Slit Kodachrome processing

[Radioiron]

I've already got the ok from dwaynes that they can process film I slit for my minox (9.2mm), so can they process film I slit to any standard format up to 35mm? I just committed to buy the brick of 120 on the anticipation of Kchrome from my minox for as long as Dwaynes is around. But can they process unperformed 35mm (828 film), unperformed 16mm and 17.5mm, unperforated 8mm. This is all with the assumption the roll has enough length for them to deal with.
Does anyone know off hand what the thickness of tech pan, 120 kr64 and 35mm kr64 are? Tech pan was one of the films that was thin enough to fit 50 exp in a minox cassette and was wondering with the relative thinness of kchrome and the fact 120 is thinner base then 35mm, could I fit 50 exp in a cassette?

 

[nickandre]

I would assume that it doesn't need sprocket holes;it's pulled through the machine. Are you one of those people I'm still scratching my heads about who bought a brick of 120 KC64 on ebay? I once saw one go for $250 last year. Still not quite sure what those people were thinking.

 

[Radioiron]

no, I saw the brick going for 20 bucks buy it now and instantly connected it to my minox photography. I had previously contacted them about processing 35mm i slit down and when I saw this I knew I had a cheap option.
If I also extract the rolls out of the back of the brick with a razor knife I can have one heck of a display piece.

 

[kodachrome64]

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

Just out of curiosity, how do you do the splitting?

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

That's cool that they'll do that, but how is K64 as a Minox film? Not too grainy?

 

[Radioiron]

I'm slitting using a sturdily built wooden jig that holds 3 razor blades in place while I pull the film out of the cassette. That is the setup for 35mm but now I'm going to need to build another that's wider for 120. 120 will be better since it's thinner base and will cut easier.
I have found a couple images online of old slides and they seem to be very good. I have not sent my first 2 loads off yet but I expect the results to be wonderful for color films of this size.

 

[Radioiron]

My nice brick of PKR 120 arrived and got me into the mood to do some figuring. My measurements from an old 120 roll tells me that there is enough length for a 50 exp minox strip. A quick comparison of K II 35mm and several 120 films with a micrometer give me some indication that 50 exp might fit in a cassette.
Assuming 5 slits per 120 roll, 20 rolls at $20, thats 100 rolls of film at 20 cents each.
I hope that if Dwaynes can process unsprocketed 35mm some of the film might go to making 828 film.

 

[Alexander Ghaffari]

Fun, remember that 120 Kodachrome 64 film is longer than most 120 films (needed for splicing).

 

[michaelbsc]

I bought one for a studio prop

Are you one of those people I'm still scratching my heads about who bought a brick of 120 KC64 on ebay? I once saw one go for $250 last year. Still not quite sure what those people were thinking.

I bought one of the bricks for a prop. It's not wasting space in my freezer, and I certainly didn't pay $250 for it. In fact, it's now sitting between two Kodak Brownies. A fitting tribute I think. (OK, so the purists will point out that I should open it and re-roll it onto 620 spools. Get over it. I'm not *THAT* crazy.)

There's also a bit of nostalgia, but I'm not harboring any delusions. If Dwayne's will process it, then I think slitting is a reasonable use for any remaining stocks. It's a lot better than tossing them in a landfill. After all, if you owned the last remaining magnum of Dom Perignon in the world you wouldn't pour it out for spite.

I think Kodachrome in 120 has an even smaller chance of happening than one more master-roll of K64-135. And I'd put another master roll of K64-135 in the under 1/10 of 1% category unless hoards of us got together and agreed to purchase the whole roll from Kodak *BEFORE* production. I don't know how many rolls of 135 come from one master roll, but I don't think I have enough room in my freezer for my share, nor enough money in my bank account to pay for my share. The problem is that we've have to split it among thousands of us to make it feasible, and I doubt we could find thousands of us willing to commit big bucks. I'm not a pro shooter, so there's no way I'm going to buy 500 rolls of film, and that quantity is a mere drop in the bucket of the commitment it would take to even get Kodak's attention.

As I pointed out before, all businesses are in business to make money; they're not in business to make whatever product they happen to sell. The product is merely a conduit to the profit margin. Artists are concerned about the product above the profit. Shareholders want a dividend payment, even if you have completely change the product line to digital images and inkjet paper.

As another glib soul pointed out some scores of postings ago, the thing we have to come to grip with is that *ALL* silver based imaging is now an "alternative" process. I don't say that digital has "won" because I don't think it's a winning or loosing proposition. Electronic/Digital has outstripped Chemical based imaging in the same way that early photography outstripped studio portrait painters, but I can walk into any craft store in town and still find pre-stretched canvas, Grumbacher paints, and row after row of brushes. It didn't die, it just moved into a different niche. The same is happening to chemical based imaging. That doesn't mean I'm changing what I do. I'm still doing what I want, because in this hobby, I'm in the artists role. I care more about the product than a profit.

MB

 

[nickandre]

Hey, mind if you tell me what kind of speed loss you get with that film? I bought 3 rolls from the same guy to test a process I'm working out for 120 film. It would be nice to not have to figure this all out for myself. I've heard 1/3 to 2/3 stop is normal. Try a shot at 64, 50, and 40 and see how they look.

And how much extra film at the end exactly? If I'm squeezing this on to reels in the dark I don't want to have to figure out then. Is it at the beginning or the end of the normal 120 roll? Which side to I cut?

Well K64 in 120 is the most likely of all the axed products to get re-introduced simply because it does not involve extra coating (I'm not saying it's likely, but it is relatively likely). It wouldn't be too hard to ask Kodak for 5000 feet of K64 70mm wide and unperforated and have someone put it on backing paper.

 

[Alexander Ghaffari]

Hey tiberius, I bought 35mm Kodachrome 64 from the same guy, which also expired in 1989. I have shoot about 80 rolls of it, and exposure at EI 50 yields consistent excellent results. There is extra film on both ends of K-14 120 film. If you use an adjustable plastic reel, most allow for 220, so it would all fit (I'm a big stainless steel supporter, but what I say is true). Yeah, Kodak might make it if someone custom ordered a master roll; however, they might not confection the stuff, so whoever bought it might have to send it to Ilford for 120 confectioning. I mean, I seriously doubt that Kodak has enough Kodachrome K-14 120 backing paper lying around.

 

[wogster]

As another glib soul pointed out some scores of postings ago, the thing we have to come to grip with is that *ALL* silver based imaging is now an "alternative" process. I don't say that digital has "won" because I don't think it's a winning or loosing proposition. Electronic/Digital has outstripped Chemical based imaging in the same way that early photography outstripped studio portrait painters, but I can walk into any craft store in town and still find pre-stretched canvas, Grumbacher paints, and row after row of brushes. It didn't die, it just moved into a different niche. The same is happening to chemical based imaging. That doesn't mean I'm changing what I do. I'm still doing what I want, because in this hobby, I'm in the artists role. I care more about the product than a profit.

MB

I think your right, there will always be some enterprising soul who will make film and chemistries. I also expect to see a return of sorts in the next 4-5 years, when chemistries will be again made for small run use, rather then only 50L lab machines.....

 

[nickandre]

I'm stainless because the heat transfer is better. Problem there. How many inches either side?

There are some people who bulk roll 70mm film for themselves. 220 would really be easier. Does kodak have all the film in a master roll split at the time of coating or do they split every once and a while? All you would have to do is get an order that's large enough and ask kodak to run one of their 5000 ft splits on the next master roll coating at 70mm instead of 35. They wouldn't be opposed to it. It just means that the clan of supporters would have to get it processed themselves. Resurrect another k14 beast. fun fun fun.

Can't they use generic paper? or stuff it into the line they're "confectioning" portra with?

 

[wogster]

Hey tiberius, I bought 35mm Kodachrome 64 from the same guy, which also expired in 1989. I have shoot about 80 rolls of it, and exposure at EI 50 yields consistent excellent results. There is extra film on both ends of K-14 120 film. If you use an adjustable plastic reel, most allow for 220, so it would all fit (I'm a big stainless steel supporter, but what I say is true). Yeah, Kodak might make it if someone custom ordered a master roll; however, they might not confection the stuff, so whoever bought it might have to send it to Ilford for 120 confectioning. I mean, I seriously doubt that Kodak has enough Kodachrome K-14 120 backing paper lying around.

They probably print backing paper on an as needed basis. The real issue is, if someone ordered a master roll cut into 120 size. They also want a 120 size K14 processing machine......

 

[michaelbsc]

They probably print backing paper on an as needed basis. The real issue is, if someone ordered a master roll cut into 120 size. They also want a 120 size K14 processing machine......

Hey, we're a crafty bunch of blokes. I can build a car if I must, although it won't be pretty and won't win anything at NASCAR (or be street legal). If we know how, and have the financial resources, we can build a processing machine, although it probably won't be pretty and may be more than a little cantankerous to run.

After all, it can't really be any harder than many of the other chemical plants I and who know how many others here have worked in. I'm not going to say it is trivial, but I deny that it is impossible. Hard is not the same as impossible.

What do you have to control? Time? Temperature? pH? Flow? Tank levels? Hell, the guy who came up with the K-Lab machine did it.

MB

 

[Radioiron]

Why do we have to build one? With a few flouting out there (one at rocky mountain film) why not just buy one and re-engineer it for 120? Someone could go on and expedition to Switzerland and track down one or part of the 120 processor from when they shut down processing there.

 

[michaelbsc]

Well, the real problem is most likely the "financial resources" issue. As this is a hobby for most of us, unless someone here is reasonably wealthy that's going to be an issue. I know, people restore 60 year old cars, but there's more of a market for old car parts than there is a market for old K-14 processors. After all, even if one of us won the maga-jackpot bazillion dollar make your head explode lottery this week, we aren't likely to build more than one machine, so that will be a world wide total of one.

I'll bet there's more than one 1950 Hudson being restored.

The interesting part would be if you could make a onesy-twosy table top unit. OK, maybe tabletop is pushing it a little, but tiberiustibz noted in another thread that he planned to try it in a sink. So maybe a washing machine size unit would be more reasonable than a tabletop unit.

Of course, the problem is that even if you did all the engineering and make it work right, you still probably have a market size of 15-30 units world wide. And they're dead meat when Kodak stops production unless the guy with the film coater starts production. So it really would take a lottery winner to back it. No one with an ounce of business sense would touch it.

OTOH, if you really want 3 color dye transfer then a tri-color 4x5 camera and you can process by hand. Stick them together in a pack and you've got a Kodachrome. Seems I saw a post from PE in some thread suggesting this is not only possible, but in fact not all that hard. You would have to make some kind of accurate image registration system for the film, but that's a relatively simple engineering problem.

 

[Alexander Ghaffari]

They probably print backing paper on an as needed basis. The real issue is, if someone ordered a master roll cut into 120 size. They also want a 120 size K14 processing machine......

You would think that...it is the most logical choice, but Kodak made a really big deal about printing it for 120 Ektar 100 (the new stuff).

Why would Kodak complain about something like that, unless it was more difficult to do than we are imagining? I mean, I hope that Kodak does not whine needlessly.

 

[wogster]

You would think that...it is the most logical choice, but Kodak made a really big deal about printing it for 120 Ektar 100 (the new stuff).

Why would Kodak complain about something like that, unless it was more difficult to do than we are imagining? I mean, I hope that Kodak does not whine needlessly.

Don't forget the cost to do one backing paper for the first roll probably costs $100,000, you need to design the paper, make the master press plates, etc. With K64 since they have already printing a few million it probably costs pennies per.

 

[Alexander Ghaffari]

Don't forget the cost to do one backing paper for the first roll probably costs $100,000, you need to design the paper, make the master press plates, etc. With K64 since they have already printing a few million it probably costs pennies per.

That makes sense, but I would have no qualm with Ilford using their generic backing paper...heck, if we could get enough people interested to make it financially feasible, I would get Kodak to ship a master roll of Ektar 100 over to Ilford for 120 confectioning with generic backing paper. : )

 

[nickandre]

Color seperation is cool. I started it last year with 35mm blowups to 11x14 lith film but didn't have the couplers. If I fail dismally in my 120 kodachrome process i'll take up more color seperations.

The only problem is the lith film is orthochromatic. Does anyone know where I can get panchromatic lith film?

 

[michaelbsc]

That makes sense, but I would have no qualm with Ilford using their generic backing paper...heck, if we could get enough people interested to make it financially feasible, I would get Kodak to ship a master roll of Ektar 100 over to Ilford for 120 confectioning with generic backing paper. : )

Well, we were originally talking about Kodachrome, which seems to me would need longer backing paper, since there's a leader and trailer required for processing. I'm not sure how much or how that works, but more than one person has mentioned it, so it must be true. (After all, I read it on the Internet!)

I don't know how well Kodak and Ilford collaborate. I doubt anyone at either place is in the basement trying to cast spells with Voodoo dolls on the other side, but they are pretty keen competitors, after all. Now, if somehow the Ilfochrome/Cibachrome crowd, which is also becoming a marginalized product by the market, could hook up and pitch that Kodachrome and Cibachrome were made for each other, you might have something. But I don't know that Harmon owns the Ilfochrome division. Perhaps they do, but I thought they were separate.

MB

 

[aluk]

Ilford/Harman film and photo paper are produced by a different company than Ilfochrome. On the other hand, that might encourage Kodak in any sort of partnership, as they wouldn't have to work with a direct competitor...

 

[wogster]

That makes sense, but I would have no qualm with Ilford using their generic backing paper...heck, if we could get enough people interested to make it financially feasible, I would get Kodak to ship a master roll of Ektar 100 over to Ilford for 120 confectioning with generic backing paper. : )

Personally I would have no problem with Kodak doing the same thing, simply use a generic paper for all films, you would only need two papers, one for 120 the other for 220, heck they could use generic foil packages as well, simply make a sticker that has the name, speed and size (120 or 220) of the film, and stick it on. Best of course would be to use a removable glue on the sticker, so that you could peel it off and stick it on the back of the camera/film back. This would be like the 35mm cameras that had the little frame for the paper film box end. Of course you still need film boxes that are different, although, if your buying a brick, I see nothing wrong with simply shrink wrapping a bunch of foil packs, who needs boxes......

 

[michaelbsc]

Personally I would have no problem with Kodak doing the same thing, simply use a generic paper for all films, you would only need two papers, one for 120 the other for 220, heck they could use generic foil packages as well, simply make a sticker that has the name, speed and size (120 or 220) of the film, and stick it on. Best of course would be to use a removable glue on the sticker, so that you could peel it off and stick it on the back of the camera/film back. This would be like the 35mm cameras that had the little frame for the paper film box end. Of course you still need film boxes that are different, although, if your buying a brick, I see nothing wrong with simply shrink wrapping a bunch of foil packs, who needs boxes......

I think it will come to this in the end, because it's a way for larger manufactures to continue to make a profit against the cheaper manufacturers. For instance, I agree with a lot of people the the Chinese film can't stand up to FP4 or Plus-X, but I've got a few rolls, and when I want to see if I've got a shutter working I'll reach for the Shanghai. Kodak wants to cut that out of the loop if they can, bet your booty. So if they can cut costs such that I can keep Plus-X on hand within a reasonable differential of the Shanghai, like most reasonable people I would do it. But they aren't hurting badly enough yet to sell "generic" film.

Perhaps one could even pitch it as, "we abandon the box for the environment" or something. Give a marketing guy a few minutes to put a positive spin on it, and it will be in a TV commercial.