x-ray
Mentor
In the late 70’s my Kodak TSR setup a tour for me through the Chamblee GA facility. At that time they had a full processing facility for still and motion picture film there. The best part was watching the technicians prepare to run Kodachrome. I can’t remember the minimum number of rolls in each run but it was a huge number. Each roll was spliced into one huge roll as a team of chemists analyzed chemistry and when everything was up to spec the processor was started. Throughout the process samples of chemistry were checked as well. It was really amazing to watch it happen.
bluesun267
Well-known
I have thoroughly enjoyed each and every image of this long thread.
Some thoughts:
I agree that Kodachrome processed by Kodak was best. It had the deepest blacks, the most subtle tonalities, the best detail and finest grain.
Many independent labs processed Kodachrome up until the late 80s/early 90s, including some pretty low end "grocery store" labs with very lax quality control. These types of labs could make Kodachrome look pedestrian, and even downright ugly, with poor color rendition, grain, and dirt. Kodak, being forced by anti-trust legislation into allowing independent labs to proliferate (and operate on an honor system) was a large reason why Kodachrome fell out of favor in the 70s-90s in my view. (Well, that...and newer films, like Velvia).
This was a conundrum that left Kodachrome, with its complicated processing regimen, in a difficult position. People also were becoming more and more accustomed to the near-instant gratification of 1-hour and overnight processing and Kodachrome would surely have died even faster if they hadn't allowed other labs to process it. Back then film developing was a competitive business driven largely by price. (I remember our local grocery chain, King Soopers, charged $1.59 to process either Super 8 or a roll of Kodachrome or Ektachrome slides, and continued to do so for well over a decade until the early 90s). The K-lab in the late 90s was Kodak's attempt to reign this problem in and provide faster turnaround with better quality, but it was too little too late.
As a youngun' in the 80s I didn't know much about processing qualities, and by the time I figured it out, Kodak had all but closed their labs.
Dwayne's got their K-14 processing machine from Kodak Dallas which was the last Kodak lab in the USA. The Kodak Lab in Lausanne, Switzerland held out for a couple more years (after Dallas) and was the last Kodak lab in the world. Then it was all Dwayne's game until the end.
Up until the early 80s there was an official Kodak K-14 lab in every US region: Seattle, Palo Alto, Los Angeles, Chicago, Dallas, Atlanta, Fairlawn, NJ, Honolulu and probably several others I've forgotten.
Kodachrome II and the K-12 process from approx 1960-1972 was the most beautiful IMO and proudly displays all the most iconic qualities of Kodachrome. A big reason for that is the more stringent processing quality control, mostly all performed by Kodak, of that period.
When Kodachrome was revamped with K-14 processing in 1972, it seems their processing formulas became "open source" and up until the 80s, one could buy Kodachrome II "knock off" films made by Ferrania (sold as 'Dynachrome' and under the Kmart "Focal" brand in the US). GAF/Ansco had their version as well. These K-12 process films should exhibit the same dye stability of Kodachrome II. There is one roll of "Focal Chrome" K-12 Super 8mm in my archive from about 1983 and it looks just as lovely as Kodachrome.
OK, that's all for now...Please keep those beautiful images coming!
Some thoughts:
I agree that Kodachrome processed by Kodak was best. It had the deepest blacks, the most subtle tonalities, the best detail and finest grain.
Many independent labs processed Kodachrome up until the late 80s/early 90s, including some pretty low end "grocery store" labs with very lax quality control. These types of labs could make Kodachrome look pedestrian, and even downright ugly, with poor color rendition, grain, and dirt. Kodak, being forced by anti-trust legislation into allowing independent labs to proliferate (and operate on an honor system) was a large reason why Kodachrome fell out of favor in the 70s-90s in my view. (Well, that...and newer films, like Velvia).
This was a conundrum that left Kodachrome, with its complicated processing regimen, in a difficult position. People also were becoming more and more accustomed to the near-instant gratification of 1-hour and overnight processing and Kodachrome would surely have died even faster if they hadn't allowed other labs to process it. Back then film developing was a competitive business driven largely by price. (I remember our local grocery chain, King Soopers, charged $1.59 to process either Super 8 or a roll of Kodachrome or Ektachrome slides, and continued to do so for well over a decade until the early 90s). The K-lab in the late 90s was Kodak's attempt to reign this problem in and provide faster turnaround with better quality, but it was too little too late.
As a youngun' in the 80s I didn't know much about processing qualities, and by the time I figured it out, Kodak had all but closed their labs.
Dwayne's got their K-14 processing machine from Kodak Dallas which was the last Kodak lab in the USA. The Kodak Lab in Lausanne, Switzerland held out for a couple more years (after Dallas) and was the last Kodak lab in the world. Then it was all Dwayne's game until the end.
Up until the early 80s there was an official Kodak K-14 lab in every US region: Seattle, Palo Alto, Los Angeles, Chicago, Dallas, Atlanta, Fairlawn, NJ, Honolulu and probably several others I've forgotten.
Kodachrome II and the K-12 process from approx 1960-1972 was the most beautiful IMO and proudly displays all the most iconic qualities of Kodachrome. A big reason for that is the more stringent processing quality control, mostly all performed by Kodak, of that period.
When Kodachrome was revamped with K-14 processing in 1972, it seems their processing formulas became "open source" and up until the 80s, one could buy Kodachrome II "knock off" films made by Ferrania (sold as 'Dynachrome' and under the Kmart "Focal" brand in the US). GAF/Ansco had their version as well. These K-12 process films should exhibit the same dye stability of Kodachrome II. There is one roll of "Focal Chrome" K-12 Super 8mm in my archive from about 1983 and it looks just as lovely as Kodachrome.
OK, that's all for now...Please keep those beautiful images coming!
Last edited:
bluesun267
Well-known
State of Durango, Mexico, 2001. Kodachrome 25 w/ Leica M2 and Summaron 35/2.8
Edo. de Durango, Mex. 2001 by Timoleon Wilkins, on Flickr
Edo. de Durango, Mex. 2001 by Timoleon Wilkins, on FlickrGreg Maslak
Well-known
Taken when I was a budding teenager dreaming of becoming a world famous travel photographer on a school trip to Greece in 1974. Nikkormat Ftn/43-86 Zoom.
CMur12
Well-known
Greg Maslak
Well-known
Another from my high school trip to Athens.
fdarnell
Well-known
I really like this thread and all the images posted!
This comment made me think of the third year Photochemistry final exam question in RIT's Photoscience program. We were given all the pH and specific gravity measurements of each of the processing tanks on the K-14 line. Doc Francis, the Dean and Professor in that class had a famous picture of a poodle the owner had dyed cyan and he always used that reference in tests, since the poodle was normally white.
The test had only one question. We were given the test at 8:00am and it was due in by 5:00pm. Open book. The question was "What color is the cyan poodle run through this line?"
As I recall it was slightly magenta. The line was way off specs. Of course we had to go research what all the specs were for the K-14 process, hence the open book status. And, true to the nature of Doc's exams, you either got an "A" or an "F". :bang:
This comment made me think of the third year Photochemistry final exam question in RIT's Photoscience program. We were given all the pH and specific gravity measurements of each of the processing tanks on the K-14 line. Doc Francis, the Dean and Professor in that class had a famous picture of a poodle the owner had dyed cyan and he always used that reference in tests, since the poodle was normally white.
The test had only one question. We were given the test at 8:00am and it was due in by 5:00pm. Open book. The question was "What color is the cyan poodle run through this line?"
As I recall it was slightly magenta. The line was way off specs. Of course we had to go research what all the specs were for the K-14 process, hence the open book status. And, true to the nature of Doc's exams, you either got an "A" or an "F". :bang:
WJJ3
Well-known
There are a lot of wonderful images here made with this magical and unfortunately no longer available film. I had the chance to shoot a few rolls of Kodachrome back in 2009-2010. Nothing compares to looking at the slides directly on the light table with a loupe, but a DSLR scan and slight adjustments give an idea.
Shot with a Pentax LX and the 43mm f1.9 Limited:
e-9469
Shot with a Pentax LX and the 43mm f1.9 Limited:
d_c
Established
A couple of images from Japan around 2002 on Kodachrome 200
lynnb
Mentor
Boot Hill cemetery, Tombstone AZ, May 1979 Nikon FE Nikkor 35mm f/2.8 Kodachrome 25 PL filter
WJJ3
Well-known
zuikologist
.........................
zuikologist
.........................
Beautiful. This reminds me of Time-Life publications for some reason.
[/url]Maine_Baxter SP_001 RF by P, on Flickr[/IMG]
Baxter State Park, Maine. 1985
Kodachrome 25, Nikon FE2, 180/2.8 ED Nikkor.
Dervla
Established
Hello, first post of a photograph.
Southern end of Stinson Beach, California, Canon Ftb, Canon FD 100mm f/2.8 SSC, Kodachrome, June or July, 1975
raydm6
Yay! Cameras! 🙈🙉🙊┌( ಠ_ಠ)┘ [◉"]
Kodachrome from 1948 (Boston). Sorry for the fuzzy scan.
Note the Rochester Postmark "May 13, 1948" and postage rate "1 1/2 cents".
Kodachrome, Boston, 1948 by rdc154, on Flickr
Note the Rochester Postmark "May 13, 1948" and postage rate "1 1/2 cents".
Kodachrome, Boston, 1948 by rdc154, on Flickr
Last edited:
plummerl
Well-known
news shooter
Established
Kodachrome 64
news shooter
Established
Larry, this one is a favorite!
x-ray
Mentor
I used Kodachrome occasionally on jobs but process time (3days) was an issue when I could shoot E6 film and have it in hand in 3 hours or less.
When Kodak reintroduced 120 Kodachrome I bought a half dozen rolls and shot it on a job along side my usual Provia. Honestly there was no comparison. The Fuji blew it away in color accuracy and overall look. Even in sharpness and grain Provia was rated almost the same as Kodachrome.
I think I kept a transparency of each and will try to find it and post a comparison.
Another consideration in the pro world was an anomaly in the red layer of Kodachrome. More than one prepress house said Kodachrome was more difficult to separate due to the red layer issue. It required a different scanner profile.
I save a roll or two of films that are extinct and have two rolls of 120 Kodachrome that went out of date in 1988. I think I have some Kodachrome II and some 25 and 64 from the 60’s and 70’s also.
Edit: In the 40’s and May have run into the 50’s Kodak made the original Kodachrome ASA10 in sheets up to 11x14. I’ve seen several 8x10 Kodachromes shot by Edward Weston. They were on display at the art Museum in Omaha a few years ago. Also a person I worked with had quite a few 4x5 an 6x9cm sheets he’d done on a job in the 40’s. The old ASA10 film was much richer than the later film.
When Kodak reintroduced 120 Kodachrome I bought a half dozen rolls and shot it on a job along side my usual Provia. Honestly there was no comparison. The Fuji blew it away in color accuracy and overall look. Even in sharpness and grain Provia was rated almost the same as Kodachrome.
I think I kept a transparency of each and will try to find it and post a comparison.
Another consideration in the pro world was an anomaly in the red layer of Kodachrome. More than one prepress house said Kodachrome was more difficult to separate due to the red layer issue. It required a different scanner profile.
I save a roll or two of films that are extinct and have two rolls of 120 Kodachrome that went out of date in 1988. I think I have some Kodachrome II and some 25 and 64 from the 60’s and 70’s also.
Edit: In the 40’s and May have run into the 50’s Kodak made the original Kodachrome ASA10 in sheets up to 11x14. I’ve seen several 8x10 Kodachromes shot by Edward Weston. They were on display at the art Museum in Omaha a few years ago. Also a person I worked with had quite a few 4x5 an 6x9cm sheets he’d done on a job in the 40’s. The old ASA10 film was much richer than the later film.
Attachments
Last edited:
Dervla
Established
The Mars Hotel, 192 4th Street, at Howard, was torn down in the late 1970s
Canon FTbn, Kodachrome, and Canon FD 100mm f/2.8 SSC, San Francisco, June or July, 1975