Kodak Reintroduces Ektachrome.

ME Super · Feb 6, 2017

Photo Engineer said:
We had an engineer who had made a product his entire life, but he died suddenly and we had to replace him with a new engineer from the same department. It took 6 months before we could deliver usable product. These two guys worked side by side for years, but the fine points of doing things were lost and had to be reinvented. Photo product making (color) is very arcane.

[snip]

PE

This is exactly the type of knowledge loss I am talking about. Nothing is *EVER* documented completely.

Nzoomed · Feb 6, 2017

ME Super said:
This is exactly the type of knowledge loss I am talking about. Nothing is *EVER* documented completely.

+1

Thats why its cruical that Kodak can continue with colour film and find a new audience!
Im really impressed with Ferrania how they are getting on, and some of their chemists look like they are getting on in years too.
Knowledge is power, and it needs to be passed down...

Nzoomed · Feb 6, 2017

railwayman3 said:
Over the years many companies have manufactured perfectly usable color reversal film....Ilford, Agfa, Gevaert, Dynachrome, Ferrania, Adox, Konica, Orwo, Ansco, and probably others. The knowledge and skills of making color film have not been confined to one or two special people at Rochester ? Even Ektachrome was coated in the US and the UK, probably elsewhere, and Kodachrome in US, UK and France. The Ekta and Koda which I used over the years seemed consistent whichever factory supplied it.

+1

I agree!
And was it not Kodak that made the first E6 film, so other competitors had to "copy" their formulas? Or at the very least, attempt to reverse engineer them to make something that was compatible?
PE can probably explain better, but for C41 and E6 films, were any patents licensed to the other competitors?

kb3lms · Feb 6, 2017

Well, if they recreated FOGBANK, I would think Kodak could reproduce Ektachrome. FOGBANK should have been MUCH harder. After all, E100G was made using the same machines that are there now. Everything was gone with FOGBANK.

Photo Engineer · Feb 6, 2017

Nzoomed said:
+1

I agree!
And was it not Kodak that made the first E6 film, so other competitors had to "copy" their formulas? Or at the very least, attempt to reverse engineer them to make something that was compatible?
PE can probably explain better, but for C41 and E6 films, were any patents licensed to the other competitors?

The first negative and reversal color films were made by Agfa using the same couplers and the same emulsions with minor tweaks and adjustment of coating methods. The first color paper was made by Agfa and used the same couplers and exactly the same emulsions as Brovira normal. I have seen the formulas and have seen the synthetic routes to the couplers. Nothing unusual in this. But, they were not particularly good when compared to modern films and papers, nor did they have the speed.

I know nothing about licensing arrangements.

PE

mshchem · Feb 6, 2017

Didn't the early Ektachrome come from Agfa patents? I was always under the impression that WWII allowed Kodak free use of Agfa technology. I have absolutely no idea if this is accurate. The US got Aspirin patent from Bayer after WW I. The University of Iowa was making unlicensed Aspirin during the first world War to supply shortages. It was all done hush, hush, this was before the US got involved.
Mike

mshchem · Feb 6, 2017

What's FOGBANK?

kb3lms · Feb 6, 2017

FOGBANK is a code name given to a material used in nuclear weapons such as the W76, W78 and W80.

Google it. Interesting story of what happens when you stop making something , especially something highly classified, and then decide much later that you need more. However, they were ultimately successful, or so we are told.

cmacd123 · Feb 6, 2017

the story I recall was that the first Ektachrome was designed as part of the war effort in WWII as their was a desire to have colour aerial photos that did not have to go back to Kodak for processing.

The photo industry did get the entire AGFA technology AFTER the war as part of the "spoils to the victors" this is also why Ansco was run by the US government for a time.

Photo Engineer · Feb 6, 2017

Kodak Ektachrome incorporates NO Agfa methodology regarding coupler incorporation or color formation. Even the developing agents are / were different by a large margin. We knew what they were doing just as they knew what we were doing at EK, but there was no chemical similarity beyond using Silver halide in gelatin. That is about it.

There were commonalities going back almost 100 years before the introduction of those products though, such as hardening and etc..

PE

Photo Engineer · Feb 6, 2017

Kodak made a nuclear trace emulsion used heavily in the defense industry, but in very small quantities. Kodak discontinued it years ago but reinstituted it at the request of congressional supporters. Hey, maybe you can get congress in on the reintroduction of Kodachrome!!!!

PE

mshchem · Feb 6, 2017

Photo Engineer said:
Kodak made a nuclear trace emulsion used heavily in the defense industry, but in very small quantities. Kodak discontinued it years ago but reinstituted it at the request of congressional supporters. Hey, maybe you can get congress in on the reintroduction of Kodachrome!!!!

PE

All this very very cool. FOGBANK, I've got a friend that thrives on this. I did get on a site that has, I think, recently declassified, info on the Keyhole satellites. How the feds had a separate area at the airport in Rochester, where the freshly deorbited film canisters were delivered. Then taken to the Hawkeye works for development. Steven Spielberg should make a movie about this. It would be a nice follow up to The Bridge of Spies. How Kodak helped bring down the Iron Curtain!

Is there anyway we can get the US President to ban Fujichrome? Tell him Kodachrome would have shown a larger crowd on inauguration day! Then ask Japan to pay for the "development ", pun intended, for Nuevo Kodachrome.
What we have is a Kodachrome Gap!!

Photo Engineer · Feb 6, 2017

CRAP! I'm sorry I made that post!

PE

Nzoomed · Feb 6, 2017

Photo Engineer said:
The first negative and reversal color films were made by Agfa using the same couplers and the same emulsions with minor tweaks and adjustment of coating methods. The first color paper was made by Agfa and used the same couplers and exactly the same emulsions as Brovira normal. I have seen the formulas and have seen the synthetic routes to the couplers. Nothing unusual in this. But, they were not particularly good when compared to modern films and papers, nor did they have the speed.

I know nothing about licensing arrangements.

PE

OK. There may or may not have been any licensing arrangements, but take E6 films, all the modern manufacturers all migrated over, and I know that Kodak was more than happy than this, as it became standardised. Obviously the competitors such as Agfa, Fuji and Ferrania were able to make films that were compatible with Kodak's E6 process.

mshchem · Feb 6, 2017

Photo Engineer said:
CRAP! I'm sorry I made that post!

PE

I've found it helps to sleep with aluminum foil on your head. It helps to shield you from the K-14 rays.
Ever Vigilant, Mike

Nzoomed · Feb 7, 2017

Photo Engineer said:
Hey, maybe you can get congress in on the reintroduction of Kodachrome!!!!

PE

I wouldnt put anything past trump!

Photo Engineer · Feb 7, 2017

To be more specific and repost previous information, Agfa couplers were water/alkali soluble and Kodak couplers were oil soluble. The Agfa couplers cannot be coated using a slide or curtain coater and they cannot be coated at high speed. Fuji and Konica also used Agfa type couplers. To compete, these companies decided to change over to high speed slide / curtain coaters and thus had to change coupler type to the Kodak type. In doing so, their secondary goal was to become compatible with E6 and C41 with the new films, and Ektaprint 3 / 2 / RA with the new papers. Kodak gave them the rights due to the lawsuit by GAF, Berkey and Pavelle. This incidentally, stopped R&D on CD6 except for Kodachrome.

The rest is history.

PE

cmacd123 · Feb 7, 2017

Photo Engineer said:
To compete, these companies decided to change over to high speed slide / curtain coaters and thus had to change coupler type to the Kodak type. In doing so, their secondary goal was to become compatible with E6 and C41 with the new films, and Ektaprint 3 / 2 / RA with the new papers. Kodak gave them the rights due to the lawsuit by GAF, Berkey and Pavelle. This incidentally, stopped R&D on CD6 except for Kodachrome.

the first fuji colour I saw was C-22 compatible. as was the GAF negative film at the time. when 110 came out fuji changed to a c-41 compatible film. GAF did make a c-22 size 110 film for a short time, until they withdrew completely. I recall that C-22 used alcohol as an ingredient, was that due to the couplers?

Photo Engineer · Feb 7, 2017

The first Fuji and Sakura that I saw were both based on Agfa technology from pre-1945 and that was in 1959. This continued until beyond 1965 when I first tested these and Agfa products at Kodak to compare development rate, image and process stability and etc....

I never saw a C-22 compatible product from any of those 3 companies. They went from proprietary processes directly to C41 and E6. This was observed in Japan and here in the US. Maybe there was a test trial in Canada???

PE

keenmaster486 · Feb 7, 2017

Hmm, I could have sworn Agfa or Fuji had a C-22 compatible film at some time. Or maybe it was Ansco?

Photo Engineer · Feb 7, 2017

Ansco (GAF) introduced a color paper compatible with Etaprint C just as Kodak introduced Ektaprint 3. They sued EK (along with Berkey and Pavelle). The interesting thing was that the GAF paper went through the Ektaprint 3 process just fine, but they won the lawsuit collectively.

PE

Nzoomed · Feb 7, 2017

Photo Engineer said:
The first Fuji and Sakura that I saw were both based on Agfa technology from pre-1945 and that was in 1959. This continued until beyond 1965 when I first tested these and Agfa products at Kodak to compare development rate, image and process stability and etc....

I never saw a C-22 compatible product from any of those 3 companies. They went from proprietary processes directly to C41 and E6. This was observed in Japan and here in the US. Maybe there was a test trial in Canada???

PE

That would have been a big headache if photo labs needed separate equipment and chemicals for each brand of film!
Good thing that everything is standardised.

Photo Engineer · Feb 7, 2017

That is why Agfa, Konica and Fuji products were not popular in the US.

BTW, the equivalent of some of the generic product mfgrs in Japan was Oriental photo. I still have one of their Kits and some old storage bottles for them here and I have an old Agfa and an old Konica paper kit.

PE

Nzoomed · Feb 7, 2017

Photo Engineer said:
That is why Agfa, Konica and Fuji products were not popular in the US.

BTW, the equivalent of some of the generic product mfgrs in Japan was Oriental photo. I still have one of their Kits and some old storage bottles for them here and I have an old Agfa and an old Konica paper kit.

PE

Interesting, although I believe that Fuji were producing E4 films, so they must have been making that transition some time back.

Photo Engineer · Feb 7, 2017

In 1960, none of the Japanese products would go through an Kodak process. And, their negative films were unmasked. They used a water rinse step after the CD to bring up edge and interimage effects. The Fujichrome that I had in the '60s had to be sent to Japan from the US for processing. They did have a Kodachrome compatible film at that time.

PE

Kodak Reintroduces Ektachrome.

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency