Survey: How many use Kodachrome?

[hrst]

Yeah. Unless someone starts to make Kodachrome clone film. It's possible. It's easier than today's films with couplers.

[railwayman3]

More important question than the processing machine is the availability of processing chemicals. One can process Kodachrome in normal spiral tanks if a special re-exposure unit is made. That doesn't need to be big or expensive. All we need is a small tabletop machine with stepper motor to drive film thru the unit and LED light and some drive logic. The amount of exposure must be determined first but then it remain unchanged. Heck, it can be done even with normal color enlarger without any special units. The process is a bit tedious but completely doable even at home, not to mention small labs ran by enthusiasts. Bigger problem is where to get the chemicals needed. Is there public formulas? Can you get the correct couplers anywhere?

I really admire anyone who might try to set this up. But, apart from anything else, would anyone trust their important films to something so experimental?

I enjoy experimenting as much as anyone, but all my "valuable" photos are taken on fresh films of brands which I know well, and processed (usually myself, unless in a hurry) in chemicals which I have come to trust over many years.

[gr82bart]

Of the 57 rolls I had when Kodak announced their discontinuance, I'm down to 41 now. I'm shooting almost nothing but Kodachromes now. I shot maybe 0-1 roll a year in the past 10 years or so, but had an urge to get back just before Kodak made its fateful announcement. Figures.

Regards, Art.

[hrst]

I really admire anyone who might try to set this up. But, apart from anything else, would anyone trust their important films to something so experimental?

I enjoy experimenting as much as anyone, but all my "valuable" photos are taken on fresh films of brands which I know well, and processed in chemicals which I have come to trust over many years.

Once done right, there would be nothing "experimental" in the process. There are specifications available. Of course, the reversal exposure steps would need some experimenting at first, but then the process could be run with quality surpassing even the professional lab, just like you can process E6 and C-41 at home at equivalent or even better quality than pro labs.

[railwayman3]

Once done right, there would be nothing "experimental" in the process. There are specifications available. Of course, the reversal exposure steps would need some experimenting at first, but then the process could be run with quality surpassing even the professional lab, just like you can process E6 and C-41 at home at equivalent or even better quality than pro labs.

I take your point, it would be wonderful if film and chemicals were available for this to be done. My point is that it could (hopefully wrongly) be seen as experimental or unrealiable until proven, and the demand would be not there to make it viable at a reasonable cost.

I've seen several indications (rumors?) on the web that K14 has been home-processed, but I've never seen any examples to confirm this. I'd like to be proved wrong?

Sorry, I'm really not intending to be negative.

[hrst]

The reversal exposure could be calibrated this way:

First, chemical reversal exposure is removed from the process; Otherwise, process runs normally.

Then, one roll is fogged completely.

Then, the red re-exposure is incremented step by step during this roll. Blue re-exposure is bypassed/off.

When processed, we could look (with densitometer, or a film scanner, or even by eye) where the cyan Dmax is achieved. This is the absolute minimum red exposure needed. Then we would look further until the point when the magenta and/or green density starts to increase. This is the absolute maximum red exposure. Then we take the average of these values.

The same procedure is done with blue exposure.

Two rolls will be sacrified in this calibration; but then, this requires exact specifications with the exact chemical formulas to avoid experimenting with them.

Does anyone see any problem here? The one I see is the availability of the chemicals (and the exact formulas).

I really believe that the biggest obstacle is how to get the chemicals and how to know what to get.

[brianmquinn]

About 2 dozen rolls a year on average. I have 50 rolls now so that will go up next year.

[Prest_400]

Yeah. Unless someone starts to make Kodachrome clone film. It's possible. It's easier than today's films with couplers.

If Mannes and Godowsky did it back in 1935, it should be still be possible to do it now. I wonder how many resources they had.
Just modify some couplers, and then you should have a 1950's kodachrome. Original 1930s Kodachrome didn't have as much archival stability compared to later versions, as far I know.

[Jeff Kubach]

I used Kodachrome a lot many years ago, now I wish I kept it up to this point!

Jeff

[mopar_guy]

I believe that Dwaynes processor was a larger capacity machine that was specially made for them. Some years back, Kodak was trying to push smaller machines known as K-labs. Where are all of these? I thought that one of these was for sale on eBay a while back with no takers.