Kodachrome - Totally dead?

[AgX]

But all aspects have been repeated several times in the recent threads, no new aspect showed up.

To be fair:
I like post #41 .

 

[alex gard]

internet forums are funny

 

[Sirius Glass]

There was a never ending the dreaded Kodachrome will be deleted! thread. Over 10,000 post proclaiming that the Kodak engineers are stupid and that we can make Kodachrome in granma's cesspool if we could just chain PE to the barn wall.

Look it up. It is all covered there. None of the points brought up are new. Give it up and get a life,

 

[MartinP]

Of course, really we all know that technically and craft-ily everything has been going downhill since the introduction of dry-plates . . .

<--- large amounts

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

There was a never ending thread about Kodachrome will be deleted!

Look it up. It is all covered there. None of the points brought up are new. Give it up and get a life,

Page 11... and still nothing new...

 

[Sirius Glass]

Page 11... and still nothing new...

If you increase the number of posts per page, you can reduce it to three pages.

 

[BrianShaw]

Sunny and warm in Los Angeles? Now that's news. Who would have thought? By the way the Hollywood Freeway is jammed at Vermont Ave.

Maybe lots of folks are heading over to Freestyle to get the last of the Kodakrome.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

Ken;

The myriad of threads on this very topic have hashed the problem over and over and we even came up with some possible solutions. See Steve Frizza's results in a previous thread.

Every time one of these threads start, they generate a cluster of up to dozens or more PMs to me from eager students who want to show the world what they can do. After lengthy exchanges of notes, they vanish and I hear nothing more. So, I am weary of this topic. Just weary.

I know a lot of back story on this from many here in addition to those students (who I admire for their ambition even though there is final realization of the magnitude of what they propose and so far, an apparent lack of results). So, call me anything your heart desires, but please take into consideration another POV which you just do not have. Be willing to consider how many pages of response both here and in PMs I have endured.

Ron. With respect. Do the same with your list of PMs as we are suggesting be done with the list of thread titles. If you see a new thread OR a new PM that has the word "Kodachrome" in it, do not open it. Skip over it. Ignore it. Why? Because you are not interested in that topic. And you have neither the time nor the inclination to respond to it.

You have a right to turn off the cell phone, so to speak. Or like me to not even own one. To be unavailable and unreachable whenever you want. You are not required in any way to be open and available 24/7/365 to answer questions about Kodachrome. Or anything else.

But please don't advocate the closing and locking of discussions by others of that same topic. Through positions of circumstance or ignorance, they know less about the subject than you do. So they may wish to keep talking. Or start talking all over again, when everything they say may have already been said by someone else before. Or just because they like to talk about it again. And they will also often be wrong in their contributions and conclusions to those discussions. That's OK. As you said, with but a single exception, it's all been just talk anyway.

While it may all be repetitive, boring, and pointless to you, it may not be so to them. So just ignore it. In both the threads, and in your PMs. Unless you come to a mutually acceptable ageement of paid employment, nobody is allowed to monopolize your time.

You're retired. It's your time to enjoy, not theirs.

Ken

 

[PaulDK]

Okay, to sum up my question, and from what you guys have contributed with in this thread..., Kodachrome could [ in theory ] be produced again, if the money, knowledge and demand is there.

That leaves me with one final thing...
...Happy holidays guys.

 

[Sirius Glass]

Ron. With respect.

Ken what you are missing is that approximately 10,000 posts of PE's 22,000 posts that have been answering the same questions about Kodachrome again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again andagain and again and again and again and again and again and again and again andagain and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again andagain and again and again and again and again and again and again and again andagain and again and again and again and again and again and again and again andagain and again and again and again and again and again and again and again.

Others have also answer these questions many times. Stop being so lazy and use the search tool.

 

[Photo Engineer]

Ken, you still don't get it!

So, I ignore a thread that is like this, a repetition of old posts. You know what? In about a week or less, I get a PM starting out "Dear PE, sorry to bother you but I've posted something that you should be answering. Didn't you see it? (reference invariably goes here) Please please answer my query and set everyone right so that they will realize that a 100,000 iso film (insert any topic here) can really be made!"

Yeah, I get them. Some are very important to me as I miss quite a few posts, but those on Kodachrome and a few others are not very useful at this point. But, from a serious grad student who wants to do a thesis on color film? What can I do or say. "Go way?" NO WAY. I respectfully answer every PM and most every post I can just as I am dutifully answering your comment even though this answer just might have crept into your mind if you gave it some thought.

So yes, I answer every and all PMs and try to do the same with every post and thread. This topic is getting difficult in the face of all of the existing threads on the same topic.

PE

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

I think that Nadvornick guy has an absolute bloody cheek to address Ron like that. Ugly. Good one PE for telling it like it is (and Sirius!)

 

[kb3lms]

@ kb3lms
If I found some old Kodachrome chemistry, could I change my hair color with it?

You probably could but you'd have to re-expose it first!

 

[Sirius Glass]

Thank you Poisson Du Jour.

The questions were answers about the inability to produce it again, lack of equipment, lack of necessary complete knowledge, lack of markets ...

And the same questions and comments keep on coming.

When statements are added to use the search tool, it is time to stop repeating the same questions and statements and start doing a little research.

 

[kb3lms]

I think APUG needs a Kodachrome sub-forum, that is blocked from internet search engines, and is easily excluded from the "New Posts" search.

+1 to this. Give it it's own forum.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

Ken, you still don't get it!

Let me try this from a different angle.

If a person is overworked it usually means that they have more tasks than resources to accomplish those tasks. In such an environment the standard coping strategy is to prioritize the tasks into a list, then allocate the available resources from highest to lowest priority task until the resources are exhausted. Simple. We all know this.

Given that, what value do you place on your own free (retirement) time? In other words, where does it fall on that list of priorities that you have established to cope with those 22,000+ PM requests for your attention that Steve has so graphically demonstrated?

At the top? Somewhere in the middle? Or (shudder) at the bottom?

The reason I ask is that if it is at or near the bottom, then one of the ripple effects of that low prioritization may be the continuing demand that none of the rest of us be allowed to ever start or contribute to another Kodachrome thread here on APUG, for fear of adding to your own personal PM backlog on the subject. And that those added PMs are then always going to be at a higher priority than you feel you can ignore.

But at the same time, the topic of Kodachrome is, for better or worse, a valid APUG topic that is still of interest to many here.

So what do we do?

Ken

 

[PKM-25]

Merry Christmas Beetches.....

Kodachrome 200, Leica M3, 50mm 1.4 Aspheric @ F2, Bourbon Street, NOLA 12/2010...
View attachment 78976

 

[Athiril]

Dan, what you propose is called E6!

Ken, you should sit down and read the patents then. That would give you hours of amusement.

And this thread serves no useful purpose in the face of the many many others.

PE

Yes, but with an older emulsion style, but with technically inferior coupler.

If someone with the money really wanted their darn kodachrome, not sure why they wouldn't just go for an E-6 variant of it (other than it wouldn't be 'real' Kodachrome). I don't see someone managing to get a custom B&W emulsion made for them, with the layers split into R/G/B sensitivity as being able to look like Kodachrome just because it was run through K-14.

If I had that kind of money and slide obsessed, I would be asking for a huge run of E100G or Astia all to myself instead. Or perhaps CT Precisa cut into 120. Or even Fortia SP again.

 

[BrianShaw]

Okay, to sum up my question, and from what you guys have contributed with in this thread..., Kodachrome could [ in theory ] be produced again, if the money, knowledge and demand is there.

... and if you can work out a few things with EPA.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

I think that Nadvornick guy has an absolute bloody cheek to address Ron like that. Ugly. Good one PE for telling it like it is (and Sirius!)

Oh dear. How immature. Won't even bother dignifying this...

 

[Roger Cole]

... and if you can work out a few things with EPA.

Really? I wasn't aware that EPA had any bearing on the discontinuation of Kodachrome.

 

[kb3lms]

Ken et al.,

I guess I am really not all that interested in shutting down another Kodachrome thread. And I'm certainly not hiding, I just put my "handle" in before I thought of using my name and now I don't care to change it. It's my ham radio call sign. Google it and you will likely find all my details. They certainly are on the FCC website.

Kodachrome was Kodak's flagship product for years and years. Maybe it was their best film and maybe it wasn't. Doesn't matter. What my post was try to illustrate is that it is a complex product that for better or worse has gone by the wayside.

There is enough interest in Kodachrome that I personally think it ought to have it's own forum on APUG, just like other special interests do. I guess the posts still come up under "Today's Posts." Maybe you can shut off posts from a sub-forum if you don't wish to see them - I never tried. But if I see a post with a topic that I don't care to read I just don't read it.

I don't wish to see any of the knowledge around Kodachrome be lost. Plenty likely has already. All the more reason to give it it's own APUG forum or sub-forum. Anyone who is really passionate about Kodachrome can go there and discuss and document to their heart's content. K64 isn't something that I yearn for, but from the science and engineering side I find it fascinating.

It would be wonderful if Kodak Alaris made a run of Kodachrome from time to time. I don't think that's going to happen, though. My processing post shows the immediate difficulties. I suppose those who want it can make their wishes known to Alaris. If Alaris then wants to make it, great. If they don't, well, that's up to them.

-- Jason

 

[Athiril]

IMHO, the processing is a bigger problem than the film itself.

 

[Ken Nadvornick]

But if I see a post with a topic that I don't care to read I just don't read it.

Thanks, Jason. The simplest solutions are often times the ones closest to our own eyes...

Ken

 

[BrianShaw]

Really? I wasn't aware that EPA had any bearing on the discontinuation of Kodachrome.

Roger. That was discussed in the Dec 21, 2011 Kodachrome thread. All I know is what I read on the internet... and I'm not about to PM PE and ask for details; nor should you.