New Kodachrome lab?

[Aurum]

If you look on fleabay, you may well find a reasonable slide scanner for less than 100 bucks. The dedicated 35mm slide and neg scanner I use (A primefilm 1800U) isn't the best in the world, but it was end of line and I picked it up for less than 50 quid box fresh and parcelforce to the door.

Does a perfectly good job, and runs on Windows 98SE!

or put another way about 10 films and you're even if you weigh $13.99 vs $4.88 per roll

 

[accozzaglia]

Hi Kevin --

I certainly don't doubt you as it relates to Wal-Mart in the U.S. For perhaps functional reasons of procurement logistics, cross-border rules on transporting items, and a matter of Canada having an economy of scale at a tenth the U.S. with a much more sparse geography, I did not dispute the manager of the photo lab of the Wal-Mart I visited. The person working with him was clearly younger than me (I'm 35), but the manager I spoke with was at least my age, perhaps older, and had been working for Wal-Mart long enough to remember that the Canadian locations (or maybe just the GTA for all we know) had phased out non C-41 services some time back. I did look over the processing envelope they use here, and it didn't appear to accommodate non C-41 options. Mind you, we probably use a different envelope for not only the more limited service, but also because they're in both English and French here.

For what it's worth, I'll give this a try in the U.S.: when I visit family in Minnesota next week, I'll drop off my Kodachrome I've shot already at a Wal-Mart nearby where I'm staying. When it returns, which will be after I've returned home, I'll have it mailed to me once I get somebody to pick it up. Then I'll have my local Shopper's Drug Mart run the rolls through a Noritsu at $3 a roll (and $1 for subsequent rolls if adding to the same CD media).

Thanks!

If you'll just do exactly what I said in my earlier post you can bypass the BS and dumb look of the employees on site and get your slides developed. Man why do so many people not believe someone like myself and others who've been saying this for years now?

 

[CRhymer]

Hello all,

A few things (pace Kevin). Has anyone actually got Walmart (USA) to send off and get processed a roll of K-14 (not with a prepaid mailer thingy) for $4.88?

Does Rocky Mountain actually do K-14 (in colour) anymore? I know it is on their web-site, but their K-lab is for sale and has been for a while IIRC. I am not saying that they don't do it. They may save up enough orders to do a run (good idea, since Kodachrome processing works best when run 24/7 and with a lot of babysitting - not to mention the shelf life of processing chemicals), or maybe they just send it to Dwayne's. After all, their speciality is outdated processes. Some things on their site are a bit dated. I am not criticizing them, just, things change. For example; there is a link to Film for Classics on their site. Now I have noticed that the Film for Classics site has been getting thinner and thinner. At one time there seemed to be two of them. Their order form is blank. Any ideas?

As to availability. There are, as of today, four in-date rolls of 64 on the shelf of my local drug store. (60° 1' 0" N and 111° 58' 0" W) and 268km (167 miles) to the nearest town (Hay River). They also send off my Kodachrome - for about $15.00 or less and 2-3 weeks turn around.

I can buy Kodachrome and get it processed from my remote location. I doubt that this will last much longer.

One after-thought. Actually this is rocket science. Yes, one can do it in their basement. No, no one does.

Actually a second after-thought. I was in Edmonton, Alberta on June 7, 2008 and called McBain's on the off chance that they had some 220 film (I wanted to test my cirkut camera on something a bit less costly). The nice lady told me (after a five minute wait) that they only had one roll left. I asked the price and type and (after another five minute wait) she told me she couldn't find that info and would have to call me back. So, I went into the main store and found they had a selection of 220 films in both Fuji and Kodak, so I bought a pro pack. While paying, I got talking with the clerk, who was old enough to remember film and where he was when Kennedy was shot. He said that the E-6 market had all but disappeared in the last six months. I bought the film because I was there, did not have to pay for shipping, and had not checked the price elsewhere. However, $65.50CDN for Fuji NPC/Pro 160S 220 (5-pack) seems a bit steep.

Cheers,
Clarence

 

[kevinbell]

Walmart Again and Kodachrome

Well to my knowledge, and I've read quite extensively on it, but Dwaynes is the only lab. Its the only one listed on the Kodak webstie. As far as someone springing up a K-14 lab "trying" to do K-14 I wouldn't use it. They'd likely mess your slides up. Also at those exhorbitant pricing, thats just rediculous. I'd only use a "certified" lab as Kodachrome is a finicky process. It has more steps to it than E-6. As far as Walmart. To the Canadian fella on the list. I'm not sure how it would work in Canada but here in the US the local store still sends it out (E-6 or K-14). E-6 is sent to a regional Fuji lab (theres several) and K-14 is re-routed to Dwaynes. I wouldn't see why a Walmart near the border with Canada wouldn't just sent it to a regional lab the same as here. I've never been to Canada so I don't know about it but doesn't Canada have Fuji operations too? If they do it would seem this would be possible. As I said and let me re-iterate this but on the ENVELOPES NOWHERE is it listed E-6, K-14, etc. It isn't listed at all. Theres simply a white no color box at the very bottom called "special instructions". On the print side yes you see those color sections on the envelope thats blue I think for one size print and green for another and then it has CD checkboxes if you want that, etc. If your Walmart film mailer envelope has "special instructions" at the bottom try simply writing in what I told you guys several posts back and see if it works. The worst thing is that they'll be returned to you. Someone will look at the roll when it is checked "special instructions" and if it's not available then it'll be sent back. The more I think about this IF Canada Walmarts offer "send out" then WHY wouldn't they also do E-6 as all send out is sent to a regional lab. I'm sure a Fuji regional lab can do E-6 since Fuji sells E-6. Just try it. Maybe go shoot a roll of slides that you wouldn't worry so much if they got lost or something worse such as processed in C-41. That way you'll know for sure. Just don't forget to WRITE IN special instructions as I stated in earlier posts! I HOPE SINCERELY that it works for you!

-Kevin

 

[kevinbell]

Another Option CVS and Walgreens and also CD's

I've talked to a Walgreens and a CVS here (drug stores) and they both do send out E-6. It's been a few weeks ago that I inquired about it but if memory serves right they were only a little more than Walmart. Walmart is $4.88 and I think those drug stores were somewhere between $5.99 and $6.50 for this service. Good luck and call your local one and see. Eckards Drugs also use to do mail out on slides as well. Check those out as possibles. Here in Greenville we have a few local labs that do E-6 for about $9 a roll. We have one here that is our "dwaynes" of this area and they do quite good work although as you know no K-14! I call them our dwaynes cause they do good work and dwaynes has a reputation for good work. Someone earlier mentioned photo CD's being shit from Dwaynes. I don't doubt it. EVERY photo CD i've ever had made from anywhere has been shit. Walmarts photo CD's are horrible. They almost have no color at all to them. Eventhough i'm a Canon man, at least for the moment, I'd recommend a Nikon dedicated slide scanner. I've heard those scanners are quite good. I think you can get one on e-bay as well. Theres a couple of other scanners out there on the market. Seems like a primefilm or some name like that in which I read was decent. If you can afford it though i'd go for the Nikon slide scanner because i've heard good things about them. They are expensive though, seems like $500? Anyway as always good luck!

-Kevin

 

[AutumnJazz]

Believe me kevin, I know. I've been looking into scanners for a while. I'm going to just get more lenses instead, though.

Slightly off topic, but I don't understand why Kodak doesn't do Kodachrome in more sizes. I know they only do one run a year, but surely there would be a market for some 120 and 4x5 Kodachrome?

 

[kevinbell]

120 and 4x5

Well you know I don't know either but I never got into medium or large format. Cost!! Medium format seems nice but i've read that Pentax is the only one that still makes new cameras for it. At least Canon and Nikon still offer new 35mm cameras should you desire one. The only thing I have that is close to shooting medium format is a Kodak Duoflex III that shoots 620 complete with the flashgun from the 1950's. I know it would shoot film just fine because the shutter is working and all the dials turn free. In fact it is in Mint condition and I have the owners manual. I ordered it off ebay from a woman and I think I paid $3 for it. It's kinda neat to have such an old camera that looks brand new. I sorta would like to shoot with it but I never messed with roll film. I know one can use 120 in a 620 camera because its only a difference in the spool size. I think the end of the spool on a 120 is thicker or something. I've heard you can put 120 in a 620 but i've not tried and since I don't know much about it I wouldnt. Not unless I had someone help me. I especially wouldnt unless someone helped me because it's likely this simple lens camera wouldn't give that much of an outstanding image. I mean it's really simple. It does have an f/stop dial around the lens but I don't know. Prolly not so high quality!

-Kevin

 

[kevinbell]

Post Script

I don't see why they don't just dump E-6 and do all Kodachrome! At least Kodachrome is supposed to have a long life. Well that is unless you project it and I do. I don't see though how E-6 would outlast it! Boy the old Ektachrome process was crap. I've seen old Ektachromes from the 60s and 70s. The ones from the 50s and 60s fade to that ugly horrific magenta. The late 60s and 70s Ektachromes seem to fade to that blue cast. Why Kodak never just dumped the whole Ektacrhome deal when they had a superior product in Kodachrome i'll never know. I mean Fuji is all E-6 and eventhough it's supposed to be better it's still technically the same process so its pretty much easy to say E-6 is E-6 and it eventually will look like crap. Of course about fading I dont know so much about that. I can tell you that all the super 8mm movies my parents shot have been screened a lot over the years and none of them have faded at all. We have them going back to the 50s actually with my grandfathers old standard 8mm kodachromes. Slides may be different but at least the 8mm stuff hasn't faded. Now when I was about 14 in the 1980s I took our super 8mm kodak camera out and shot some Ektachrome 8mm and I looked at that roll recently compared to the older kodachrome k-25 8mm we had. That Ektachrome while still acceptable in color it is nowhere near as colorful as those 1950s and 1960s kodachrome 8mm films we have. My dad shot all k-25 super 8 then when kodak dropped the k-25 he did k-40 super 8. The K-40 looks good too although a tad bit grainier. It's amazing because dad never had a "cadillac" of a camera. He and mom used a Kodak M-22 Super 8mm movie camera. It still was better than some of the other "mini" kodak super 8's of the time. His had the flip down grip. I never understood how people shot on those M12 (I think is the model) which had no grip. They were simple a square box. I'd shoot some 8mm today If it had sound. Unfortunately we never had a sound outfit and Kodak no longer makes the sound movie cartridges. They make the silent super 8mm though! These days having no sound just isnt acceptable. I always thought super 8mm movies were fun, especially when you took several cartridges of a trip then spliced them all on a large reel. At any rate i've just never ever been a "print" person. Even when I was a kid and the photo bug hit I always thought slides were more fun and superior as was 8mm. I just never cared for prints. Now i've done my share of them but I still will always be a "chrome" (slides) person. People on here were talking about chromes fading well some of the worst fading i've ever seen are prints done in the mid to late 1970's. Prints before then and after seem to hold up better. This similar "quality" isse also affects reel to reel audio tape from the mid and late 70's . It was due to using inferior tape binders. I don't know what it was with film but I think inferior chemicals or paper.

-Kevin

 

[2F/2F]

Kevin,

E-6 could be processed on-site and on deadline. It's about the workflow, not the quality. Fine artists tend to forget/ignore this about editorial and journalism photography.

 

[kevinbell]

Kodachrome

K-14 (Kodachrome) could be processed on site as well. I read in a forum, either on photo.net or on here that back in the late 80s or early 90s that Kodak had designed a Kodachrome minilab that could do work on site but unfortunately it was never actually brought out in stores. I guess they decided to stick with E-6. Yes E-6 could be processed on site and as I said we have a couple of places here that do it but i'm not paying their price when I get excellent results from Walmart. I mean $4.88 vs almost $10 is a difference. Now that being said I would use them IF I needed some in a hurry because there are those times you want your slides back quick such as you're giving a slide show that night. We've been talking about K-14 and E-6 for a while now but no one has said whether they project their slides or not? I'd love to hear back from those who still give slide shows. Do you give those to your family or also to friends? I'd invite friends over for one if I had friends in them or perhaps to see some of my landscape/nature slides. I just got my slides back from the beach. I've sorted them and put them in a carousel ready for a show. I'm just waiting on my grandmother who went with us to get back. Get this she's at the Beach again! At any rate shes 87 and still gets around and drives. I'm waiting though cause she was in several slides so i'll wait and have the show when she gets back. I usually do slide shows as a family. My mother will usually cook a meal and i'll set up the projector. We'll sit around and do like hamburgers and hotdogs and give the show. I don't know what they did this time at the lab or if it was my doing but my slides are exceptionally deep in color. I used Ektachrome this time and I usually use Fujichrome. I ran through the show by myself to check slides for orientation issues and noticed the color was exceptional. I have three projectors. I have an Ektagraphic III AMT, an Ektagraphic III E, and a Carousel 850H. I tend to like the carousel 850H the best for whatever reason. Maybe because its more "vintage" being from 1971!. Anyway since we're talking slides how many of you give shows to your friends and family's and do you have a hotdog while watching them or snacks or what?? Ideas folks??

-Kevin

 

[2F/2F]

Temporary Kodachrome labs were set up on a few occasions for the Olympics. However, it was in no way standard practice for journalists to use Kodachrome once Ektachrome became available. For many reasons, especially from the POV of a fine-art photographer or hobbyist, Kodachrome is superior to Ektachrome. However, the opposite also holds true for many photographers...the commercial photographers and news wires that made up a huge part of Kodak's business. Your idea that Ektachrome be dumped and Kodachrome kept is like arguing that nothing but luxury and sports cars should be on the road, while grocery getters and commercial trucks should be discontinued. The former are fun and exciting, and "superior" as far as being works of automotive art, but it's the latter that we really need to live our lives. Similarly, Kodachrome may have been "superior" to "Ektachrome", but not in ways that mattered to those who shoot most: editorial, journalism, documentary, and commercial photographers.

 

[srs5694]

Medium format seems nice but i've read that Pentax is the only one that still makes new cameras for it.

I don't believe that's true. Certainly new MF cameras are still available, although it's conceivable these are stragglers at the end of a now-closed supply chain. B&H lists MF cameras from Contax, Fuji, Hasselblad, Mamiya, Pentax, and Rollei on their Web site. There are also new Kiev cameras available, although these could well be stragglers. Oh, and there are also the Holga cameras. (I'm sure the Lomographers who buy those burn through lots of MF film!)

 

[AutumnJazz]

I don't project slides. At one point, I went looking for a slide projector, but I ended up burning threw the money I alotted myself for fun...I spent it all on film.

I do pass around one of those mini viewers when I get a new roll of film back. I really must start developing and mounting the film that I can...

 

[kodachrome64]

Actually, the Kodak "K-Lab" (Kodachrome mini lab, if you want to call it that) was introduced around the early 90s if memory serves, it just wasn't a huge success. They did sell some of them but I don't know how many. This is what Rocky Mountain has for sale on their website and what they presumably use to process Kodachrome according to their website.

The new generation of E6 films is supposed to have better archival qualities than even Kodachrome. That combined with the projector fading qualities of KChrome, there really isn't much incentive to shoot it for that reason. I do because mostly of the colors and secondly for the PROVEN archival qualities, but I think we will find that current Fujichrome products have better archival qualities than KChrome. That wasn't true in the past, but E6 films are generations ahead of K14. I still love it, but there isn't really any compelling reason to shoot it unless you just like the colors. There are 100 ASA E6 films that are much more finely grained with two-thirds of a stop more speed (and are cheaper and easier to process and will probably be around longer). But I love everything about the way K64 looks, right down to the grain. I am willing to jump through hoops to shoot it and I would still shoot it if it were twice the cost. But I'm glad there's a variety and that KChrome isn't the only film! For people who will be projecting frequently it is definitely a poor choice, though I haven't faded any of mine. Every time I put a K64 slide in the projector I forget all about E6 for awhile.

Nick

 

[dfbldwn]

A few things (pace Kevin). Has anyone actually got Walmart (USA) to send off and get processed a roll of K-14 (not with a prepaid mailer thingy) for $4.88?

Yes, within the last 3 months. Came back in less than 7 calendar days. Their Fuji scan/print machine did really well making prints, e.g. got rid of the usual Magenta cast very nicely.

Sam's Club also did it earlier this year, and for almost a dollar cheaper per roll.

Its real simple if you label it as specified above, viz. "Process K-14 Kodachrome slides". Mine goes to the Fuji (Wal-Mart) outlab in Atlanta, and off to Dwayne's.

You can also specify whether to mount or, when I want to scan myself, I just write "DO NOT MOUNT" (my scanner scans an unmounted roll of Kodachrome faster and cleaner than mounted slides).

 

[CRhymer]

Hello dfbldwn,

Now that is a great deal, since Dwayne's web price is $6.99 for 24 and $9.00 for 36. And, at Sam's price, $3.88, if I understand you correctly, it is practically free. With deals like that, we should see a run on Kodachrome.

Hello AutumnJazz,

35, 120 and sheet film are coated on different bases.

Cheers,
Clarence

 

[kodachrome64]

Has anyone ever tried to get a CD at Walmart/Sam's? I wonder what would happen if I selected the CD option on the envelope and wrote "Process K-14" in the special instructions area. I haven't heard of anyone doing this, but I don't see why not; the only way to know for sure is to try! (Certainly asking someone would be no help, since most people working there do not likely even know what Kodachrome is).

Nick

 

[pesphoto]

These guys process K14.
http://www.rockymountainfilm.com/oldfilm.htm

 

[kevinbell]

K-14 vs. E-6

2F/2F I know you stated that photojournalists and magazines used E-6 but as I recall National Geographic used Kodachrome. If you look at the older National Geographic magazines they used to print in fine small print under the photo "Ektachrome" or "Kodachrome" but most i've seen were "Kodachrome". Seems like it would be more cost effective to produce one very good product and support it well. Just seems like a better thing to me but I could be wrong. I will say this. I usually shoot fujichrome but this time when I went to the beach on vacation I shot Ektachrome and I will say that to my eyes the color is richer and better. I may start using Ektachrome instead of the Fujichrome.


-Kevin

 

[kodachrome64]

National Geographic was a large consumer of Kodachrome. (I highly doubt they are now). But, IIRC, back in the heyday of Kodachrome, NG only used a small portion compared to consumers. I can't remember what the numbers are or any idea of the ratios, but I seem to remember this.

The difference between Kodachrome and Ekta/Fujichrome is that there are several types of Ektachrome and several types of Fujichrome, but only one type of Kodachrome. If you liked one of the flavors of Ektachrome, that's great. I like some flavors of Fujichrome and not others. I like the way E100VS does reds; not as much as I like the way Kodachrome does them, but I do like it.

I would have a hard time believing that it would make any sense for Kodak to only produce one product and "support it well". Especially when Kodachrome is the most costly to support. If it had the demand, maybe, but I have a feeling that the folks over at Eastman Kodak would be just as happy if Kodachrome died a quiet death and all that's left is Ektachrome. Who knows; maybe there's just enough demand to keep production on K64 going and keep the soup flowing to one developer. Then again maybe they'll keep it around till it's 75 year anniversary and then pull the plug.


Nick

 

[2F/2F]

Kevin,

National Geographic is technically journalism, but a pretty unique form of it. It is feature journalism, for one. As a monthly magazine, and a magazine that is feature oriented, and therefore not particularly timely, National Geographic has a lot different considerations than many publications and professionals. You can be sure that tons of other early color feature work was shot on Kodachrome as well. But with these publications, many of their stories are ready well in advance, and they certainly have a healthy portfolio of evergreens on hand. Not an example of what I meant. Their deadlines are nowhere near as tight as your everyday commercial photographer or newspaper, who would have to process on site in the days of film. It is more documentary feature, often with quite long term projects, AND gives a lot of artistic freedom to the photographers compared to most journalistic photographers. Additionally, much of their work comes from contributors, who may work however they please, as they are working for themselves on spec. The issue for news photo editors has always been time and practicality, not quality...least of all archival quality. Let's not forget that up until about a decade ago (maybe 15 years?), all the New York Times had ever printed was black and white photos. Journalists even shot black and white film well into the 1990s for some, if not much, of their work. KISS is the philosophy.

All I am saying is that there is PLENTY of reason why Ektachrome survived.

 

[AutumnJazz]

kodachrome64, I LOVE the colors. There is nothing like Kodachrome for beach landscapes.

CRhymer, I was under the impression that all film is just coated on giant rolls, then cut to size. Do they actually coat sheets that are already as wide as 135 is?

 

[Photo Engineer]

Kodak coats on 42" and 72" wide rolls, about 5000 ft long. They coat on basically two thicknesses, 5 and 7 mil thick, and it may be acetate or polyester. So, just about every film has its own support.

In addition to that, some films have AH (anti halation), some like Kodachrome use Rem-Jet, and some use embedded carbon. All of these act as conductors or antistats for high speed coating and to prevent sparks in the darkroom.

PE

 

[AutumnJazz]

So why doesn't Kodak coat larger formats? Is the demand just too low for it to be cost effective?

 

[Photo Engineer]

The Kodachrome process is unique in that it must be run continuously for the best results. If throughput falls below a certain level, and the machines run on and off, then quality begins to suffer. It is better to discontinue the product rather than have customer complaints about quality.

So, the number of labs for Kodachrome have shrunk and gradually sheet film and then MF vanished. The products could not be sustained. This is a sad situation for those that love Kodachrome, but it is technically too hard to make and process for the stuff to be made and have a lot go to waste due to poor sales.

If you could get people to agree to a 42" x 5000 foot run of film, maybe you might convince them. That is a lot of LF and ULF film. All I can do is suggest you try.

PE