Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,557   Posts: 1,545,212   Online: 929
      
Page 8 of 50 FirstFirst ... 23456789101112131418 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 493
  1. #71
    AgX
    AgX is online now

    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,614
    Quote Originally Posted by Prof_Pixel View Post
    You can't simply coat the emulsion layers of color print material on a transparent base to make a transparency.

    Color print dyes 'get 2 shots at the light' when viewed (light passes through the dyes - hits the base - and is reflected back through the dyes on its way to your eyes) and would make a pretty 'weak' transparency. In addition, color print materials have much lower maximum densities than transparencies (it would be wasted because of front surface reflections of prints).

    There WERE Kodak products in the past designed to make display transparencies from color negatives.

    Agfa still offers two display films aimed at RA-4 processing.
    One even got maxD>3.

  2. #72
    wogster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Bruce Peninsula, ON, Canada
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,266
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    As I have said time after time, Kodak has abandoned the patents for K-14 allowing anyone to use them. They are open and clearly disclosed.

    PE
    The patents, yes but not the formulas. If Kodak really wants to say Kodachrome is dead, they should make the formulas available through something like a creative commons licence, with the only condition being that anyone who decides to use them must credit Eastman Kodak with the process design.
    Paul Schmidt
    See my Blog at http://clickandspin.blogspot.com

    The greatest advance in photography in the last 100 years is not digital, it's odourless stop bath....

  3. #73
    wogster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Bruce Peninsula, ON, Canada
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,266
    Quote Originally Posted by Prof_Pixel View Post
    You can't simply coat the emulsion layers of color print material on a transparent base to make a transparency.

    Color print dyes 'get 2 shots at the light' when viewed (light passes through the dyes - hits the base - and is reflected back through the dyes on its way to your eyes) and would make a pretty 'weak' transparency. In addition, color print materials have much lower maximum densities than transparencies (it would be wasted because of front surface reflections of prints).

    There WERE Kodak products in the past designed to make display transparencies from color negatives.
    Okay you would need to change the emulsion slightly to get a brighter image, the problem with the display transparency materials is that when they were around, you had to buy a roll that would cost as much as a 2 year old car, and would take 30 years to use it all up. I'm talking a material that would be in similar quantities and prices as 8x10 printing paper. You could then transfer a few sheets out of the box, into a light safe, seal up the box and drop it in the deep freeze. Since it's RA4 chemistry, it's the same as your prints, so chemicals would be cheap and easy to obtain. A bigger benefit, you wouldn't really need E6 either. film manufacturers could really produce 3 emulsions a C41 in 100, 400, 1600 ISO and two print materials one for prints and one for transparencies. With a shrinking market share, the fewer materials might be enough to make it economical to make film, until of course 2020 when it becomes retro and takes off again. The would be another side benefit, it would be possible to produce a transparency from a digital image, since it has better preservation then digital or negatives.

    I currently plan on getting a roll of traditional B&W film, taking the entire roll of my now 1 year old daughter, then getting that processed, somehow, so that she will have a permanent record of her as a baby, because I realise that nearly all the images taken of her, so far are digital. I have the old B&W prints of when I was her age, taken 50 years ago, then look wonderful now, even if they were taken with a $2 box camera.
    Paul Schmidt
    See my Blog at http://clickandspin.blogspot.com

    The greatest advance in photography in the last 100 years is not digital, it's odourless stop bath....

  4. #74
    Stephen Frizza's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    1,380
    Images
    174
    Quote Originally Posted by wogster View Post
    The patents, yes but not the formulas. If Kodak really wants to say Kodachrome is dead, they should make the formulas available through something like a creative commons licence, with the only condition being that anyone who decides to use them must credit Eastman Kodak with the process design.
    Kodak has made everything needed to do K-14 available. It should be made known that there are various publications from as early as the 1960's which clearly state multiple formulas and methodologies required and capable of producing a colour result from kodachrome. I suspect (and while I do not know for sure) that the process methodologies and formulas would be very similar and with appropriate tweaking could be adapted to k-14. Think Dyanchrome, Fuji and I believe Konica may have also had processes similar to k-11, k-12 there is information and methodology info that can be adapted from these sources as well. Mind you with what Kodak has released about the k-14 process (which I believe is everything) I know as fact what is in the patents makes it possible for processing to be done. Though as I have stated in the past the Yellow Dye Developer I use is not from the K-14 process.
    "Its my profession to hijack time" ~ Stephen Frizza.

  5. #75
    Diapositivo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,844
    Quote Originally Posted by AgX View Post
    Agfa still offers two display films aimed at RA-4 processing.
    One even got maxD>3.
    That's extremely interesting.
    A fast search gave me this:
    http://www.agfa.com/sp/global/en/bin...m611-42599.pdf

    Sadly it's not sold in roll format. It's not clear what the sensitivity is. It says it is to be exposed through an enlarger. I suppose the ISO speed would be quite low.
    Still, if it existed as roll film, even at ISO 6, I would gladly try it.

    Did anybody try to take pictures with this material?
    Fabrizio Ruggeri fine art photography site: http://fabrizio-ruggeri.artistwebsites.com
    Stock images at Imagebroker: http://www.imagebroker.com/#/search/ib_fbr

  6. #76
    Greg Davis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Crestview Hills, KY
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    1,923
    Ilford makes the Ilfoflex material, as well.
    www.gregorytdavis.com

    Did millions of people suddenly disappear? This may have an answer.

    "No one knows that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father." -Matthew 24:36

  7. #77
    Diapositivo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Rome, Italy
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,844
    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
    I agree with PE that it's gone. I just still like talking about it.
    I think the only path - unlikely but not impossible for the true film believer, as I am - is that film photography, and slide film in particular, begins a come back that will lead it, let's say in 10 years, to the levels of sales which existed during the first years of the digital revolution, when film sales were shrinking but not yet really in danger. For Europe that might mean something like 2006. For the US maybe something like 2003.

    If and when film sales go back to that level, Kodak (or whoever purchased the technology using it with whichever brand name) might easily think about producing Kodachrome again. In 2006 Kodachrome was still a viable product and it would be some sort of a "flagship" product for Kodak, a bit like Porsche continues to sell their 911-family cars: even though they are not the latest in technology, there still is a market for "retro" technology provided it is well realized. Values like "tradition" and "history" do have a meaning, and Kodachrome might be the 911 (or the Morgan) of the future slide market.

    The first condition to become true is that the market bounces back to where it was some 6 years ago. Not easy for sure, but not impossible either.
    Fabrizio Ruggeri fine art photography site: http://fabrizio-ruggeri.artistwebsites.com
    Stock images at Imagebroker: http://www.imagebroker.com/#/search/ib_fbr

  8. #78
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,032
    Images
    65
    As it now stands, Kodachrome was the first reversal film to go, process and all, and E6 may follow in its footsteps. Kodak has already discontinued their E6 line of films. Fuji now has the full market, but digital is replacing reversal film rapidly. So, the full E6 line will be the next to go.

    As for the other suggestions, you cannot turn just any color material into Kodachrome. You cannot take reflection print materials and coat them on film support. I've done that, and it looks crappy. It would take a major revamping effort and lots of money to come up with something, and to do that someone must put up the money at the very start!

    The Ilfochrome materials have ISO values of about 10 or thereabout while the grain looks like an ISO 800 film. That is the nature of dye bleach. It is good for films, but not for in-camera use.

    All of these suggestions are pipe dreams, and I can guess what you are smoking. Even the Kodak rep had no idea of what he was saying. There is no market for Kodachrome and it will not come back. I wish that i was wrong, but that is the state of the market!!!!

    PE

  9. #79

    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Mission Viejo, California
    Shooter
    127 Format
    Posts
    1,464
    Keep E-6 alive. It is possible and it is in your hands.
    - Bill Lynch

  10. #80
    Ken Nadvornick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Monroe, WA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,296
    Images
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    ...and I can guess what you are smoking.
    And legally in the state of Washington, as of four days ago...



    Ken
    "They are the proof that something was there and no longer is. Like a stain. And the stillness of them is boggling. You can turn away but when you come back they’ll still be there looking at you."

    — Diane Arbus, March 15, 1971, in response to a request for a brief statement about photographs



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin