Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,954   Posts: 1,558,022   Online: 1116
      
Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 61
  1. #21

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,670
    Quote Originally Posted by Petzi
    It seems unlikely to me that exposure from a particular side of the film is required, other than that the film is opaque at this point in the processing, and that this means the light might not get to the right layer if applied from he wrong side. I would assume that the side is irrelevant if enough light gets to the emulsion. Perhaps Photo Engineer can shed some light on this issue.
    This is where you are wrong. Each of the three emulsions layers must be developed separately and must be exposed to light from a specific side. I believe the center layer is the last to be developed and may use a fogging developer. It has been years since I read about the K12 and K14 processes. The Dignan Newsletter published the formulas as in intellectual curiousity. The steps in the process are far more exacting and complex than the E-6 process.

  2. #22
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,203
    Images
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by Gerald Koch
    This is where you are wrong. Each of the three emulsions layers must be developed separately and must be exposed to light from a specific side. I believe the center layer is the last to be developed and may use a fogging developer. It has been years since I read about the K12 and K14 processes. The Dignan Newsletter published the formulas as in intellectual curiousity. The steps in the process are far more exacting and complex than the E-6 process.
    Gerald, it seems that you didn't read my last post.

    I am free now to look up the actual formulas and patent # if anyone is interested.

    PE

  3. #23

    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,670
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer
    Gerald, it seems that you didn't read my last post.
    I can only plead that my post had a long gestation this morning. I kept getting sidetracked by work. I long to be retired and able to devote my time to photography.

  4. #24
    kraker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    The Netherlands, close to the Belgian border
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,191
    Images
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer
    I am free now to look up the actual formulas and patent # if anyone is interested.
    Well, yes, I'm interested. Not because I'm going to try myself, but merely out of curiosity. I have fond memories of Kodachrome.

    shuttr.net
    -- A sinister little midget with a bucket and a mop / Where the blood goes down the drain --

  5. #25
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,203
    Images
    65
    US Patent # 3, 658, 525 and one other by the same inventors.

    PE

  6. #26
    Craig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Location
    Calgary
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    779
    Images
    39
    After looking at the patent, its nice to know exactly what is in the kodachrome chemistry, but tough for anyone but an industrial chemist to obtain the chemicals and mix the solutions.

    Interestingly it specifies a processing temperature of 27C, I thought that it was 38C?

  7. #27
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,203
    Images
    65
    Patents only have to show a working example that is different, and better than the prior art.

    This will work, but the actual formulas and process cycle of the real Kodachrome are somewhat different.

    PE

  8. #28

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Woonsocket, RI USA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,725
    Thanks for the links, CRhymer. This sounds like at least a few of these K-Lab machines might still be in service, but I'd heard that only one lab in the US (Dwayne's) and one or two others worldwide still did Kodachrome. Are the remaining K-Lab machines all sitting idle, or are a few still working but just not doing much business, compared to the quantities going to the (very few) bigger K-14 labs?

  9. #29
    David A. Goldfarb's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawai'i
    Shooter
    Large Format
    Posts
    17,360
    Images
    20
    I think the last Kodachrome labs are Dwayne's and Kodak Switzerland, and Kodak Switzerland will cease processing Kodachrome motion-picture film August 1. I don't know if they will end 35mm Kodachrome processing at the same time.
    flickr--http://www.flickr.com/photos/davidagoldfarb/
    Photography (not as up to date as the flickr site)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com/photo
    Academic (Slavic and Comparative Literature)--http://www.davidagoldfarb.com

  10. #30
    htmlguru4242's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Sandy Hook, CT
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    973
    According to Rocky Mountian Photo's site, they're sellign a KLab processing unit.

Page 3 of 7 FirstFirst 1234567 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



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