenge you to make 1 hand coating from your own emulsion. If it is so easy, you should have no problem. We can compare notes afterwards and I'll show you photos of my half dozen or so hand made locomotives. (HO scale)

As for the making of Kodachrome, of course it is possible, just as it is possible to hand process. Is it possible to commercialize it now? That is another matter that approaches the impossible due to all of the factors I have mentioned before. I have never said it was impossible to recreate, but it will be VERY difficult.

PE

Bob-D659 · Jan 9, 2011

The larger problem than making Kodachrome and chemistry in really small runs just might be price to end users, who would be interested in paying $50 or so for a 135-36 roll and maybe another $50 or so for processing?

I'm reasonably sure Kodak would resume production of both the film and chemistry if someone ordered a couple of master rolls every year and the chemistry for it. The decision to stop production was solely based on economics.

2F/2F · Jan 9, 2011

Well, what about "New Kodachrome?" An E-6 film that looks as close as physically possible to Kodachrome?

It sounds much more feasible to me. Kodak proper, if anyone, may even decide that it is in their interests to make such a thing some day.

Or is it really just the name that people want?

Photo Engineer · Jan 9, 2011

I have said before that an Ektachrome product can be made to resemble Kodachrome.

There are several barriers in the way however. The E6 market is the smallest of the color markets now and therefore cannot support the R&D. The other reason is that there has been a shift in the customer base towards a different look in slides. Several here have pointed that out.

PE

BrianL · Jan 9, 2011

Ric, who cares 30 years later. Well, been there and done that. I've got Kodachrome from 30+ years ago and other slide films from the same period, all stored the same way and the Kodachrome has no loss or shifts whatsoever while the others are in some stage of fading. At my age, I happened across many of these only recently having been stored decades ago and it is wonderful to revisit the past especially as now I am medically hampered. Also, now is the time they are of some interest to my son who is not as old to see what his old man used to do and the results. He was brought up on film but is now using digital and half the time loses the images as a harddrive crashes or he erases them by mistake. I can see that as time passes future generations of collections of images will simply not exist as they did in the past with film.

I could have seen a market for Kodachrome in an archival duplication system for digital and as a film for general use. CDs, hard drives, etc. have a more limited lifespan than even the worst archival life of film so I can see the day when there will be a market for producing a film based archive of digital images at teh consumer as well as professional level and not simply inkjet prints.

Antonov · Jan 9, 2011

2F/2F said:
I'd much rather someone bring back T64, EPN, 320T, 800Z, Tri-X 320, Portra 400VC and NC, Pro 160S and C, and a basket full of films other than Kodachrome. The loss of Kodachrome is a very minimal loss to our photographic palettes. The loss of each of these others left a big hole in the palette.

Hm. A lot of those film your mentioning are still in production.

Photo Engineer said:
Antonov;

If film making were easy, then there would be more small house shops making simple films. I've built model locomotives, so I challenge you to make 1 hand coating from your own emulsion. If it is so easy, you should have no problem. We can compare notes afterwards and I'll show you photos of my half dozen or so hand made locomotives. (HO scale)

As for the making of Kodachrome, of course it is possible, just as it is possible to hand process. Is it possible to commercialize it now? That is another matter that approaches the impossible due to all of the factors I have mentioned before. I have never said it was impossible to recreate, but it will be VERY difficult.

PE

Come on PE, I didn't expect this kind of discussion from you. Comparing H0 model locomotives with real working steam locomotives is simply ridicolous. It's like I'm comparing Caffenol with Kodachrome.

2F/2F said:
Well, what about "New Kodachrome?" An E-6 film that looks as close as physically possible to Kodachrome?

It sounds much more feasible to me. Kodak proper, if anyone, may even decide that it is in their interests to make such a thing some day.

Or is it really just the name that people want?

Where do I sign?

railwayman3 · Jan 9, 2011

2F/2F said:
It is a little bit more than an opinion. It is a provable position that we lost more versatility and artistic control with any one of the recent film discontinuances than we did with Kodachrome. E-6 and C-41 films are much more pliable and varied. Any film gone is such a tragedy, but why go through all this work for a film that really wasn't that special, physically speaking? If there is an argument to be made for wanting to make it again, it should be made from the nostalgia angle. That is the only angle that makes sense for me.

What if there was an E-6 film that looked just like Kodachrome? Then would people be happy?

Hmmm....Well, to be a bit pedantic, I never used two or three of the films which you mention, so could reasonably argue a provable position that "I" (personally) lost no versatility or artistic control when these films were discontinued. Substitute "I", (yourself), for the Royal "we" in your second sentance and I'll agree then.

You say that Kodachrome really wasn't that special and that the nostalgia angle is the only sense for making such a film....now those really are your opinions.

Lumiere Alticolor and Dufaycolor were nothing special compared with modern films, and certainly would not be up with these for definition, speed or color accuracy. But, being another entirely different system, they had a totally unique soft, artistic and pastel color palette unlike any modern emulsion. They will never come back, but, if they were magically still here in some ideal photographic world, would you dismiss them as pure nostalgia. Or would you at least value the opportunity of having another choice....I know I would. Why do people here still do platinum prints, callotypes and a host of other ancient processes, when inkjet printing works well and is much easier?

Of course, I'd be delighted with an E6 film which looked just like Kodachrome. But it's not easy to do...the emulsion sensitivities and the dye sets for the three colors are different, and PE confirms above that the demand would not support the R&D to sort this out. Just as a Photoshop simulation of Kodachrome will never be perfect given present technology.....digital and analog systems produce the colors in totally different ways.

2F/2F · Jan 9, 2011

Some of them are still available from retailers' or manufacturers' stock, but AFAIK, I have heard about each of them being discontinued in manufacture (Pro 800Z twice).

2F/2F · Jan 9, 2011

Photo Engineer said:
I have said before that an Ektachrome product can be made to resemble Kodachrome.

There are several barriers in the way however. The E6 market is the smallest of the color markets now and therefore cannot support the R&D. The other reason is that there has been a shift in the customer base towards a different look in slides. Several here have pointed that out.

PE

...but would you agree that it would be much more feasible and better in quality than some outside party remaking Kodachrome and a new processing facility?

Kodachrome in China?

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency