TP120- followup

I've heard that when processed as a B&W film Kodachrome reacts much like
Tech-Pan. I have not tried it however but soon will. Too bad they discontinued
Kodachrome in the 120 format.

Derek Gee wrote:

"Tom Bombadil" wrote in message
...
Neil Gould wrote, in rec.photo.equipment.medium-format:

The way *I* read their statement, it's a very small extrapolation from
those "manufacturing inconvenience" points to understand its poor
profitability. One only has to consider that almost *anything* else that
uses those resources more efficiently and that doesn't require
re-engineering of all the basic materials will exceed the profitabililty
of TP.

Neil

Oh man, I've definitely been reading this thread too long. I totally
forgot it was about Tech Pan until I read your final word "TP"!
I've been preoccupied with the fact that Kodak has just closed their
film lab in New Jersey, abandoning all Kodachrome processing in the
United States to a single remaining third party, Dwaynes Photo in Kansas.
Of course turnaround time has increased dramatically, and this will help
drive down sales, paving the way for a "justifiable" discontinuance
of the product itself.

Frankly, anyone who is concerned with turnaround times was no longer using
Kodachrome prior to Kodak's latest lab closure. The number of reasons to
continue using Kodachrome are becoming fewer and fewer as the E-6 stocks
improve. The biggest reason I can think of to use it is the better
reproduction of blacks than the E-6 films. The other reasons I can think of
a

Proven dark stability
High degree of sharpness
Thin film travels smoother through cameras

The E-6 films have:

finer grain
more saturated colors
fast processing available

If you want Kodachrome to continue being made, better keep buying it, no
matter what the turnaround times end up being.

Derek

I've heard that when processed as a B&W film Kodachrome reacts much like
Tech-Pan. I have not tried it however but soon will. Too bad they discontinued
Kodachrome in the 120 format.

Derek Gee wrote:

"Tom Bombadil" wrote in message
...
Neil Gould wrote, in rec.photo.equipment.medium-format:

The way *I* read their statement, it's a very small extrapolation from
those "manufacturing inconvenience" points to understand its poor
profitability. One only has to consider that almost *anything* else that
uses those resources more efficiently and that doesn't require
re-engineering of all the basic materials will exceed the profitabililty
of TP.

Neil

Oh man, I've definitely been reading this thread too long. I totally
forgot it was about Tech Pan until I read your final word "TP"!
I've been preoccupied with the fact that Kodak has just closed their
film lab in New Jersey, abandoning all Kodachrome processing in the
United States to a single remaining third party, Dwaynes Photo in Kansas.
Of course turnaround time has increased dramatically, and this will help
drive down sales, paving the way for a "justifiable" discontinuance
of the product itself.

Frankly, anyone who is concerned with turnaround times was no longer using
Kodachrome prior to Kodak's latest lab closure. The number of reasons to
continue using Kodachrome are becoming fewer and fewer as the E-6 stocks
improve. The biggest reason I can think of to use it is the better
reproduction of blacks than the E-6 films. The other reasons I can think of
a

Proven dark stability
High degree of sharpness
Thin film travels smoother through cameras

The E-6 films have:

finer grain
more saturated colors
fast processing available

If you want Kodachrome to continue being made, better keep buying it, no
matter what the turnaround times end up being.

Derek

wrote in message
...
I've heard that when processed as a B&W film Kodachrome reacts much like
Tech-Pan. I have not tried it however but soon will. Too bad they
discontinued
Kodachrome in the 120 format.

Affirmative. There are no color couplers in Kodachrome Film, Basically it is
three layers of silver emulsion, each with different color sensitivities.
The Dyes are provided in the chemistries, along with blue and yellow lamp
fogging, the final fog is magenta which is a chemical fog.

Run the Kodachrome through a Rem-Jet anti-halation removal bath, then
through PQ (1st Dev = Phenidone/Hydroquinone).
If you dont put the film in any of the three color developers there will be
no dye-oxidation bonding, thus no color. skip the bleach and go right to fix
and viola youve got a nice black and white negative!

A pretty expensive Black and White negative tho!

Of course you can just use standard BW chems but you WILL have to do a
rem-jet step before developing, otherwise youll have a real mess on yer
hands and film that will resemble decorator-flypaper

Mike Lachance

wrote in message
...
I've heard that when processed as a B&W film Kodachrome reacts much like
Tech-Pan. I have not tried it however but soon will. Too bad they
discontinued
Kodachrome in the 120 format.

Affirmative. There are no color couplers in Kodachrome Film, Basically it is
three layers of silver emulsion, each with different color sensitivities.
The Dyes are provided in the chemistries, along with blue and yellow lamp
fogging, the final fog is magenta which is a chemical fog.

Run the Kodachrome through a Rem-Jet anti-halation removal bath, then
through PQ (1st Dev = Phenidone/Hydroquinone).
If you dont put the film in any of the three color developers there will be
no dye-oxidation bonding, thus no color. skip the bleach and go right to fix
and viola youve got a nice black and white negative!

A pretty expensive Black and White negative tho!

Of course you can just use standard BW chems but you WILL have to do a
rem-jet step before developing, otherwise youll have a real mess on yer
hands and film that will resemble decorator-flypaper

Mike Lachance

I've heard that you can do the anti-halation layer removal by hand. If it looks
like Tech-Pan, it'd be worth. Remember I already agreed to pay $12/roll for
TechPan. I have a hunch though that the fellow that told me that it looked like
TechPan was processing K12, but there's always hope.

"Michael R. Lachance" wrote:

wrote in message
...
I've heard that when processed as a B&W film Kodachrome reacts much like
Tech-Pan. I have not tried it however but soon will. Too bad they
discontinued
Kodachrome in the 120 format.

Affirmative. There are no color couplers in Kodachrome Film, Basically it is
three layers of silver emulsion, each with different color sensitivities.
The Dyes are provided in the chemistries, along with blue and yellow lamp
fogging, the final fog is magenta which is a chemical fog.

Run the Kodachrome through a Rem-Jet anti-halation removal bath, then
through PQ (1st Dev = Phenidone/Hydroquinone).
If you dont put the film in any of the three color developers there will be
no dye-oxidation bonding, thus no color. skip the bleach and go right to fix
and viola youve got a nice black and white negative!

A pretty expensive Black and White negative tho!

Of course you can just use standard BW chems but you WILL have to do a
rem-jet step before developing, otherwise youll have a real mess on yer
hands and film that will resemble decorator-flypaper

Mike Lachance

Sorry, I meant the now discontinued K25.

wrote:

I've heard that you can do the anti-halation layer removal by hand. If it looks
like Tech-Pan, it'd be worth. Remember I already agreed to pay $12/roll for
TechPan. I have a hunch though that the fellow that told me that it looked like
TechPan was processing K12, but there's always hope.

"Michael R. Lachance" wrote:

wrote in message
...
I've heard that when processed as a B&W film Kodachrome reacts much like
Tech-Pan. I have not tried it however but soon will. Too bad they
discontinued
Kodachrome in the 120 format.

Affirmative. There are no color couplers in Kodachrome Film, Basically it is
three layers of silver emulsion, each with different color sensitivities.
The Dyes are provided in the chemistries, along with blue and yellow lamp
fogging, the final fog is magenta which is a chemical fog.

Run the Kodachrome through a Rem-Jet anti-halation removal bath, then
through PQ (1st Dev = Phenidone/Hydroquinone).
If you dont put the film in any of the three color developers there will be
no dye-oxidation bonding, thus no color. skip the bleach and go right to fix
and viola youve got a nice black and white negative!

A pretty expensive Black and White negative tho!

Of course you can just use standard BW chems but you WILL have to do a
rem-jet step before developing, otherwise youll have a real mess on yer
hands and film that will resemble decorator-flypaper

Mike Lachance

Sorry, I meant the now discontinued K25.

wrote:

I've heard that you can do the anti-halation layer removal by hand. If it looks
like Tech-Pan, it'd be worth. Remember I already agreed to pay $12/roll for
TechPan. I have a hunch though that the fellow that told me that it looked like
TechPan was processing K12, but there's always hope.

"Michael R. Lachance" wrote:

wrote in message
...
I've heard that when processed as a B&W film Kodachrome reacts much like
Tech-Pan. I have not tried it however but soon will. Too bad they
discontinued
Kodachrome in the 120 format.

Affirmative. There are no color couplers in Kodachrome Film, Basically it is
three layers of silver emulsion, each with different color sensitivities.
The Dyes are provided in the chemistries, along with blue and yellow lamp
fogging, the final fog is magenta which is a chemical fog.

Run the Kodachrome through a Rem-Jet anti-halation removal bath, then
through PQ (1st Dev = Phenidone/Hydroquinone).
If you dont put the film in any of the three color developers there will be
no dye-oxidation bonding, thus no color. skip the bleach and go right to fix
and viola youve got a nice black and white negative!

A pretty expensive Black and White negative tho!

Of course you can just use standard BW chems but you WILL have to do a
rem-jet step before developing, otherwise youll have a real mess on yer
hands and film that will resemble decorator-flypaper

Mike Lachance

Greetings Tom,

Tech Pan is a great film and quite fine grained. It started out in the
scientific and technical world and was adopted by the general BW community
shortly there after. Special chemicals were created and offered as well as
research for processing in a variety of ways.

The Kodachrome process is an interesting one where dyes are introduced to
the film during the K-14 process. Use as a BW film may not be what you
expect. If it were me, I would continue with Tech Pan as the results are
much more specific.

Talk to you soon, let me know if you have any questions.

Ron Baird
Eastman Kodak Company



I've heard that when processed as a B&W film Kodachrome reacts much like
Tech-Pan. I have not tried it however but soon will. Too bad they
discontinued
Kodachrome in the 120 format.

Derek Gee wrote:

"
Neil Gould wrote, in rec.photo.equipment.medium-format:

The way *I* read their statement, it's a very small extrapolation
from
those "manufacturing inconvenience" points to understand its poor
profitability. One only has to consider that almost *anything* else

Derek Gee wrote:

Frankly, anyone who is concerned with turnaround times was no longer using
Kodachrome prior to Kodak's latest lab closure. The number of reasons to
continue using Kodachrome are becoming fewer and fewer as the E-6 stocks
improve. The biggest reason I can think of to use it is the better
reproduction of blacks than the E-6 films. The other reasons I can think of
a

Proven dark stability

OK

High degree of sharpness

Not an issue for me. The E-6's I use and Kodachrome are both quite sharp enough.

Thin film travels smoother through cameras

Never have I worried about smooth traveling through cameras, even with
Verichrome Pan (still using up my cache of that)!


The E-6 films have:

finer grain

If I'm seeing grain in my Kodachromes, I'm liking it.

more saturated colors

Well, DIFFERENT colors, and this is why I still use Kodachrome: its unique,
beautiful color palette. Here's where I want to insert the words:

FLAGSHIP PRODUCT

No one ever had a hit record singing about Astia, Velvia, or Sensia!

fast processing available

Truer than ever by comparison.


If you want Kodachrome to continue being made, better keep buying it, no
matter what the turnaround times end up being.

I'm doing my part!

Derek Gee wrote:

Frankly, anyone who is concerned with turnaround times was no longer using
Kodachrome prior to Kodak's latest lab closure. The number of reasons to
continue using Kodachrome are becoming fewer and fewer as the E-6 stocks
improve. The biggest reason I can think of to use it is the better
reproduction of blacks than the E-6 films. The other reasons I can think of
a

Proven dark stability

OK

High degree of sharpness

Not an issue for me. The E-6's I use and Kodachrome are both quite sharp enough.

Thin film travels smoother through cameras

Never have I worried about smooth traveling through cameras, even with
Verichrome Pan (still using up my cache of that)!


The E-6 films have:

finer grain

If I'm seeing grain in my Kodachromes, I'm liking it.

more saturated colors

Well, DIFFERENT colors, and this is why I still use Kodachrome: its unique,
beautiful color palette. Here's where I want to insert the words:

FLAGSHIP PRODUCT

No one ever had a hit record singing about Astia, Velvia, or Sensia!

fast processing available

Truer than ever by comparison.


If you want Kodachrome to continue being made, better keep buying it, no
matter what the turnaround times end up being.

I'm doing my part!