Kodak Reintroduces Ektachrome.

[cmacd123]

Kodak recommended Portra for making dupe negatives from slides. Even that is a poor substitute for a real dupe negative or dupe positive film, neither of which exist today. As said, contrasts build when duping pos to pos and the results end up crappy.
/QUOTE]

I wonder if the Motion Picture intermediate films might actually have a use here? (assuming you could find a MP lab who would sell you a very short offcut.)

 

[cmacd123]

Duplicate slides were best used to allow multiple users to project the same slide.
Think salespeople and slide presentations to customers.

The alternative way for some of those was to use te Motion Picture workflow, with as many sets of slides as you wanted on Movie print film. of course before Kodak decided that long life print film mattered, slides on Movie Stock were not colour stable past about a year. Many
"canned" programs were also done as "Film Strips" - generally also on MP film. images half frame size, but all locked in order on one 3-6 ft roll of film.

 

[Peter Schrager]

I never really liked or used duplicate slides that stayed in the same format, the loss of quality was just too poor. So in the early 90’s if I had to supply a dupe to satisfy and end use vs the orginal, I had a 4x5 made from a 35mm slide on either duping positive or an interneg, usually the former.

Even that was never as good as a drum scan so it was really quite rare. Nowadays I don’t even send out for a drum scan because using my D850 scanner mounted to a hybrid use of a Sinar P2 and LED light source kind of puts any drum scan to shame. This is especially true of scanning Kodachrome slides that are really rich in color and have high levels of d-max to punch through, there sinmply is no comparison it is so good.

Can you post a picture of the rig??

 

[railwayman3]

The alternative way for some of those was to use te Motion Picture workflow, with as many sets of slides as you wanted on Movie print film. of course before Kodak decided that long life print film mattered, slides on Movie Stock were not colour stable past about a year. Many
"canned" programs were also done as "Film Strips" - generally also on MP film. images half frame size, but all locked in order on one 3-6 ft roll of film.

Back in the day many tourist places here in the UK sold sets of souvenir color slides. One producer was Woodmansterne (still operating in general publishing), who's slides were of exceptional quality, mostly made by duplicating onto 35mm print film from large-format color negs, branded "Elfincolor", and a few from transparency originals (the latter usually news-type events), branded Elfinchrome. I have a collection of these from my late Father, the chrome duplicates (e.g. the 1953 Coronation) are still fine, but the others from negs are all mostly faded to the usual "Eastmancolor pink".

 

[cmacd123]

but the others from negs are all mostly faded to the usual "Eastmancolor pink".

I was looking at some of the Sawyers Panavue slides I got as a Kid, and they also have that typical style of fading.

too bad they did not use the same process that they used for the VueMaster reels, which was on a Kodachrome duplicating film. (I once herd that VueMaster once had about the biggest Kodachrome processing line outside of Kodak, and they mostly if not exclusively used it to make Kodachrome Duplicates of the stereo pairs for Vuemaster Reels.

 

[ME Super]

The elephant in the room here, of course, for duplicating slides is the hybrid process. With that, you can lower the contrast enough to print your duplicates onto regular slide film. I've also used a hybrid process to get slides from negatives (think Ektar, Portra 400, and Portra 800). Dwayne's will do this for about $1.10/slide. I don't know what they (Dwayne's) will use for duplicating a slide, but they'll do that for slide from slide for around $0.50/slide.

 

[Roger Cole]

I doubt that new E6 processing options are going to magically appear in our home towns with the release of Ektachrome, so most of us will need to rely on mail-in processing. Photographers are already mailing in their Velvia and Provia, so mailing in Ektachrome will be no different. Things are never going to return to as they were in the past. Be thankful we still have film.

Exactly. I mail out my C-41 as well. It's possible I could get that done otherwise, and I certainly could do it myself, but by the time I find time to do it myself, or to take time to battle Atlanta traffic to go drop it off then pick it up, sending it out turns out to be quicker! And WAY easier and more convenient. I just don't see the problem or, for most things, the rush.

 

[Roger Cole]

I am not sure why there is so much worrying going on about E6 Labs. I started home processing my E6 about 6 months. It was actually harder to source a working 35mm slide projector than it was to source what is needed for home processing E6 film.

It's simple enough to do manually, and I have a Jobo so it's even simpler. But it's a fair bit of work and time even with the Jobo. And if you buy chems in smaller amounts it's considerably more expensive, but in larger quantities I sometimes had problems with the developers spoiling (even the concentrates from which I mixed as needed, and did my best to store without air accessing them) before using them up, depending on how much E6 you shoot.

I agree it's not much of a problem, but again - I can send it out and get it back quicker than I could find the time to get in the darkroom and do it myself anyway.

 

[kb3lms]

The elephant in the room here, of course, for duplicating slides is the hybrid process. With that, you can lower the contrast enough to print your duplicates onto regular slide film.

How do you do it? When you say hybrid I am assuming you mean using a digital camera or scanner and then computer to adjust contrast.

 

[zowno]

You already have your best option for bold colors: Velvia.

I didn't mean saturation, I misspoke. I guess bold in my lexicon just means true and reaL. Like it's a bold move to have authenticity in film

 

[ME Super]

How do you do it? When you say hybrid I am assuming you mean using a digital camera or scanner and then computer to adjust contrast.

Yep. Scan, adjust contrast if needed, burn to CD, and send off to Dwayne's. Works like a charm with negatives too. I've shot Portra 800 (in 120), then sent the lab scans off to Dwayne's to have 35mm slides made (since they don't do larger formats). The slides come back in 35mm slide mounts, with black filling in the frame on the sides to fill in where the picture isn't.

 

[kb3lms]

OK, got it. I hadn't connected the Dwayne's part. (Didn't read the whole thread either) Thanks!

 

[B&Wpositive]

Yep. Scan, adjust contrast if needed, burn to CD, and send off to Dwayne's. Works like a charm with negatives too. I've shot Portra 800 (in 120), then sent the lab scans off to Dwayne's to have 35mm slides made (since they don't do larger formats). The slides come back in 35mm slide mounts, with black filling in the frame on the sides to fill in where the picture isn't.

I couldn't find information on their site about this. Is this something they have listed on their site?

 

[AgX]

A issue we did not discuss so far if I remember right are filters, necessary when using reversal color films for slides. Thus especially colour correction filters in red and blue.
I experience such filters, aside of skylight 1A, as much more scarce used than projectors. And for instance Heliopan is phasing these out.

 

[ADOX Fotoimpex]

A issue we did not discuss so far if I remember right are filters, necessary when using reversal color films for slides. Thus especially colour correction filters in red and blue.
I experience such filters, aside of skylight 1A, as much more scarce used than projectors. And for instance Heliopan is phasing these out.

We can probably make the most important ones in our new *SNAP ON* line if there is a demand. Mild coloring, which is needed here just like the new 85B we made, is easy. Very dense Filters (like IR) are more difficult on a film coating machine.

 

[cmacd123]

We can probably make the most important ones in our new *SNAP ON* line if there is a demand.

the original Wrathen Filters from way back when were made of Just coloured Gelatin, sandwiched between sheets of glass and in a holder. that sounds like what your technology is most similar to.

BTW, I see you now have the "Cibachrome" trademark on your site. is this a future product, or just an addition to your trademark portfolio?

 

[ADOX Fotoimpex]

the original Wrathen Filters from way back when were made of Just coloured Gelatin, sandwiched between sheets of glass and in a holder. that sounds like what your technology is most similar to.

BTW, I see you now have the "Cibachrome" trademark on your site. is this a future product, or just an addition to your trademark portfolio?

it might be a very far future project. We have all Know How and all ingredients (still) but this is as complex as building a rocket.

 

[Nzoomed]

it might be a very far future project. We have all Know How and all ingredients (still) but this is as complex as building a rocket.

wow, if you ever can produce the stuff in the future, i sure as want to get my prints don on it!

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

The biggest problem with any idea of re-introducing/re-manufacturing Cibachrome/Ilfochrome is the cost/quality equation that became so absolutely lopsided as to turn legions of devoted printers away from it in disgust. Soaring prices, freight, poor quality control and chemicals shortages all added up. There came a time when the sheer cost of the stuff, both importing and retailing to the customer far, far outweighed pursuing it as a preferential means of media for quality photography -- essentially it had outlived its welcome on many fronts.

 

[Rudeofus]

The biggest problem with any idea of re-introducing/re-manufacturing Cibachrome/Ilfochrome is the cost/quality equation that became so absolutely lopsided as to turn legions of devoted printers away from it in disgust.

Had these printers simply left in disgust and kept quiet, we might still have Ilfochrome today. Instead they created a huge racket on APUG about how utterly impossible it is to do Ilfochrome in a small amateur dark room, how only preflashed Kodachrome 25 would give suitable slide material for it, and that only with three different masks - all made from Verichrome Pan. Needless to say that it didn't help, that Ilfochrome materials were made by a company which would rather sell inkjet paper under a fancy name and which was therefore not exactly committed to analog photography.

 

[Lionel1972]

it might be a very far future project. We have all Know How and all ingredients (still) but this is as complex as building a rocket.

If I were ADOX I would try to team up with Kodak to reintroduce Cibachrome since I'm sure many people would be more inclined to shoot slide film if they could print directly from slides on Cibachrome.
Kodak needs to increase the potential market for their reintroduction of Ektachrome as much as possible.

 

[Photo Engineer]

The bleach uses quite toxic chemistry. Are you prepared for that go-round?

PE

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

If I were ADOX I would try to team up with Kodak to reintroduce Cibachrome since I'm sure many people would be more inclined to shoot slide film if they could print directly from slides on Cibachrome.
Kodak needs to increase the potential market for their reintroduction of Ektachrome as much as possible.

PE's comment is correct, additional to the repeated replacement of machine parts affected by the process, EPA licensing (horrendously costly), specialist printers, ancillary costs...

But the other thing is the customer cost of Ciba/Ilfochrome Classic. Progressive price rises seen in the period 2003 to 2009 literally burnt both edges of the bridge and priced it way, way out of reach of those who would most desire to use it, beside cashed-up professionals. Are you, or some other party, assuming Ciba/Ilfochrome Classic, is or could be resurrected as an economical way to print? It is not. You cannot print this stuff beautifully at any size and charge peanuts for it: it would be very expensive (more than it was up to 2010). What about the market? With the damage done, the market and interest from professionals is no longer there: they have moved on. Intensive market research and testing would be requisite before committing to a wholesale release and hoping for a pot of gold, and that alone could take years.

 

[AgX]

PE's comment is correct, additional to the repeated replacement of machine parts affected by the process, EPA licensing (horrendously costly), specialist printers, ancillary costs...

Who has to licence what at cost at EPA? EPA is a US authority, not a german one.

Maybe you mean paying for installing safety devices to comply with a authority standards. But over here these would not be different from those concerning more standard photo-chemicals.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

Who has to licence what at cost at EPA? EPA is a US authority, not a german one.

Maybe you mean paying for installing safety devices to comply with a authority standards. But over here these would not be different from those concerning more standard photo-chemicals.

Probably a different name in Germany and elsewhere. I was referring to the Australian Environment Protection Authority and the $38,000 licencing that was levied for disposal of hazardous chemical waste at the old Ilfochrome Classic printing facility, along with odour and noise abatement for a place that was surrounded on all sides by residential housing. The lab was demolished early in May 2011, and a very nice set of modern town houses built on the site. Residents nearby were not sorry at all to see the lab close which was soon after discontinuation of Ilfochrome Classic as a print media.