Reports of (Colour) Kodachrome Home Processing Emerge from Sydney

Ian Grant · May 2, 2012

Stephen Frizza said:
I don't want to throw a spanner in the works but has anyone here seen or used Ilfords colour transparency film which is 2iso, it is based on the same technology as Ilfochrome? if i were to attempt to make any colour film (WHICH I AM NOT) I would first strive to make this type of colour film. Just throwing it out there......

I have some exposed Ilfochrome colour transparencey film, it's E6 process and 100 ASA. The reusew of names gets confusing but I realise you mean the Ciba/Ilford Ilfachrome in this case. I think the speed would make it rather impractical.

It's worth reading D A Spencers book - Colour Photography in Practice, 1939, it's a very interesting analysis of (early) Colour photography and differing approaches, Later editions aren't as interesting as by then many processes were obsolete and so no longer included. D.A. Specer was a senior research chemist and a Director of Kodak and so in a unique position.

Ian

Prof_Pixel · May 2, 2012

Ron,

Kodak Instant Film as I remember it.

Kodak Instant Film and Ektaflex printing material used developer dye release technology. When the incorporated developing agent was oxidized during the process of reducing Ag, a colored dye was released, with no coupling involved.

Fred

Photo Engineer · May 2, 2012

Yes Fred, both used RDRs (Redox Dye Releasers) with an ETA in the pod to facilitate dye release. It used Reversal F emulsions to get an ISO of about 100 (? - I've forgotten the speed). A 3000 speed counterpart with metallized dyes was under development. It used negative emulsions and got very high speed via some interesting technology. The dyes were very stable.

PE

Prof_Pixel · May 2, 2012

Photo Engineer said:
It used Reversal F emulsions ...

PE

I've always loved the story about the core and shell Reversal F emulsion being created as a spy film during WW2. The latent image went internal and the common surface developers of the day would not develop the image; it took a grain cracking developer to do this.

Fred

Thor Simon · May 31, 2012

Photo Engineer said:
The real problem is the thickness of 3 sheets of support which may cause some sharpness problems. IDK for sure.

So you'd want film-pack. Oops. But large format aero film is still in the catalog, right?

Kittlegraphy · Jun 3, 2012

K-Lab Kodachome processing

Maybe I'm just slow, but this thread is the first time that I've seen any real information about a recipe for making the K-14 developing chemicals. I am very happy to see that.

I own the K-Lab that has been mentioned here and there and that I wrote about on the Kodachrome Project forum. I finally have some time to work toward getting the K-Lab restored and mechanically operational.

I need help in getting a true and solid way to manufacture the K-14 specific chemicals to operate the K-Lab and develope 35mm Kodachrome. Since the K-Lab is much smaller than Dwayne's Kodachrome processor, the amount of K-14 chemicals is much smaller. That should help to keep the cost of supplies down and make the cost of developing individual Kodachrome rolls reasonable.

Please contact me to help get Kodachrome developing rolling again.

Kevin Kittle

Photo Engineer · Jun 3, 2012

Kevin;

See the US patent granted to R. Bent and R. Mowrey.

PE

PKM-25 · Jun 4, 2012

I have 60 rolls of the last batch in the uber bottom of my freezer, I am sure the person on ebay "jel8080" who is buying up nearly every roll in sight would love to get their hands on it....but I would like to shoot it my self one day if a viable process comes about, so good on anyone for putting forth the effort...

Brett_Johnson · Jul 16, 2012

Hi all,

Kevin - if I get you right, you are seriously considering trying to recreate a Kodachrome developing lab. If that's so, then please keep me in the loop. I'm aware of a shedful of enthuiasts sitting on rolls of Kodachrome in the blind hope that a new developer will emerge.

Best wishes - and good luck,

Brett.

Nzoomed · Jul 16, 2012

so perhaps i should hang on to my kodachrome for the time being?
I was about to list some of it on ebay?
Its been kept frozen since i got it.

SkipA · Jul 16, 2012

I've got 50 cartridges of Super 8 K40 in my freezer. One of these days I'll figure out how to expose it and develop it for B&W projection, at least. But if someone manages to get a K-14 cine film processor running, that would sure be fun.

AgX · Oct 31, 2012

Photo Engineer said:
Kodachrome film is a B&W film with at least 9 different emulsions sensitive to Red, Green and Blue light and these emulsions are able to tell them apart and reproduce the original colors. The coatings are very thin to give good sharpness and the emulsions are very fine grained but still give good speed and grain. The coating is so complex than only Kodak remained active in this field even though Fuji once made a compatible film, as did Konica in Japan.

PE

In the past aside of Kodak 7 more manufacturers made films on the Kodachrome principle.

Prof_Pixel · Oct 31, 2012

Dynacolor (here in Rochester) made a Kodachrome compatible film, and in the early '60s, DuPont had a Kodachrome project, but the introduction of Kodachrome II killed it if I remember correctly.

Photo Engineer · Oct 31, 2012

Kodak released the patent for K14 so that anyone could do it. At that time, Fuji Konica and Kodak could run the "old" Kodachrome. All declined to move into K14 and thus Kodak was the only source of K14 films. Dyanchrome was long gone at that time.

PE

Gerald C Koch · Oct 31, 2012

The problem is not with developing this film. That is fairly easy compared to restarting its nmanufacture. Do any of the old coating machines still exist? Is there anyone with the expertise to run one? I seriously doubt that any company would be willing to make Kodachrome film again. If anyone truly believes that such an event could happen then I have some land in south Florida I'd like to sell them.

AgX · Oct 31, 2012

You do not need the old coating machines. Any current multi-layer coater would be fine.
Out of those 8 companies only Kodak went on even in the haydays. And Kodak profited for a part from the reputation of the tradename Kodachrome.

Some time ago a fellow member wanted a custom production done. He was fixed at Kodak, but Kodak was not interested. I don't assume there is still someone else considering custom production.

Gerald C Koch · Nov 1, 2012

AgX said:
Any current multi-layer coater would be fine.

I am not so sure about this. Kodakchrome contained more layers than any film manufactured today.

AgX · Nov 1, 2012

Gerald, Kodachrome was no wonder-film.

Athiril · Nov 1, 2012

The main difference I see between a B&W pan film, and a (basic) Kodachrome-type film, is the yellow filter, and separation of spectral bandwidths (red, green, blue, etc) into different emulsion layers and never mixed.

wogster · Nov 1, 2012

Gerald C Koch said:
The problem is not with developing this film. That is fairly easy compared to restarting its nmanufacture. Do any of the old coating machines still exist? Is there anyone with the expertise to run one? I seriously doubt that any company would be willing to make Kodachrome film again. If anyone truly believes that such an event could happen then I have some land in south Florida I'd like to sell them.

What you need is not the old coating machines, but a coating machine that can manufacture in small enough batches that you don't have $1,000,000 worth of perishable product that you need to unload in a short period of time. I'm thinking a master that is 140mm wide (just over 5½ inches) and maybe 100m long (just over 328 feet) this would allow for trimming into 35mm, 120, 4x5 sheets and 5x7 sheets. It would be a little thick for 120, but you could use the same thickness for 35mm, 4x5 and 5x7....

AgX · Nov 1, 2012

Modern coating machines can be reduced in coating width. But the speed is another factor. Depending on coating technology there is a limited speed range. And with short strips to be coated these must be brought up to speed before coating starts. And the volumes of tubings, the machine rig-up time, cleaning, the preparation of needed elements not availabable off the shelf, necessary pilote runs..., all must be taken into account.

But as you indicated, it is not an issue of technology and still(!) not an issue of competence, but an issue of economics.

kb3lms · Nov 1, 2012

What you need is not the old coating machines, but a (new) coating machine that can manufacture in small enough batches that you don't have $1,000,000 worth of perishable product

This is really the key to film manufacture in the future. We don't really want 54 inch 6000 foot master rolls, we need something more like 24 inch 600 foot master rolls. What's really needed is new machinery designed to produce at this type of scale and the flexibility to make many types of film product on demand. That's an engineering problem that can be solved given the proper minds applied to the task. What we do not seem to have is anyone willing to invest in it. A "right-sized" machine producing at that scale could be kept busy enough to offset it's costs.

ADOX appears to be headed in this direction, although I don't know that they have scaled themselves up to having their own coating facilities. Rather, IIRC, they have the actual coating done by an outside party that coats many things. But their scale of production seems on track to me.

Someone at Kodak had dropped hints of capabilities along these lines but apparently that went nowhere.

Of course, if such a coating faciilty could be shared for other applications that enhances it's appeal.

StoneNYC · Nov 1, 2012

wogster said:
What you need is not the old coating machines, but a coating machine that can manufacture in small enough batches that you don't have $1,000,000 worth of perishable product that you need to unload in a short period of time. I'm thinking a master that is 140mm wide (just over 5½ inches) and maybe 100m long (just over 328 feet) this would allow for trimming into 35mm, 120, 4x5 sheets and 5x7 sheets. It would be a little thick for 120, but you could use the same thickness for 35mm, 4x5 and 5x7....

I should probably start a new topic for this, but I've always wondered about the thickness, why would 120 need to be thinner? I've noticed the mill of the film differentiate between film sizes but why? It's the same exposure levels etc, why would it change? It can't be the rolling factor since 35mm rolls up as well.

Side note, what about 70mm perf AND unperf so you can make 116 rolls and shoot it on antique foldies, so fun!

~Stone

The Important Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

wblynch · Nov 1, 2012

Which all proves that "Economy of Scale" works in both directions.

Photo Engineer · Nov 1, 2012

First, Kodachrome film does NOT contain more layers than modern color films. Portra and Ektar have 14 or more layers compared to 9 or so for Kodachrome. Second, any machine can coat Kodachrome. Third, Kodachrome can be processed by hand. And the couplers and CD-6 are the ingredients of Kodachrome that are hard to get.

BTDT. I hate all of this repetition. See the other bigger Kodachrome thread for all of the info.

PE

Reports of (Colour) Kodachrome Home Processing Emerge from Sydney

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency