PDA

View Full Version : A Kodachrome type film formula!



Pages : 1 [2] 3 4 5

holmburgers
12-31-2010, 12:24 PM
well said dee-double-u

Lionel1972
12-31-2010, 01:05 PM
Time for a "More Impossible Project"...
Who would buy Kodachrome-like film in 120 and 4x5"? I would.

michaelbsc
12-31-2010, 01:35 PM
Time for a "More Impossible Project"...
Who would buy Kodachrome-like film in 120 and 4x5"? I would.

Buy it? I've still got a whole brick of 120 in the freezer.

Lionel1972
12-31-2010, 01:47 PM
Even if I could never get them processed, I still envy you michaelbsc!

And I feel jealous that you likely have some big Kodachromes to look at in your archives.

Photo Engineer
12-31-2010, 01:56 PM
Answering two questions here:

1. Rem jet is needed as antihalation, as it must be removed in the first step so the red reversal exposure can be made properly. Normal AH layers are not suitable. Second reason is that it is an antistat for motion picture use, and as Kodachrome is also used in-camera as MP stock, it uses rem-jet.

2. Actually, E6 chemicals can be used to process the Kodachrome family of films, but it will take quite a bit of tinkering. I'll explain. You must divide the color developer into 3 parts and add the cyan, magenta and yellow couplers to those 3 parts as outlined in the patent to Bent and Mowrey. There are 3 couplers given there, but others can be used. The problem is getting them and paying for them.

Anyhow after rem-jet removal, you then develop in E6 1st developer, wash, red reexpose, red/cyan develop, wash, blue reexpose, blue/yellow develop, wash, fog and green/magenta develop, wash, then finish with the rest of the E6 process. It is actually that simple and is possible!

PE

Christopher Nisperos
12-31-2010, 02:02 PM
... and don't forget the black & white option:

http://www.cinematography.com/index.php?showtopic=48841

hpulley
12-31-2010, 02:03 PM
Sounds like the Possible Project to me ;-)

Lionel1972
12-31-2010, 02:06 PM
PE, your contributions here are really invaluable. Thank you so much for being around. I hope someday someone will have the opportunity and financial power to make good use of them.

Lionel.

Photo Engineer
12-31-2010, 02:16 PM
Lionel;

Thanks. And that is why I do what I do! I'm trying to preserve analog techniques.

PE

michaelbsc
12-31-2010, 02:30 PM
Time for a "More Impossible Project"...
Who would buy Kodachrome-like film in 120 and 4x5"? I would.

I think this movement by Kittlegraphy over on the Kodachrome site is one beginning of the "More Impossible Project".

The real question is how much would it cost? Remember, Kodachrome has already failed as a consumer commodity.

The first question is whether it failed as a boutique product is because of the lack of interest in Kodachrome or because Kodak is abysmally structured to support a boutique product.

I suspect there's an element of both in the failure. It's true that Kodak, despite it's technical prowess and far reaching organization is not the right structure for manufacturing and selling a boutique film. Love or hate Kodak, and I don't care which, their organizational structure just is *NOT* the right one for that.

So, fast forward to a day in the future, distant or not so, where a small manufacturer is cranking out RonAChrome as started in the beginning of this thread. (Hopefully by then Ron will be out of the barn.) And let's pretend it's coated on a substrate that is stiff enough for use as sheet film.

And let's also pretend that either Kittlegraphy has his line running smoothly, or we've learned how to process it in the kitchen somehow.

What is it going to cost per sheet of 4x5? What if it's packed in 5 sheet packages for $99 US, basically twenty bucks a pop? And you still have to get it processed? So the chemistry for that costs you another $12 for single use? So by the time you've figure in the Hazmat shipping and everything you've got $150 in five images? And you still don't have a final frame-able product to hang on the wall?

Are these outrageous prices? Are these even realistic prices? It's beginning to sound like the prices for Cibachrome. Hell, why not just expose Cibachrome in camera?

I picked these numbers out of thin air, so I don't have anything to justify them other than the experience of running a small business and being constantly shocked at how much it costs to get something out the door. And this is a stab in the dark at making a boutique product in an industry that I have no qualifications to be making anything more than uneducated guesses. I could be off by a factor of who knows how much.

If you were to reduce the volume even more, because folks won't support those prices, you'd be looking at producing alternative process kits that let people coat their own. I have real doubts about that.

michaelbsc
12-31-2010, 02:38 PM
Sounds like the Possible Project to me ;-)

I agree. We need to make certain that the next few thousand rolls of "found" Kodachrome get due justice.

Manufacturing new film may be a Herculean task, but processing found film should be possible.

Ron, back in the barn. :sick:

MB

Athiril
12-31-2010, 02:47 PM
Isnt remjet just carbon powder in a glue? (a glue that falls apart and dissolves very quickly in alkaline solution)

Mustafa Umut Sarac
12-31-2010, 03:21 PM
Athiril ,

Try to find using movie films at the camera , threads. There is all formulas available to dissolve the ramjet

michaelbsc
12-31-2010, 03:43 PM
Athiril ,

Try to find using movie films at the camera , threads. There is all formulas available to dissolve the ramjet

http://www.filmshooting.com/scripts/forum/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=20919&start=0

About 2/3 of the way down the page. Look for a posting richard p. t. Mon Aug 17, 2009 2:23 am

Gotta run. I haven't read this thoroughly yet. It may or may not be useful.

Photo Engineer
12-31-2010, 05:10 PM
Actually Michael, you are not totally wrong. This film will be expensive and labor intensive to make, but covering the development costs will add to the sale price. Then, tack on processing! No, you won't get this for a low low price. A B&W film made by these methods could run as high as $5 per 4x5 sheet.

That is one of the problems of sustaining any analog product. It takes a huge physical plant and a huge staff of trained people even if you are making small runs.

The future may be in hand made products, as I have said before.

PE

bwfans
12-31-2010, 05:46 PM
Answering two questions here:

... You must divide the color developer into 3 parts and add the cyan, magenta and yellow couplers to those 3 parts as outlined in the patent to Bent and Mowrey. There are 3 couplers given there, but others can be used. The problem is getting them and paying for them.

... red reexpose, red/cyan develop, wash, blue reexpose, blue/yellow develop, wash, fog and green/magenta develop, wash, then finish with the rest of the E6 process. It is actually that simple and is possible!

PE

I really appreciate PE's help and especially the effort on preserving analog photography.

My questions are, does that means the only (mainly) chemicals required to have color image are cyan couplers, magenta couplers, and yellow couplers in additional to E-6 chemicals?

What are cyan, magenta, and yellow couplers? Who manufactures/distributes/retails them ? Is it affordable? If nowhere to buy or too expensive, any alternatives?

(I hope those cyan/magenta/yellow couplers can be found in the inkjet cartridges inside the Epson printer sitting in front of me :). )

michaelbsc
12-31-2010, 05:56 PM
Anyhow after rem-jet removal, you then develop in E6 1st developer, wash, red reexpose, red/cyan develop, wash, blue reexpose, blue/yellow develop, wash, fog and green/magenta develop, wash, then finish with the rest of the E6 process.

OK, let me ask some questions. But first let me rewrite the steps.

01) rem-jet removal
02) develop in E6 1st developer
03) wash
04) red reexpose
05) red/cyan develop
06) wash
07) blue reexpose
08) blue/yellow develop
09) wash
10) fog
11) green/magenta develop
12) wash
13-18)then finish with the rest of the E6 process (I'll straighten this out later).

Step 04, red reexpose is done through the back of the film? Through the side where we just recently removed the rem-jet backing? Yes or no?

And is it important to protect the other side, which ever side is the other side, from exposure to the light at this stage?

And this is done with red light of a certain frequency? Or with white light?

MB

michaelbsc
12-31-2010, 05:58 PM
(I hope those cyan/magenta/yellow couplers can be found in the inkjet cartridges inside the Epson printer sitting in front of me :). )

Man wouldn't that be just too sweet. I doubt it, but if so I'm buying ink jets.

Photo Engineer
12-31-2010, 06:21 PM
I really appreciate PE's help and especially the effort on preserving analog photography.

My questions are, does that means the only (mainly) chemicals required to have color image are cyan couplers, magenta couplers, and yellow couplers in additional to E-6 chemicals?

What are cyan, magenta, and yellow couplers? Who manufactures/distributes/retails them ? Is it affordable? If nowhere to buy or too expensive, any alternatives?

(I hope those cyan/magenta/yellow couplers can be found in the inkjet cartridges inside the Epson printer sitting in front of me :). )

The couplers can be found in the Kodachrome patent by Bent and Mowrey which is 3658525 IIRC. If not, let me know. My search on Freepatentsonline.com keeps crashing on me with an error message.

They are NOT inks nor are they normally related to inks. These are colorless chemicals that become dyes when treated with film in the presence of a color developer.

PE

Photo Engineer
12-31-2010, 06:23 PM
The red reexposure is done through the base from which the rem-jet was just removed.

The front side must be protected!

The red exposure nominally uses a WR70 red filter, and the intensity and time must be such that the other layers are not fogged.

The blue exposure is also a WR filter, and must be carefully controlled to prevent fogging the green layer.

PE