Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,530   Posts: 1,543,967   Online: 1103
      
Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 47
  1. #21
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,380
    Images
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by noacronym View Post
    Does Kodak still make it?
    No they licence it. It may, however, be still made using the equipment and premises they sold, by the same employees.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  2. #22
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,269
    Images
    148
    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    No they licence it. It may, however, be still made using the equipment and premises they sold, by the same employees.
    Not globally.

    Champion moved their plant from the UK to Spain and then ditched their contracts with Ilford and Paterson when they took over chemistry production for Kodak. It's also forgotten that Chanpion were once May & Baker and manufactured raw chemicals including all the colour developing agents as well as professional & consumer black & white and colour processing chemistry, all amongst the best available.

    Other companies help each other out, Ilford and Fuji havehad links (Ilford has made film for Fuji in the past), Ilford are on friendly terms with Foma, they had links to Oriental and Konica/Sakura, oh and Foma confection for Fuji in a joint funded plant.

    Ian

  3. #23
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,888
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    You cannot make a single part color developer or blix and you certainly cannot make a color monobath.

    PE
    Well apparently you can indeed make a single part (concentrate) color developer and blix, because Tetanal did. I've used it. It sucked as hrst says, but they made it.

    Prints actually looked pretty good if there weren't extensive very light areas and if you trimmed off the yellow borders. So I believe him that the developer worked.

    Its attraction was that they advertised it as ambient temperature, which it was. It came with a time/temperature chart and produced pretty much identical results (maybe 5cc color variation max from the coldest to the warmest on the chart) at all temperatures, but all of them had the yellow whites problem. At the time I didn't realize you could do pretty much the same thing with Kodak chemistry with no problems.

    hrst has it exactly right about mixing the stuff.

  4. #24
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,269
    Images
    148
    Photocolor made a superb 3 part E6 kit, it was made by Champion in later years for Paterson who took over Photocolor which was itself the chemistry side of Johnsons acompany involved with Photograpghy for decades before Eastman founded Kodak

    There's a lot of garbage written against 3rd party products, some correct but often dismissing extremely good products designed by world experts in their fields.

    Remember Kodak needed to constantly buy in expertise and the classic is Mees, and his insistance they take over the company he was a director of Wratten & Wainwright.

    Quote Originally Posted by noacronym View Post
    I don't think I've ever heard of Eastman Kodak manufacturing anything that wasn't top-notch. You guys are making me uneasy. With EK knocked off as the big boy on the block, are we just going to get stuck with second-rate stuff?
    You're joking.

    They stole ideas like Polaoids Instant film and made huge errors of judgement with investments in rubbish like 110 and Disc cameras.

    Ian

  5. #25
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,015
    Images
    65
    Roger, that is my point. It is pretty poor and as said before, some are very hard to mix.

    As for other Kodak products, t is not widely known that Kodak engineered and coated Polaroid colo products for Land, as he could not make them himself. Some of Land's ideas were entirely incorrect and under a rigid contract, Kodak did the R&D to fix these problems. Land never acknowledged this work though.

    Kodak then went on to engineer two totally different methods of instant imaging that they were advised did not infringe. In fact, due to double patenting, it could later be shown that Land had blocked the field with incorrect patents. But this is hindsight.

    Kodak chemicals were made on site at Kodak Park until recently, by Champion. In fact, they made the news here when a tank truck of one of the processing chemicals upset and spilled next to the old P&S building (Powders and Solutions).

    PE

  6. #26

    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    Penfield, NY
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,027
    Quote Originally Posted by noacronym View Post
    As for the Kodak polaroids, they knew full well they were infringing on trademark. That WAS dumb.

    Nonsense! I worked on the Kodak Instant Photography System for 7 years and the technology involved was completely different. Polaroid won the patent case with a female judge in their hometown of Boston based on the idea of a 'concept patent' - the 'concept' of instant photography. I'm so glad to see the Kodak technology live on in the form of Fujix Instant Film while Polaroid is long gone.

  7. #27
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,380
    Images
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by noacronym View Post
    I stand corrected. Better to be corrected by your betters and take it like a man, than to remain ignorant. Thank you. So what's the best chemical kit in April 2013 for the process herein? As an aside, I wonder if this Champion is the same one of the old Champion paper that I once bought so much of.
    Here is some history about Champion: http://www.championphotochemistry.com/milestones.php
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  8. #28
    MattKing's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Delta, British Columbia, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    12,380
    Images
    60
    Quote Originally Posted by noacronym View Post
    Thank you for the post Matt. No, it is not the same as Champion Paper formerly with a plant in Canton NC. And I looked up their RA4 chemistry. It is a 2-part process. I wonder who makes a process these days meeting PE's standards. I've got a backlog of color negatives, but don't want some amateur kit.
    I am confident that PE has said before that bleach-fix ("blix") can indeed be designed to work well with RA4 chemistry.

    It is C41 (and E6) where it is a problem.

    By the way, Champion only lists their own products on their website - they don't list the Kodak (and other?) products that they aren't marketing directly.
    Matt

    “Photography is a complex and fluid medium, and its many factors are not applied in simple sequence. Rather, the process may be likened to the art of the juggler in keeping many balls in the air at one time!”

    Ansel Adams, from the introduction to The Negative - The New Ansel Adams Photography Series / Book 2

  9. #29

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Los Alamos, NM
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,052
    Quote Originally Posted by noacronym View Post
    Yeah I remember the 110 cameras. My grandmother had a perfectly good X-15 and bought a 110. I had forgotten about the disc cameras. That was a bunch of junk. But think about it--the 126 Instamatics were the i-phone of the day. And I think we're seeing ipods and iphones grow tired now. What's AAPL going to do next? Every dog has his day. As for the Kodak polaroids, they knew full well they were infringing on trademark. That WAS dumb.
    But back to these color processing kits--which is the good stuff NOW, and which is junk?
    Yes, they were not great. But Kodak loaded them with state of the art stuff. Also remember that the 126 cartridge was the first truly precision (.0001 inch tolerances in places) injection molded plastic part and that it was even self compensating for changes in temperature. A real engineering breakthrough that led the way to many more precision plastic parts. Some of Kodak's injection molded lenses actually worked better than many of their glass lenses. The 110 cartridge was not quite the same quality as the 126, but it was still the same sort of thing. Kodak made some very top notch things cheaply for the ordinary consumer.

    Back to being on topic. I notice the ECN-2 process recommended for many Vision 3 products has a recommended alternate ferricyanide bleach (SR-29) and that the recommended production bleach (SR-33) is also a ferric (ferric nitrate) based bleach. VNF-1 also recommends a ferricyanide bleach (SR-40), but RVNP does not (only a persulfate bleach). I know motion picture films are not the same as still films, but the dyes are probably similar in both products. If modern color negative motion picture films tolerate a ferricyanide bleach, it seems that still films a likely to as well. The situation with color reversal films is less clear, since the recommended process for Ektachrome motion picture film (RVNP) does not list a recommended a ferricyanide bleach, although VNF-1 does. I suspect something like SR-29, which is simple and cheap, could be used ahead of the blix for C-41 processing in the current kits. It might be worth a cautious try in the E-6 kits. Persulfate bleaches get a bit exotic for the home formulator.

  10. #30
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,015
    Images
    65
    The RA4 process can work just fine with a blix due to the low silver levels and the absence of Iodide and DIR couplers! C41 cannot do that very well and neither can E6.

    Ferricyanide can be used with some films. Image stability should be tested.

    PE

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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