Sorry, but I can't let that pass, you're not in the real world. Try running your own business in the current UK economic climate, when you're on call 7 days a week.....anyone (I don't say you) who's spent their whole life in employment, with a salary guaranteed at the end of the month, benefits paid for by the employer, and a company pension scheme hasn't a clue. And, if you get it wrong, there's one person who has to accept responsibility...there's no Perez who you can try to blame.
Originally Posted by Photo Engineer
I'm sure that Steve Frizza doesn't have an employer to pay for his lab, equipment, business vehicle, paid holidays, etc., and that every cent of necessary capital expenditure comes from his own pocket, or the profit (hopefully) generated from his work and business. I also hope that he doesn't have the find the equivalent of $30,000+ from taxed income as I have for the cost of my wife's recent surgery.
Don't worry, I'm off this website now, at least for a while; there's plenty of other photography and digital forums which have a much better atmosphere.
The irony in all this is that Dwayne's literally couldn't GIVE AWAY for FREE the Kodachrome processing machine, it was so large no one would come take it away, not even the smithsonian or national museum of science or any other place. So to expect a single person to do it by hand when no one could even take the machine and they had to tear it apart and send it to the trash...it's amazing anyone even tried...
Sent w/ iPhone using Tapatalk
For small quantities, as hard as doing it by hand may be, it's probably easier than running the big machine.
Originally Posted by railwayman3
A reasonable answer, but one that misunderstands my point.
1. Steve does run his own business and has many problems with taxes and income, but in spite of that he was able to do what he did.
2. I am retired and on a fixed income and I have lost my health care benefits. I have invested heavily in coating blades and books as well as lots of Silver Nitrate and many other things such as printing the books and duplicating the DVDs. I have taxes on that income to deal with and lots of late hours were spent in my tiny lab (7'x14')/ I am now working on 2 more books and am working with 2 interns at GEH.
Point is, that I did it and took it pretty far in my lab but I still will not attempt Kodachrome or any other chrome except possibly Cibachrome.
And many groan and moan here, but do nothing at all!
If you cannot, you cannot, but if you can or could and are posting here, why just talk? Start to work.
Now, I'm sorry that my comments have driven you away. I h ope that your wife is better soon. My wife had 2 major surgeries while writing the book and she needed one year for recovery for the second. I hope your wife does better.
SNIP SNIP SNIP SNIP
right on ron !
Originally Posted by Photo Engineer
it is much easier to talk and do the whole wishful-thinking thing than it is to do something constructive with one's time
in the area of photochemical tinkering. there are always people who do the heavy lifting and others who enjoy the results ..
if you like doing the heavy lifting enjoy it, i know i like playing and learning too ...
Thanks Ron! you have written exactly what I feel....too many talk and too few get to work on experiments. I also get annoyed by people who claim to desperately want to do Kodachrome but haven't read any of the information / publications and patents given away by kodak.
I also get annoyed by people whom I give good insight into methodologies and then get told no no there are better ways. Take for example my RGB screens for doing an autochrome like process. I expressed in that thread a perfect simple solution for pairing the screen with the film emulsion and yet for 20 pagers after announcing a simple method people were still over complicating it with other ideas that simply dont work.
It makes me not want to share the all details on my experiments. I work hard for what I learn. why should I simply serve it to others on a silver platter?
when people ask me whats the difference between Tri-x and Neopan i dont tell them anymore. I simply say buy ten rolls of each test them and you tell me! thats how i learned!!!
sorry to complain but you are spot on Ron people need to stop talking and start doing!
Yes i agree too.
Originally Posted by Stephen Frizza
Lots of talk but no action.
If i had the skill, experience and knowledge, and was not living on the other side of the earth, i would love to help in some way, but ive had absolutely nothing to do with hand processing of any film whatsoever. And since im dedicated to many other hobbies interests, i dont have time for everything.
However, ironically the demise of kodachrome has for me personally sparked an interest in film (E6) photography.
Ive learned greatly about how films work with dye couplers etc, but i have a hell of a lot more to learn.
Ive created a wiki with the intention of documenting everything there is to know about processing kodachrome right down to the chemistry of the film itself and the chemicals/couplers to process it.
I feel this should be done regardless of whether Kodachrome ever gets processed again or not, since its a record of history.
If people are serious enough to want their kodachromes processed, i would expect them to do their hardest to gather whatever information they find from the relative patent documents etc and put it on the wiki. Its completley pointless why people are buying up the stuff if it cant be processed and paying ridiculous prices for it and storing it in their freezer. If they want to shoot it, they can expect to do the hard yards to develop it.
Yes it would be awesome if it could be easily processed, but i dont think its worthwhile doing unless some historically significant footage comes to light such as the shuttle film, which is even a much more harder challenge than processing a short strip of 35mm film.
I dont have much knowledge on the film or chemistry myself, but will contribute what little i can to the wiki.
All i ask, is if we want to keep film alive (E6 in particular), we all need to work together, keep shooting it and promote and share our photos as much as possible.
Already people look at me all stupid when i pull out my XA3 and turn the winder!
Its crazy how film has declined so fast in less than a decade, now us as analog photographers look the odd ones out.
Keep shooting guys, im putting all my hard efforts into E6 for the time being, at least that has some future, Kodachrome does not and C41 films do not really interest me much. So E6 is all im shooting.
Steve, I was glad to contribute to your "dilemma" on Kodachrome processing. Remember, more is said than done. I seem to remember that I owe you something. PM me please to refresh my aging memory.
I recall reading about a guy who tried a trick to get Kodachrome film "developed"(in color). What he did was he would use a red filter and take a shot of the scene, then advance the film to the next slide, and shoot the same scene with a green filter, then advance to the next slide and shoot the same scene with a blue filter. Then he developed the film as black and white and scanned the film. And in photoshop he converted each BW slide into the color channel of the filter used and superimposed them and the end result was a color image of kodachrome. Though the cost was that it takes 3 slides to get one picture and objects cant be moving in the scene. But hey it worked.
Ron, there are two types of home brew activity: one, which tries to replace existing commercial products with self made stuff. Typical examples for this are my feeble attempts at home brewing, or the emulsions that you brew in your dark room shed. This form of home brew is relatively easy in so far as one can replace one component with self mixed version, fine tune self mixed version, then move on to next component of the whole process. Raw materials and lots of public knowledge are available, that's why this form of home brew activity is quite popular here.
The second form, and this is was what Stephen did, is to replace a whole product or process that is no longer commercially available. In the case of Kodachrome a whole product line went belly up, first the coated emulsion, then the process. Stephen could not use bath 1-5 from a kit, then use and fine tune a self made bath 6, then continue with the rest of the commercial kit, nope, he had to mix the whole shebang. At once. And he could not sneak into a K14 processing lab and measure pH or specific gravity of individual bathes because there is no K14 lab today. But that last bit makes Stephens efforts very valuable to some: either convince Stephen, or someone who picks up his work, to process your Kodachrome, or use your stock as aged low ISO b&w emulsion, or toss it.
So the question is, and as it looks only Stephen can answer this: how many serious inquiries for K14 processing did you really get and how much were these people willing to spend? Would the owner of these Shuttle films give some of them to whoever gets these processed successfully, or would this require too much red tape?
Personally I have never shot a single roll of Kodachrome in my whole life, but if you tell me there is a potential market of say US$ 100000, then I could easily see myself putting in a serious effort into starting up such an operation.