Processing of Kodachrome 120

nickandre · Nov 24, 2008

I just picked 3 rolls of 1989 kodachrome 120 on ebay for $5. I'm going to use them to test a home K14 process. I'm just interested how many people have PKR 120 left/would like to have me process a few rolls for them. Of course this is only if I get the process right, and does not include guarantees on 20 year old film. I'm quite sure I will be able to get a color image; color balance and cross development will be an issue.

As I side note what first developer should I use? I have experience with 10 yr old 400 speed bg fog, it was a negative film so it wasn't hard to deal with. What fog level would I experience with frozen since new PKR 120 dated 1989? Something like 1/6 the amount. Are there any developers that are "good" at holding back the appearance of fog? Correct me if I'm wrong but frozen film has little no speed loss. I could try rating it at ASA 40 and working the process from there to reduce fog. I'd have to get contrast right though. And color balance.

Or I could use the first developer from my E6 kit, though the Z-50 kodachrome manual of god suggests 2 minutes at 99 degrees. This seems fast for any developer I've used. What could they be referring to? a faster developer? Or could it just be the film?

nickandre · Nov 24, 2008

wait. the emulsion of kodachrome is much thinner. could that have something to do with it?

Alexander Ghaffari · Nov 24, 2008

If you are talking about the Kodachrome from the same guy that I bought my 35mm 1989 PKR from, which I am certain that you are, then with my 1989 Kodachrome, it lost 1/3 stop film speed with extremely minimal increase in noticeable base fog. Normal K-14 process yields excellent results... id est, no compensation for increased base fog is necessary for good results with my film. Remember that my film and yours were stored in the exact same fashion for the same period of time.

If you can find a way to process 120 Kodachrome 64 with good results, then I shall find a way to obtain unexposed film that was continuously stored in a freezer. Scores of people have attempted and failed, I hope that you succeed in your endeavor. I imagine that you could enlist the help of some ex-Soviet reverse engineers to build any machinery, since they were so abundant and now out of work. Then you would need some chemistry assistance once the machinery is completed...unfortunately, I do not know how to obtain affordable chemists necessary to synthesize any needed chemicals...perhaps some ex-Soviet chemical engineers? Putin may have reinstated the USSR's chemical weapons program, so they may not be out of work. Anyway, best of luck!

Photo Engineer · Nov 24, 2008

Read the original formulas in the patent. They are published.

PE

kodachrome64 · Nov 24, 2008

Wirelessly posted (BlackBerry 8300: BlackBerry9000/4.6.0.185 Profile/MIDP-2.0 Configuration/CLDC-1.1 VendorID/102)

Wow I hope this is possible. Please keep us updated on your progress.

Nicholas Lindan · Nov 24, 2008

Somewhere there should be a warehouse full of the Kodachrome 'mini-labs' the Justice department forced Kodak to make. Unless they are landfill. You should be able to get one real cheap.

I think Rocky Mountain film lab was trying to auction one off a few years ago.

Brandon D. · Nov 24, 2008

tiberiustibz said:
I'm just interested how many people have PKR 120 left/would like to have me process a few rolls for them.

Sign me up, sir.

Keep us updated on whether or not it works!

David A. Goldfarb · Nov 25, 2008

Kodachrome minilabs were only designed to process 35mm in long rolls spliced together like movie film.

Nicholas Lindan · Nov 25, 2008

David A. Goldfarb said:
Kodachrome minilabs were only designed to process 35mm in long rolls spliced together like movie film.

Aw, bummer.

But since this, if it proceeds, promises to be such a noble failure [and being English by birth, nothing is so admired as the noble failure] may I propose buying two of them and splicing them together in the middle to get a 70mm machine ...

[And if you need a smiley to tell you this isn't a serious proposition then you bloody well deserve to take it seriously.]

rwyoung · Nov 25, 2008

Nicholas -

I think you would have to splice the machines along their long edges. And then you would need one designed for right-hand use and another for left-hand use. And possibly a third for tongue-in-cheek use...

dmr · Nov 25, 2008

May I ask how you are doing the re-exposure steps? Most specifically, how you are measuring them or assuring the correct degree of re-exposure? I understand this is one of the more critical variables there is in the K14 process.

nickandre · Nov 25, 2008

Ahh. I started a thread on photo.net on the specifics.

The plan is to scratch mix the first developer or get one that follows similar specs (E6 first dev maybe?) I'll work it out using 35mm kodachrome stock. Once the negative images are developed I will set up the correct wratten filters (at first to try and get an image I'll be using non-standard theatrical filters I first used in color seperation) behind a flashlight bulb 5 feet or so above the film. Using a nifty enlarger timer I'll make a re-exposure test strip. I will develop the re-exposed layer fully until there is no real further increase in density with greater time to be sure it is fully re-exposed. I will repeat with the blue re-exposure. I'm considering using a green filter for the final re-exposure to minimize cross development, but I will have already loaded and unloaded the film 3 times, so chemical fogging is looking like the way to go. Hopefully the PITA factor will be compensated slightly by the profits.

The color developers will be probably generic film developer with CD-3 added. Color couplers will be purchased from this website. The first developer will be scratch mixed. If this works I might ask dwaynes for chemistry, but I'm trying not to put the cart before the horse here.

Can anyone find the formula for the first developer of kodachrome? I googled it but came up empty on the patent search.

I would recommend submitting a test roll for each batch to calculate speed loss. Depending on the speed loss I could switch between a more conservative re-exposure and a more heavy re-exposure to minimize the magenta cast that typically comes with film that has speed loss in a properly calibrated process.

Photo Engineer · Nov 25, 2008

The entire formula set is published in the US patent on K-14. It has changed since the initial publication due to the high agitation notes earlier here somewhere. And, it no longer uses the pre-hardener. CD-3 may not be active enough for the yellow layer. IDK for sure. And, the E6 first developer may not be right for this film. Again, IDK. It has been a long time for me.

The holders of the patent are Bent and Mowrey. I don't remember the number but it is also posted here and on PN.

PE

nickandre · Nov 25, 2008

Ok, in the event that CD-3 is not active enough what will happen? Will the halide develop without dye coupler activation? Can I avoid this by doing something like presoaking the emulsion in the coupler/cd mix?

Does the patent have the first developer formula? I can only find chemical descriptions with carbon ring models of the CD6 molecule or whatever.

2F/2F · Nov 25, 2008

I understand the appeal of Kodachrome, and it is a shame to have that beautiful big film sitting doing nothing, but the simple fact is that there are some medium format transparency films readily available that blow Kodachrome away in every respect (except perhaps archival longevity), and then some, seeing that you can push and pull like mad with E-6. I would just process the rolls you have as b/w and put the time into really learning a still-produced E-6 film. You are going to end up putting a load of time and money into something that will probably not work, just to get the same pictures that you could have got with an E-6 film off the shelf. Anything you do with the transparencies beside projection, litho print, or an Ilfochrome will require the image to be digitized anyhow, so you might as well take advantage of the non-destructive editing ability of digital and craft your E-6 medium format images to have the Kodachrome look you want. (You will need to do very little to a nice, plain film like Provia to get it looking that way.) If the ability to process 120 was still around, I'd say go for it. For 35mm, heck yeah. Might as well shoot it like mad while you still can.

Photo Engineer · Nov 25, 2008

Tiberius;

IDK whether CD3 will work in place of CD6. CD6 is available as the p-Toluene Sulfonate Salt and as the Sulfur Dioxide adduct here and there. CD6 is far more active than CD3 but forms dyes like CD3. It is between CD3 and CD4 in activity, but forms dyes like CD3 instead of CD4. That is about all I can say.

All formulas are in the patent.

CD6 is basically N-Ethyl, N-Methoxy Ethyl, 3 Methyl, p-Phenylene Diamine, a close cousin of both CD3 and CD4.

PE

dmr · Nov 25, 2008

tiberiustibz said:
Can anyone find the formula for the first developer of kodachrome? I googled it but came up empty on the patent search.

Would this be it here?

MQ Negative Developing Composition Sodium hexametaphosphate 0.6 g. Sodium sulfite 79.0 g. Monomethyl-p-aminophenol sulfate 5.0 g. Sodium hydroxide 1.0 g. Hydroquinone 2.0 g. Sodium carbonate 35.0 g. Potassium iodide (0.1%) 12.5 ml. Sodium bromide 3.0 g. Sodium thiocyanate 1.7 g. Hydroquinone monosulfate 4.0 g. Water to make 1 liter

From:

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3658525.html

(Don't ask me why I read stuff like that!)

wogster · Nov 25, 2008

2F/2F said:
I understand the appeal of Kodachrome, and it is a shame to have that beautiful big film sitting doing nothing, but the simple fact is that there are some medium format transparency films readily available that blow Kodachrome away in every respect (except perhaps archival longevity), and then some, seeing that you can push and pull like mad with E-6. I would just process the rolls you have as b/w and put the time into really learning a still-produced E-6 film. You are going to end up putting a load of time and money into something that will probably not work, just to get the same pictures that you could have got with an E-6 film off the shelf. Anything you do with the transparencies beside projection, litho print, or an Ilfochrome will require the image to be digitized anyhow, so you might as well take advantage of the non-destructive editing ability of digital and craft your E-6 medium format images to have the Kodachrome look you want. (You will need to do very little to a nice, plain film like Provia to get it looking that way.) If the ability to process 120 was still around, I'd say go for it. For 35mm, heck yeah. Might as well shoot it like mad while you still can.

I kinda wonder that myself, people are willing to spend who knows how much money to reinvent a method to process a film that hasn't been made since 1996, when there are perfectly good modern films available. Filns that you can get processed cheap at dozens of places in any large city, some can turn them around in an hour or two.

Photo Engineer · Nov 25, 2008

dmr said:
Would this be it here?

MQ Negative Developing Composition Sodium hexametaphosphate 0.6 g. Sodium sulfite 79.0 g. Monomethyl-p-aminophenol sulfate 5.0 g. Sodium hydroxide 1.0 g. Hydroquinone 2.0 g. Sodium carbonate 35.0 g. Potassium iodide (0.1%) 12.5 ml. Sodium bromide 3.0 g. Sodium thiocyanate 1.7 g. Hydroquinone monosulfate 4.0 g. Water to make 1 liter

From:

http://www.freepatentsonline.com/3658525.html

(Don't ask me why I read stuff like that!)

IDK how many times I have posted that reference. I was bound and determined not to do it again.

Yes, that is the correct reference, but I didn't verify what you posted as being correct. It must be the Kodachrome first developer, as the patent describes both E6 and K14 processes. What you posted looks more like E6, but I cannot be sure unless I read it over again in detail.

I feel that by now, if you are interested, you should look it up and verify it yourself. It takes too much of my time.

PE

ssloansjca · Nov 26, 2008

If you can really, REALLY, process PKR120 I have some film I would love to send you.

~Steve Sloan

Besk · Nov 26, 2008

I have a few rolls myself. I pulled it out of the freezer two or so years ago. Now maybe I will put them back in!

nickandre · Nov 26, 2008

I'll get working on it. Do you know why? Not because I'm obsessed with kodachrome (though I think It's really cool), but because it would be cool to figure the process out and then also to charge $30 a roll. It's not all profit, but I won't go broke either. It will be a PITA to re-expose but, here goes.

I am purchasing some frozen 35mm stock to calibrate the process with, I'll start with the couplers and E6 first developer and go from there. If all goes well I'll have the rudamentary process worked out in a month. If everything works well, I'll take orders and people can ship their film to me. If everything goes south, I'll use the kit to dye my dog purple and sell the film on ebay.

Photo Engineer · Nov 26, 2008

Just remember to use sharp cutting (narrow band pass) wratten filters or you will get crosstalk. We used WR 98, 99 and 70 when we needed R/G/B exposures, but in this case you only need R and B and then can turn on the lights for the final exposure.

PE

dmr · Nov 26, 2008

Photo Engineer said:
Just remember to use sharp cutting (narrow band pass) wratten filters or you will get crosstalk.

I was thinking (yes, dangerous, I know) back to my past life in the lab at the hospital and one of the then-high-tech lab instruments, the spectrophotometer.

Part of a spectrophotometer is the monochromator, a tunable light source which produces a light of any specific wavelength used to illuminate a sample. Some of these used a prism and a slit, others used a diffraction grate, but the result was light of a very specific color and very pure.

Could something like this maybe be adapted to this project? (I don't know, I'm just throwing it out on the table.) This way any color of any wavelength could be dialed in and even tuned, by trial and error, to get the best results.

Just an idea here ...

Photo Engineer · Nov 26, 2008

Could you use a spectrophotometer? I suppose so, but the wavelength might be too narrow and miss the sensitive peak of the dyed emulsion. Also, spectrophotometers tend to have low light levels at any given wavelength. For example, that 100 watt bulb behind it has itself divided up over all of the lines.

So, it might work if tuned properly and if the right exposure was given. With the Wratten filters, no tuning is needed, just adjusting for the right exposure.

PE

Processing of Kodachrome 120

nickandre

nickandre

Alexander Ghaffari

Photo Engineer

kodachrome64

Nicholas Lindan

Advertiser

Brandon D.

David A. Goldfarb

Moderator

Nicholas Lindan

Advertiser

rwyoung

dmr

nickandre

Photo Engineer

nickandre

2F/2F

Photo Engineer

dmr

wogster

Photo Engineer

ssloansjca

Besk

nickandre

Photo Engineer

dmr

Photo Engineer

Processing of Kodachrome 120

Advertiser

Moderator

Advertiser

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency