3 ms·

I'd rather they just made a new Kodachrome line, but easier to process than the original... film is still pretty popular in the amateur crowd, and if they relea

by jff 12y ago

I'd rather they just made a new Kodachrome line, but easier to process than the original... film is still pretty popular in the amateur crowd, and if they released a color film that was as easy to process as b&w and looked like Kodachrome, I'd be all over that.

ghaff 12y ago
Come on. That's a niche of a niche. Assuming it were even possible to develop such a thing, you wouldn't even pay back your R&D costs.
js2 12y ago
Then it wouldn't be Kodachrome. Kodachrome is fundamentally a different type of film from regular color negative and slide film, much less b&w film. It has no dye, rather the dye is added during processing. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/K-14_process http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/K-14_process An easier-to-process color slide film exists... it's E-6. Some of the later Fuju slide films got very good using this process. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-6_process http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-6_process E-6 is easy enough to do at home, and good enough that it is largely responsible for Kodachrome's decline. You're kidding yourself if you think there would be any market for something between the two.
- ghaff 12y ago
  Kodak had very good E-6 films latterly as well. I even mostly switched away from Kodachrome. (K-25 was always special but just too slow for most uses.) E-6 is doable at home but you still need fairly exacting temperature control. I never had that kind of equipment. Certainly harder than B&W. But I agree with your basic point. Besides, slide processing is basically a by the numbers operation unless you're doing really funky stuff.
- jff 12y ago
  E-6 is easier than K-14 but it's still a lot pickier than B&W. I want a color film that's as easy to process as B&W in a Rodinal stand dev.
  - js2 12y ago
    Color is inherently more complex than B&W, so I think you're asking for a unicorn. There's a 3-bath version of E-6 (with all the compromises that entails)... I'm not sure how much simpler color film development can get, short of Polaroid.

by jff 12y ago

ghaff 12y ago

Come on. That's a niche of a niche. Assuming it were even possible to develop such a thing, you wouldn't even pay back your R&D costs.

js2 12y ago

Then it wouldn't be Kodachrome. Kodachrome is fundamentally a different type of film from regular color negative and slide film, much less b&w film. It has no dye, rather the dye is added during processing. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/K-14_process http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/K-14_process An easier-to-process color slide film exists... it's E-6. Some of the later Fuju slide films got very good using this process. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-6_process http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-6_process E-6 is easy enough to do at home, and good enough that it is largely responsible for Kodachrome's decline. You're kidding yourself if you think there would be any market for something between the two.

ghaff 12y ago
Kodak had very good E-6 films latterly as well. I even mostly switched away from Kodachrome. (K-25 was always special but just too slow for most uses.) E-6 is doable at home but you still need fairly exacting temperature control. I never had that kind of equipment. Certainly harder than B&W. But I agree with your basic point. Besides, slide processing is basically a by the numbers operation unless you're doing really funky stuff.
jff 12y ago
E-6 is easier than K-14 but it's still a lot pickier than B&W. I want a color film that's as easy to process as B&W in a Rodinal stand dev.
- js2 12y ago
  Color is inherently more complex than B&W, so I think you're asking for a unicorn. There's a 3-bath version of E-6 (with all the compromises that entails)... I'm not sure how much simpler color film development can get, short of Polaroid.