Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,924   Posts: 1,585,008   Online: 1065
      

View Poll Results: How many rolls would you shoot?

Voters
57. You may not vote on this poll
  • <5 rolls/year

    34 59.65%
  • 6-20rolls/year

    15 26.32%
  • 21-50 rolls/year

    4 7.02%
  • 51-100 rolls/year

    3 5.26%
  • 100-250 rolls/year

    1 1.75%
  • 250-500 rolls/year

    0 0%
  • 500+ rolls/year

    0 0%
Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 93
  1. #71

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,278
    The difference, of course, between your casual EK discussions and these discussions is that EK knows well the cost model. Thanks for shedding additional light on the topic. I find it intellectually interesting (and a good reason for being a bit of a skeptic on reviving dormant/extinct technologies).

  2. #72
    Ken Nadvornick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Monroe, WA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,651
    Images
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    If I scaled down to a 4" machine, and coated 1000 ft of Kodacrhome...
    Thanks for this, PE. Very interesting. According to that earlier unconfirmed report, EK may actually be trying something like this at some level? Not necessarily for Kodachome, but for all of their film lines. And if they are or were, you may still have the contacts to know about it, right?

    In any case, these numbers well illustrate how impressive the efforts by Ferrania may turn out to be with their new, boutique-level E-6 and C-41 efforts. And the efforts by all of the other already-updated companies as well. My hope is that EK/EA won't allow themselves to be passed by in these crucial manufacturing transformations.

    It's an honest statement by me that every single Kodak product I have stopped using over the years has been because Kodak discontinued it. Not because I chose to walk away from it. That's a devastating observation. And I'd speculate I'm not alone. Anything that EK/EA could do to reverse that trend would be welcomed by me, and possibly crucial to them.

    [Edit: Thinking about it because I really do try to be honest, Tri-X may be the single exception. Plus-X and Tri-X were my two b&w users for most of my life, and Tri-X is still available. I now use HP5+ in its place. But all of the other films and papers over the years, I think so.]

    Ken
    Last edited by Ken Nadvornick; 01-01-2014 at 03:15 PM. Click to view previous post history. Reason: Added [Edit]...
    "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

  3. #73

    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    5,278
    Quote Originally Posted by Ken Nadvornick View Post
    ...
    It's an honest statement by me that every single Kodak product that I have stopped using over the years has been because Kodak discontinued it. Not because I chose to walk away from it. That's a devastating observation. And I'd speculate I'm not alone. Anything that EK/EA could do to reverse that trend would be welcomed by me, and possibly crucial to them.
    Ken is not alone. Same with me, and ever time I go through a short period of mourning.

  4. #74

    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Burnaby, BC
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    635
    Quote Originally Posted by Ken Nadvornick View Post
    snip...

    It's an honest statement by me that every single Kodak product I have stopped using over the years has been because Kodak discontinued it. Not because I chose to walk away from it. That's a devastating observation. And I'd speculate I'm not alone. Anything that EK/EA could do to reverse that trend would be welcomed by me, and possibly crucial to them. snip... Tri-X may be the single exception. snip... Ken
    +1.
    An assortment of F-series Nikons (F to F6, excluding the F4) with quite a few Nikkors, a pair of M6s with some Leitz glass, a pair of 500c/ms with a wide range of Zeiss optics and, just to help keep Duracell solvent, a D800.

    Favourite films: (1). KE ("Kodachrome Era"): 35mm: PKM25 and PKR64, HP5/Tri-X; 120: PKR64, PanF, FP4. (2). PKE ("Post-Kodachrome Era"): (a) 35mm: E100G, HP5 Plus/Tri-X and Delta 3200; (b) 120: E100G, PanF Plus, FP4 Plus, TMax 100.

  5. #75

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Boston
    Shooter
    Med. Format RF
    Posts
    141
    Kodachrome is dead. The OP needs to accept that fact.

  6. #76

    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    USA
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    1,389
    Images
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by BrianShaw View Post
    Ken is not alone. Same with me, and ever time I go through a short period of mourning.
    Do you dress in yellow for a week?

  7. #77
    Ken Nadvornick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Monroe, WA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,651
    Images
    48
    The drive-by crowd has awakened...



    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

  8. #78
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,552
    Images
    65
    Ken, you missed the fact (perhaps) that there are fixed costs in scaling down that are going to affect the overall pricing situation. Also, the original Kodachrome films were all made at the 4" scale in KRL so those formulas exist.

    I can say that as far as I can determine there are NO plans for reviving Kodachrome regardless of what you might think otherwise. As surmised earlier in one of these threads, the EPA would take a dim view of resurrecting some of these extinct chemicals. And that is just one reason among many. For example, the defect rate is much much higher at smaller scales.

    PE

  9. #79
    BradS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    S.F. Bay Area, California
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    4,084
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    If I scaled down to a 4" machine, and coated 1000 ft of Kodacrhome, it would make about 400 rolls of either 20 or 36 exposure. That one run would take about 1 month of prep and testing and would have to pay for all of the people involved and the chemicals involved. So, 3000 ft would supply about 1200 rolls and do the job many times over for those who signed up. The 3000 ft would take 3x as long overall as it probably would need 3 coating sessions. If all went well, the actual coating time would be about 1 hour for each 1000 ft.

    So, let some bright guy figure pay for a month for about 25 people, facilities and chemistry to come up with a film cost.

    Now, for the process you need to make 3 couplers and CD6. This needs 4 bench chemists and would take about 1 month each plus chemicals and hazmat conditions and waste disposal. Figure that in.

    Lets assume that the process machine exists, so what you need then is a group of lab techs to mix the chemistry and then run the machine while keeping it in control. Figure this into the process costs.

    Try it sometime. Exercises like this were not uncommon as casual discussion at EK. In fact, we had to calculate the amount of emulsion per square foot all the time. It was one of our earliest exercises.

    It aint cheap even on a small scale. You just make less.

    PE
    Thanks for this PE. I'm happy to have an engineering viewpoint added to the discussion. In my line of work we do this kinda thing all the time...we call it a "back of the envelope calculation". Often enough they happen over lunch or beers after hours (in which case they become napkin analysis).

  10. #80
    Ken Nadvornick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Monroe, WA, USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,651
    Images
    48
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    ...as I can determine there are NO plans for reviving Kodachrome regardless of what you might think otherwise.
    No, no. These have always been nothing more than hypothetical discussions about Kodachrome. Just for fun. At least as far as I've been concerned.

    That's why I've been so perplexed, and at times irritated, by the emotional, wild-eyed reactions of so many. I just don't choose to organize and present my thoughts that way. Nobody was trying to kill their pet puppies.

    It was a hypothetical discussion about what might be possible some day (i.e., not "totally dead"), not about what is actually happening today. Or even in the near future.

    Ken
    Last edited by Ken Nadvornick; 01-01-2014 at 04:48 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    "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

Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 2345678910 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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