Kodachrome with Rockland Polytoner colour couplers

Nzoomed · May 7, 2016

MattKing said:
As one colonial to another, and a lifetime user of Kodak COLOUR films, I resemble that!

+1

I dont know why the Americans spell "COLOUR" without the "U" ? lol it probably annoys me in much the same way as it does the opposite to PE!

Photo Engineer · May 7, 2016

Color is pronounce without the U.

PE

Stephen Frizza · May 8, 2016

Photo Engineer said:
As I said, you can do it with 3 sheets of any B&W film if you have the process down.

PE

To demonstrate what Photo Engineer is talking about ....This is a very rough and poor quality proof of concept which I did in my lab over the last 2 weeks. I pinned a kodak shirley print to my copy wall and photographed it using 3 filtered sheets of Fuji Acros 100 which were each processed with their corresponding colour so when registered they would produce a colour transparency. My registration is slightly off, The transparency has many flaws in terms of contrast, density and colour, sharpness etc but I post this simply as a demonstration of the basic idea and concept and don't have the time at the moment to correct the issues I encountered. take it for what it is ...hopefully it motivates others who are keen to explore this to get in the darkroom and get experimenting.

(The second image shows the correct colour of what I tried to replicate.)

Nzoomed · May 8, 2016

Stephen Frizza said:
To demonstrate what Photo Engineer is talking about ....This is a very rough and poor quality proof of concept which I did in my lab over the last 2 weeks. I pinned a kodak shirley print to my copy wall and photographed it using 3 filtered sheets of Fuji Acros 100 which were each processed with their corresponding colour so when registered they would produce a colour transparency. My registration is slightly off, The transparency has many flaws in terms of contrast, density and colour, sharpness etc but I post this simply as a demonstration of the basic idea and concept and don't have the time at the moment to correct the issues I encountered. take it for what it is ...hopefully it motivates others who are keen to explore this to get in the darkroom and get experimenting. View attachment 156453 View attachment 156454
(The second image shows the correct colour of what I tried to replicate.)

Its not a bad alternative, but has limited uses in the fact that you have to shoot 3 separate exposures, which is not practical for everyday use unless you are doing scenic photography perhaps.

I do agree with what you say that its not worth investing on processing a dead format.
However, there are many who missed the deadline for the close off at Dwanes and i can see why there is still an interest in developing it.

I fully support those who are at least making an effort to process it even from an experimental / learning angle.

I reckon you would be able to get some business for developing it if you put the word out, crowdfunding with a set target and minimum amount of backers would be a start, you need a good number to make it worthwhile doing, at least it would give those another opportunity to process their film, even if its a one off.

The demise of Kodachrome was what sparked my newly found interest in analog photography, no kidding!
So dont underestimate the snowball effect that a processing run of Kodachrome would do to the whole analog film community.

railwayman3 · May 8, 2016

Nzoomed said:
Kelvin Kittle had rescued the K-Lab from Rocky Mountain Photo Lab, so there is some equipment out there to process the stuff if the chemistry can be obtained.

He used to post on the (now defunct) kodachrome project forum, then disappeared from there some years ago. IIRC correctly, he showed some pictures of the recovery of the K-Lab, which had been standing outside rusting in a junkyard ! Even if it had been in good condition and the chemistry were available, you only have to read the K-lab manuals, which are still available, on the web to realise how incredibly complicated it would be to get working at all. And, even if such a miracle were possible, how could you begin to tune the process to match the quality of Kodachrome at its best, given that all unused film is now at least five years outdated ?

Photo Engineer · May 8, 2016

Good job Steve.

Parallax of 3 sheets of film can cause the appearance of or the severity of registration. I would not worry about it. Often it can be improved by mounting the C and M images emulsion to emulsion to decrease apparent parallax!

PE

Nzoomed · May 8, 2016

railwayman3 said:
He used to post on the (now defunct) kodachrome project forum, then disappeared from there some years ago. IIRC correctly, he showed some pictures of the recovery of the K-Lab, which had been standing outside rusting in a junkyard ! Even if it had been in good condition and the chemistry were available, you only have to read the K-lab manuals, which are still available, on the web to realise how incredibly complicated it would be to get working at all. And, even if such a miracle were possible, how could you begin to tune the process to match the quality of Kodachrome at its best, given that all unused film is now at least five years outdated ?

I dont think his K-lab was sitting around for too long before it was decommissioned.
Yes ive seen the photos and it seemed to be in reasonable condition.

Anyway, who cares about the film's expiry date, i shot some expired kodachrome super8 just before Kodak ceased processing it and the oldest roll was dated 1979.
It developed fine, maybe a little faded, but nonetheless was OK, the films dated from the 1980's appeared perfect.

So if everyone has been keeping their kodachrome in the freezer, there is nothing to worry about!

Anyway, does anyone know why the kodachrome project forums were shut down?
There was a few of us here.
Kelvin Kittle did get back to me and say he was working on his property but the K-lab was safe, but was tied up until his renovations had been completed.

Anyway, for anyone reading this, when i asked Film Ferrania on the possibility of making the colour couplers for Kodachrome, they did not rule it out.

Im sure if enough funds were gathered, some chemistry could be made, but we would need someone with the skill and knowledge to process it, and some sort of machinery or equipment would have to be made albeit basic for the light exposures etc, but it could be done.

I dont know how Steve Frizza did it, with a handful of rolls it could probably be performed in a jobo, but the re-exposures would be the difficult part.

vincentbihler · May 10, 2016

Hey there,

I'm very interested in any way of new kodachrome processing... If Ferrania really is planning on doing Kodachrome couplers... I presume it may happen faster than we think it could do! Some Kickstarter has to be done in here

Best
Vincent

twelvetone12 · May 10, 2016

AFAIK Ferrania will not produce any chemistry for Kodachrome but only E6 film. And they stated various times that they have no plans to redo other manufacturer's films.

railwayman3 · May 10, 2016

Nzoomed said:
I dont think his K-lab was sitting around for too long before it was decommissioned.
Yes ive seen the photos and it seemed to be in reasonable condition.

Anyway, who cares about the film's expiry date, i shot some expired kodachrome super8 just before Kodak ceased processing it and the oldest roll was dated 1979.
It developed fine, maybe a little faded, but nonetheless was OK, the films dated from the 1980's appeared perfect.

So if everyone has been keeping their kodachrome in the freezer, there is nothing to worry about!

Anyway, does anyone know why the kodachrome project forums were shut down?
There was a few of us here.
Kelvin Kittle did get back to me and say he was working on his property but the K-lab was safe, but was tied up until his renovations had been completed.

Anyway, for anyone reading this, when i asked Film Ferrania on the possibility of making the colour couplers for Kodachrome, they did not rule it out.

Im sure if enough funds were gathered, some chemistry could be made, but we would need someone with the skill and knowledge to process it, and some sort of machinery or equipment would have to be made albeit basic for the light exposures etc, but it could be done.

I dont know how Steve Frizza did it, with a handful of rolls it could probably be performed in a jobo, but the re-exposures would be the difficult part.

I do fully understand what you are saying, but, surely, the whole idea of resurrecting Kodachrome film and/or processing would be to reproduce the identical characteristics of the original film (other than, perhaps, processing a very few films containing irreplaceable images). Otherwise, what's the point ?

Yes, I also had some film expired in the 1980's and processed in 2010 which developed fine....but "maybe a little faded" isn't original Kodachrome quality ?

A read of the K-lab manuals shows what a complex and delicately-balanced process it is...just check the trouble-shooting guide for what can go wrong! And the whole process is computer-controlled by hardware and software dating back around 20 years. And where are the hundreds of feet of good quality Kodachrome going to be found to commission and fine-tune the machine.

The patents are also an enlightening read, but you probably need a Doctorate in chemistry to understand them!

On the chemicals, I'm sure that Ferrania have enough to occupy themselves with the E6 project....but imagine the cost of synthesis of small quantities of high purity specialist organic chemicals.

But, if all these issues can miraculously be resolved, you're then only left with gathering enough funds and finding someone, in the right location, with enough skill and knowledge to operate it (presumably they'd need paying at an appropriate skilled rate).

Sorry, not being negative, just realistic.

Nzoomed · May 10, 2016

railwayman3 said:
I do fully understand what you are saying, but, surely, the whole idea of resurrecting Kodachrome film and/or processing would be to reproduce the identical characteristics of the original film (other than, perhaps, processing a very few films containing irreplaceable images). Otherwise, what's the point ?

Yes, I also had some film expired in the 1980's and processed in 2010 which developed fine....but "maybe a little faded" isn't original Kodachrome quality ?

A read of the K-lab manuals shows what a complex and delicately-balanced process it is...just check the trouble-shooting guide for what can go wrong! And the whole process is computer-controlled by hardware and software dating back around 20 years. And where are the hundreds of feet of good quality Kodachrome going to be found to commission and fine-tune the machine.

The patents are also an enlightening read, but you probably need a Doctorate in chemistry to understand them!

On the chemicals, I'm sure that Ferrania have enough to occupy themselves with the E6 project....but imagine the cost of synthesis of small quantities of high purity specialist organic chemicals.

But, if all these issues can miraculously be resolved, you're then only left with gathering enough funds and finding someone, in the right location, with enough skill and knowledge to operate it (presumably they'd need paying at an appropriate skilled rate).

Sorry, not being negative, just realistic.

Put it this way, Steve Frizza processed some Kodachrome with his own method, it worked and gave good results that i could not fault.
They were colour charts he photographed, would have been good to have seen other images, to see what the Kodachrome "red" really looked like, but the colour charts in the photo i saw looked pretty accurate.
But otherwise, at the end of the day, color images were developed, he obviously was able to find chemicals without having to specially get them made.
I did see what i believed was the yellow color coupler listed on alibaba, so there are chemicals out there. I documented this on the kodachrome wiki.
Anyway, i feel that for a start it would be more important to recover valuable images rather than getting people to shoot, such as the space shuttle film that some of his rolls never made it to Dwaynes in time.

As far as expired films go, i was only saying that i successfully shot old stuff with reasonable results, and if most people shot on fresh stock and then kept frozen, there should be no real issues.

I think people will come to terms that it would not be exact K-14 perhaps, but if the results turned out consistent and fairly comparable to kodachrome, then others may have a go shooting some more.

I think i asked Dave Bias on the Ferrania thread and he never gave me a no, but said he would put it to their team.
I said it could be a good PR marketing exercise if they successfully produced the chemistry to develop the film which would generate media attention.

The building blocks for these chemicals are all very similar to what is currently used in most other color films, so it should be possible for them to produce some if they have the time and necessary funds.

Anyway, I dont want to go too far ahead, but Im sure its possible if enough people had the dedication to process it.
Brings me to question why Steve Frizza even bothered to process the stuff to prove the point that it could be done, knowing he would end up having hundreds of enquiries as a result.
Especially considering it cost as much as he claimed for the chemistry, what was even in it for him if he only had a few shots of color charts to show for it?
I surley would have shot some more impressive photos if it was me testing out that process, maybe he did and has not publicly made the photos available?

All im saying is there will be interest in this film for a long time, so its something we will have to get used to on here.

Wayne · May 10, 2016

Nzoomed said:
All im saying is there will be interest in this film for a long time, so its something we will have to get used to on here.

There's like 5 people in the world who are seriously interested, on a good day. Probably a lot fewer than the number that think the world is flat. I don't think we have to get used to it because eventually Sean will cave in to pressure to create a "Hopeless K******* Optimist Forum" right next to the Gloom and Doom forum.

Nzoomed · May 10, 2016

Wayne said:
There's like 5 people in the world who are seriously interested, on a good day. Probably a lot fewer than the number that think the world is flat. I don't think we have to get used to it because eventually Sean will cave in to pressure to create a "Hopeless K******* Optimist Forum" right next to the Gloom and Doom forum.

There seems to be a fair few Kodachrome threads on here that continually get bumped from time to time, i know there were a few highly interested from the Kodachrome Project forums that were regularly posting here.

Anyway, i dont have any issues with those experimenting with it and i commend them for their efforts.

Great idea on creating a KODACHROME optimist Forum! lol
I would rather see Ektachrome back any day though if i had to choose. Ive still got a nice stockpile in my freezer!

Gerald C Koch · May 10, 2016

I have mentioned this before but it always seems to fall on deaf ears. The demand for color slide film has been decreasing for many years. How could you possibly convince a company like Ferrania to step into a diminishing market. It just ain't gonna happen!!! Instead of the unreal expectation of Kodachrome returning slide aficionados should be worrying about the future of existing films.

Gerald C Koch · May 11, 2016

This thread and others like it remind me of a favorite radio show of my childhood. It was called It Pays To Be Ignorant. The format of the show which was unchanged from week to week was this. There was a quizmaster and a panel of three "experts." The panel was asked a question that had a very obvious answer such as "What is served in a teacup" The panel would then talk all around the question often ignoring it entirely. This was much to the dismay of the quizmaster who attempted to bring the panel back to the question. Each week the panel never managed to answer the question.

So it is with these threads. Reason and reality have flown out the window. Nothing seems to be able to get the "panelists" back to the reality that Kodachrome is never coming back.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/It_Pays_to_Be_Ignorant

Nzoomed · May 11, 2016

Gerald C Koch said:
I have mentioned this before but it always seems to fall on deaf ears. The demand for color slide film has been decreasing for many years. How could you possibly convince a company like Ferrania to step into a diminishing market. It just ain't gonna happen!!! Instead of the unreal expectation of Kodachrome returning slide aficionados should be worrying about the future of existing films.

Ferrania's first film is going to be just that - SLIDE film!

Ferrania recognise the huge gap in the slide film market and I for one am happy they will be bringing another E6 offering to the table!
Ferrania is going to be the future of analog photography, unless Kodak recognise the needs and start small scale runs of film again, perhaps we will see E100g back again?
They are already in the process of introducing a new Super8 camera, so it looks like the tide is now turning and they mean serious business.
Negative films dont interest me much, i mainly shoot E6, I dont care about perfection and i like the traits of slide film.

Wayne · May 11, 2016

I'd love to see Ektachrome comeback. As unlikely as it is, its orders of magnitude more likely than K******** which simply won't happen unless the world changes first.

Gerald C Koch · May 11, 2016

We keep hearing that Ferrania will be getting back into the film business. But so far only talk. The following article is interesting but not reassuring if you read it carefully. Really Scotchcrome technologies? Some very old technology!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrania

twelvetone12 · May 11, 2016

Gerald C Koch said:
We keep hearing that Ferrania will be getting back into the film business. But so far only talk.

Well, actually no. It you read all the updates they restored their factory building and were able to acquire all the certifications to run a production line in it. It is no joke to do that in Italy, and there is no way one could even think of opening a chemical plant without the proper (expensive and difficult to obtain) certifications and hoping to get away with it.

Stephen Frizza · May 11, 2016

Nzoomed said:
Put it this way, Steve Frizza processed some Kodachrome with his own method, it worked and gave good results that i could not fault.
They were colour charts he photographed, would have been good to have seen other images, to see what the Kodachrome "red" really looked like, but the colour charts in the photo i saw looked pretty accurate.
.................................................................................................................................................................................
Anyway, I dont want to go too far ahead, but Im sure its possible if enough people had the dedication to process it.
Brings me to question why Steve Frizza even bothered to process the stuff to prove the point that it could be done, knowing he would end up having hundreds of enquiries as a result.
Especially considering it cost as much as he claimed for the chemistry, what was even in it for him if he only had a few shots of color charts to show for it?
I surley would have shot some more impressive photos if it was me testing out that process, maybe he did and has not publicly made the photos available?

All im saying is there will be interest in this film for a long time, so its something we will have to get used to on here.

I posted a small sample image of a successful Kodachrome colour processing attempt on my personal facebook page, Some people saw it and it went very public very quickly ( I never expected it to become so public!). It took me quite a few attempts to get that colour chart looking good and there are multiple problems with my process that I have made mention in the past, Such as the length of film I can process and the dye not being archival. So much can go wrong. the process I did is not technically K-14 and because the process is different the results will never be the same as the kodachrome everyone came to love.

I did the tests for a few reasons. First is that I'm young and have a deep urge to learn everything I can in photography. I wanted to see if it could be done and I learned it could. Secondly I do intend on one day doing something with what I learned. I will make an image using some frozen Kodachrome I have. I'm just not sure what that image will be yet. I don't want to waste it shooting something simply because I can. I want to plan out a concept and produce an image that feels right for the process.

Over the past few years have been doing other experiments I find far more interesting but don't wish to share at the moment. I was once far more active in the photographic community (especially locally) but now I try to keep a very private profile.

In terms of attaining chemistry to process Kodachrome in colour there is a range of substitute chemicals that will work (all be it with different visual results) and are attainable that were not used in the K-14 process.

Nzoomed · May 11, 2016

Stephen Frizza said:
I posted a small sample image of a successful Kodachrome colour processing attempt on my personal facebook page, Some people saw it and it went very public very quickly ( I never expected it to become so public!). It took me quite a few attempts to get that colour chart looking good and there are multiple problems with my process that I have made mention in the past, Such as the length of film I can process and the dye not being archival. So much can go wrong. the process I did is not technically K-14 and because the process is different the results will never be the same as the kodachrome everyone came to love.

I did the tests for a few reasons. First is that I'm young and have a deep urge to learn everything I can in photography. I wanted to see if it could be done and I learned it could. Secondly I do intend on one day doing something with what I learned. I will make an image using some frozen Kodachrome I have. I'm just not sure what that image will be yet. I don't want to waste it shooting something simply because I can. I want to plan out a concept and produce an image that feels right for the process.

Over the past few years have been doing other experiments I find far more interesting but don't wish to share at the moment. I was once far more active in the photographic community (especially locally) but now I try to keep a very private profile.

In terms of attaining chemistry to process Kodachrome in colour there is a range of substitute chemicals that will work (all be it with different visual results) and are attainable that were not used in the K-14 process.

Those are fair enough reasons and i commend you for your efforts, as im sure you would have gained alot of knowledge.
Yes i do expect it would be hard to process long lengths of film. So many cruical factors with the chemistry, continually needs replenishing as it oxidises fast etc, then the length of the re-exposures under different coloured light would also be critical.
I wish i had the time and dedication that you have, as I wouldnt mind giving it a go one day either.

For a heads up, Steve Mccurry has kept a few rolls in his freezer, so i would try and get in touch with him for any future projects He did say that he will keep it frozen for the one time that it may be able to be used again.
I understand your reasons for staying private, but even from an educational point, I would be very interested to know what was involved in a little more detail and it may prompt others to continue on from your work and experiment further.
Im all for the freedom of sharing information, but if you want to keep it to yourself, then thats completley fine with me.

Photo Engineer · May 11, 2016

Enough details are in the patent for anyone to do given the equipment, chemicals and training.

Steve has all of that, but most of the rest of the APUG members do not.

PE

Nzoomed · May 11, 2016

Photo Engineer said:
Enough details are in the patent for anyone to do given the equipment, chemicals and training.

Steve has all of that, but most of the rest of the APUG members do not.

PE

Very useful information here thanks
Ive gone through countless documents, but this shows some new information to me.
I have to hand it to Steve that he has done well considering you have to have a very good background on chemistry to get any results.

Anyway, someone on this thread must have been working on the Wiki i started.
Check this out:

http://kodachromia.wikia.com/wiki/Kodachrome_Developing_in_home_darkroom?diff=4013

Poisson Du Jour · May 11, 2016

Photo Engineer said:
Color is pronounce without the U.

PE

In Australia it colour pronounced with the u, softly. The Americans, as with New Zealanders, mangle their vowels so the "troublesome" 'u' was politely left out. Just a geographic difference of English, and the two are freely interchangeable in verbal and written discourse.

Photo Engineer · May 11, 2016

Nzoomed said:
Very useful information here thanks
Ive gone through countless documents, but this shows some new information to me.
I have to hand it to Steve that he has done well considering you have to have a very good background on chemistry to get any results.

Anyway, someone on this thread must have been working on the Wiki i started.
Check this out:

http://kodachromia.wikia.com/wiki/Kodachrome_Developing_in_home_darkroom?diff=4013

This patent has been quoted and otherwise mentioned here several times. I'm surprised that you missed it.

PE

Kodachrome with Rockland Polytoner colour couplers

Attachments

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency