Kodachrome

[George Mann]

Kodachrome is dead and will never come back, deal with it.

I for one refuse to give up on it!

 

[George Mann]

Kodachrome? No. Ain't happenin'.

Never say never!

 

[George Mann]

Kodachrome is "dead" only because economic forces have determined that it is. Ask me, it was murdered.

Amen!

 

[George Mann]

Kodachrome? It is obsolete!

Technically, there has to be a similar "improved" process to obsolete it.

No such process exists.

 

[mshchem]

Technically, there has to be a similar "improved" process to obsolete it.

No such process exists.

I've still got plenty in my film fridge. If Elon (Metol) Musk can land a rocket on a barge, anything is possible!!

 

[Sal Santamaura]

Kodachrome fills a different niche than E6, and would outsell it given todays trends.

How unfortunate that Eastman Kodak doesn't recognize your incredible market expertise. If only it would embrace your wisdom.

Technically, there has to be a similar "improved" process to obsolete it.

No such process exists.

Sure one does. Doesn't have to be similar. It can be far superior. It's called digital imaging.

Or, if one insists on chemical imaging, there's Ektachrome. At least according to Ron Mowery it was superior. But why would anyone pay attention to what he wrote when they could listen to you?

 

[Andrew O'Neill]

HIE has a better chance of reappearing, than Kodachrome...and I doubt HIE will reappear.

 

[RPC]

Technically, there has to be a similar "improved" process to obsolete it.

No such process exists.

The primary dictionary definition I see is always "not used anymore" or "no longer in use". Secondary definitions say it is replaced by something newer.

Currently and officially, it is no longer in use..

 

[Huss]

I've still got plenty in my film fridge. If Elon (Metol) Musk can land a rocket on a barge, anything is possible!!

It was a very large barge.

 

[warden]

I've now built an Arduino controlled device using LEDs and the glass filters specified in the K14M Theory Guide, using the exposure levels in the Guide. This week I switched to using the couplers and colour developers from the 1938 Mannes & Godowsky patent, and the first developer from the 1972 Bent & Mowrey patent. Here's the scan of the Super 8 Kodachrome 40 that I processed last week, using these methods:



here's the process I used:

Modified K14 process
- 05:00 remjet removal bath
- 04:00 wash
- 04:00 First development
- 02:00 wash
- 05:00 remove film from Lomo spiral
- 05:00 remove remjet - 04:00 Red exposure
- 1000 micro watt seconds per square centimetre through Kopp 2403 filter, 5mm thick
- 03:00 Reload onto Lomo spiral
- 01:00 Add Cyan coupler to developer (on magnetic stirrer)
- 12:00 cyan developer bath 20°C (constant mild agitation)
- 03:00 wash - 05:00 remove film from Lomo spiral
- 05:00 Blue exposure
- 230 micro watt seconds per cm2 through Schott BG25 glass filter, 5mm thick - 03:00 reload onto Lomo spiral
- 01:00 add yellow coupler to developer
- 10:00 yellow development bath 20°C (constant mild agitation)
- 03:00 wash
- 08:00 White light exposure
- 01:00 Add magenta coupler to developer
- 05:00 Magenta development bath 20°C (constant mild agitation)
- 03:00 wash - 08:00 Ferricyanide bleach bath 24°C - 01:00 wash
- 06:00 sodium thiosulphate fixer bath 24°C
- 06:00 wash
- 01:00 stabiliser bath 24°C
Formulas
Colour developers from Mannes and Godowsky Kodachrome patent 1938: https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/ed/13/21/8e8f88900704dc/US2252718.pdf
First developer from Bent and Mowrey Kodachrome patent 1972: https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/b6/0b/e3/fc2c18d455bfd3/US3658525.pdf
Re-exposure details from Kodachrome K14M Theory Guide: https://125px.com/docs/unsorted/kodak/tg2044_1_02mar99.pdf

This may need a new thread. Thanks for sharing your work!

 

[George Mann]

The primary dictionary definition I see is always "not used anymore" or "no longer in use". Secondary definitions say it is replaced by something newer.

Currently and officially, it is no longer in use..

It is a film stock. Film stocks are still in use. Also, it is a unique film stock which has no direct, legitimate replacement.

 

[btaylor]

I've now built an Arduino controlled device using LEDs and the glass filters specified in the K14M Theory Guide, using the exposure levels in the Guide. This week I switched to using the couplers and colour developers from the 1938 Mannes & Godowsky patent, and the first developer from the 1972 Bent & Mowrey patent. Here's the scan of the Super 8 Kodachrome 40 that I processed last week, using these methods:



here's the process I used:

Modified K14 process
- 05:00 remjet removal bath
- 04:00 wash
- 04:00 First development
- 02:00 wash
- 05:00 remove film from Lomo spiral
- 05:00 remove remjet - 04:00 Red exposure
- 1000 micro watt seconds per square centimetre through Kopp 2403 filter, 5mm thick
- 03:00 Reload onto Lomo spiral
- 01:00 Add Cyan coupler to developer (on magnetic stirrer)
- 12:00 cyan developer bath 20°C (constant mild agitation)
- 03:00 wash - 05:00 remove film from Lomo spiral
- 05:00 Blue exposure
- 230 micro watt seconds per cm2 through Schott BG25 glass filter, 5mm thick - 03:00 reload onto Lomo spiral
- 01:00 add yellow coupler to developer
- 10:00 yellow development bath 20°C (constant mild agitation)
- 03:00 wash
- 08:00 White light exposure
- 01:00 Add magenta coupler to developer
- 05:00 Magenta development bath 20°C (constant mild agitation)
- 03:00 wash - 08:00 Ferricyanide bleach bath 24°C - 01:00 wash
- 06:00 sodium thiosulphate fixer bath 24°C
- 06:00 wash
- 01:00 stabiliser bath 24°C
Formulas
Colour developers from Mannes and Godowsky Kodachrome patent 1938: https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/ed/13/21/8e8f88900704dc/US2252718.pdf
First developer from Bent and Mowrey Kodachrome patent 1972: https://patentimages.storage.googleapis.com/b6/0b/e3/fc2c18d455bfd3/US3658525.pdf
Re-exposure details from Kodachrome K14M Theory Guide: https://125px.com/docs/unsorted/kodak/tg2044_1_02mar99.pdf

Amazing! Well done!

 

[MattKing]

It was a movie film that lots of people made great still images on.
They needed movie film volumes to make it work.
It had real problems with cyan, that never could be solved.
Modern Ektachrome is immeasurably more accurate.
But Kodachrome fed me, clothed me, sheltered me and put a roof over my head through all of my youth, while (eventually) filling my camera, so I will protect George's right to revere it's past.
Just don't expect me to support its return.
Kodachrome from 60 years ago - I'm the little guy in blue, with my grandmother's gloved hand on my shoulder.
This was taken as we were leaving Toronto, in order for my Dad to start his new job at the Kodak Canada Kodachrome (and Ektachrome) processing lab in North Vancouver, BC.

 

[mshchem]

It was a movie film that lots of people made great still images on.
They needed movie film volumes to make it work.
It had real problems with cyan, that never could be solved.
Modern Ektachrome is immeasurably more accurate.
But Kodachrome fed me, clothed me, sheltered me and put a roof over my head through all of my youth, while (eventually) filling my camera, so I will protect George's right to revere it's past.
Just don't expect me to support its return.
Kodachrome from 60 years ago - I'm the little guy in blue, with my grandmother's gloved hand on my shoulder.
This was taken as we were leaving Toronto, in order for my Dad to start his new job at the Kodak Canada Kodachrome (and Ektachrome) processing lab in North Vancouver, BC.
View attachment 286581

That's a beautiful picture. All the Kodachrome (and Kodak processed) slides my Dad shot are still brilliant and not faded, some from the late 1940's. Greatest film and processing ever!

 

[George Mann]

I shot maybe 100 rolls of Kodachrome 64. It had a special rendering like no other film before or since.

To answer the OP's original quarry, I would shoot at least 12 rolls a year if it were to be reintroduced.

 

[RPC]

It is a film stock. Film stocks are still in use.

That film stock is not in use. Therefore, it is an obsolete film stock.

Also, it is a unique film stock which has no direct, legitimate replacement.

As indicated earlier, it does not need a replacement, although it can be argued there are improved replacements that have made it obsolete.

 

[MattKing]

I shot maybe 100 rolls of Kodachrome 64.

Assuming 36 exposure rolls, that would have been about 500 feet of Kodachrome.
The Kodachrome processing machines developed about one mile of Kodachrome in a single run.
During its heyday at the lab where my father was Customer Service manager, the Kodachrome machines were used almost continuously, one mile of customer's film at a time, three 8 hour shifts a day.
And they needed those sorts of volumes to be practical and profitable.

 

[mshchem]

That film stock is not in use. Therefore, it is an obsolete film stock.

As indicated earlier, it does not need a replacement, although it can be argued there are improved replacements that have made it obsolete.

I'm pretty partial to Fujichrome Provia F. I still like it better than Ektachrome. I like processing my own film so I gave up Kodachrome long time ago. Still I love the slides, it scans great!

 

[George Mann]

That film stock is not in use. Therefore, it is an obsolete film stock.

Discontinued, not obsolete.

 

[halfaman]

I am ok with a Kodachrome comeback, the thing is that I would like to see others happening before. Like a color direct positive printing process (Cibahrome) or fast E6 films.

 

[RDW]

I'd like to see Kodachrome back ahead of any other discontinued film or process. It looked different to anything else, in a good way. We've lost a colour palette that we took for granted, and I wish I'd shot a lot more of it. I don't think it's demise had much to do with reduced demand for movie film. Kodachrome was only rarely used as a professional movie stock, and much more often by amateurs shooting smaller formats, which was never as popular as still photography on film. And although there were only huge processing facilities left at the end, at one point Kodak were making 'K-Labs' that were competitive with other minilabs, so it was possible to do processing on a small scale. But Kodachrome, as a unique slide film process, was a niche of a niche of a niche in a declining market, which made it an obvious candidate for the chop, especially by a company in trouble. And bringing it back now would mean producing a whole bunch of chemicals that would be useless for other processes, not to mention starting up at least one large-scale dedicated processing facility, so it seems very unlikely to happen.

 

[adycousins]

This may need a new thread. Thanks for sharing your work!

Yes, possibly, but knowing the way these threads go I fear the response :-D

 

[CMoore]

Assuming 36 exposure rolls, that would have been about 500 feet of Kodachrome.
The Kodachrome processing machines developed about one mile of Kodachrome in a single run.
During its heyday at the lab where my father was Customer Service manager, the Kodachrome machines were used almost continuously, one mile of customer's film at a time, three 8 hour shifts a day.
And they needed those sorts of volumes to be practical and profitable.

Does anybody know.....just round numbers.....the difference in cost to produce Kodachrome Vs Ektachrome and also the same question about cost to process them.?
Thank You

 

[Sal Santamaura]

Does anybody know.....just round numbers.....the difference in cost to produce Kodachrome Vs Ektachrome and also the same question about cost to process them.?
Thank You

Matt might be able to address production cost. I can only speculate that, since Kodachrome was essentially a black and white film without incorporated couplers, it might have been less expensive to produce.

From a user's perspective, during the decades when Kodachrome was mainstream, processing cost was identical. I paid what I paid for a Kodak PK-36 processing mailer, which could be used interchangeably for Kodachrome or Ektachrome.

 

[CMoore]

It was a movie film that lots of people made great still images on.
They needed movie film volumes to make it work.
It had real problems with cyan, that never could be solved.
Modern Ektachrome is immeasurably more accurate.
But Kodachrome fed me, clothed me, sheltered me and put a roof over my head through all of my youth, while (eventually) filling my camera, so I will protect George's right to revere it's past.
Just don't expect me to support its return.
Kodachrome from 60 years ago - I'm the little guy in blue, with my grandmother's gloved hand on my shoulder.
This was taken as we were leaving Toronto, in order for my Dad to start his new job at the Kodak Canada Kodachrome (and Ektachrome) processing lab in North Vancouver, BC.
View attachment 286581

I know, or rather i have always heard, it was a popular 16mm movie film.
Was Kodachrome used for 35mm movies also.?
Thank You