8mm Forum: Another place to process Kodachrome (K-14) other than Dwayne

»	8mm Forum » 8mm Forum » Another place to process Kodachrome (K-14) other than Dwayne

UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!

Author

Topic: Another place to process Kodachrome (K-14) other than Dwayne

Winbert Hutahaean
Film God

Posts: 5468
From: Nouméa, New Caledonia
Registered: Jun 2003

posted January 04, 2010 03:01 PM

Hi all,

What is my understanding that K-14 process is now only available from Dwayne. But I just got another info that http://www.clarkcolor.com/helppricing is also developing Kodachrome.

If we are going to say that they will send anyway to Dwyane, their current price is much cheaper from Dwayne, so I believe they process at their own lab. The cost is $3.50 per 24 exposure roll or $3.95 per 36 exposure roll, plus $1.60 per roll for shipping and handling to USA address. Compared to Dwyane which is $8.00 per 24 exposure roll or $10.00per 36 exposure roll, plus $4.50 per roll for shipping and handling to USA address.

I am not part of this company, but isn't this good especially for those working with Kodachrome Slide. What will you say?

A super 8mm related issue is I asked them about processing Kodachrome super 8mm, and the answer is:

quote:
Dear Winbert,

Thank you for contacting us and giving us the opportunity to answer your questions.

...bla...bla..bla...

Please note: we do not develop Kodachrome Super 8mm films.

We hope you will take the time to browse our website at http://www.clarkcolor.com for a complete list of our photo processing services and prices.

We thank you for your business. If we may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Sincerely,
Rita
Customer Relations

If they have already the K--14 chemical with them, isn't it only one step needed to develop super 8mm ??

cheers,

--------------------
Winbert

| IP: Logged

Joerg Polzfusz
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 815
From: Berlin, Germany, Europe, Earth, Solar System
Registered: Apr 2006

posted January 05, 2010 04:22 AM

quote:
If they have already the K--14 chemical with them, isn't it only one step needed to develop super 8mm ??

They most likely have got a processing machine that takes up to 2m of 35mm film and that automatically cuts the processed slides.

Jörg

| IP: Logged

Martin Jones
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1269
From: Thetford , Norfolk,England
Registered: May 2008

posted January 05, 2010 04:24 AM

"Process" in (American) English means "to handle/proceed through a system" It comes from the verb "to proceed".
The action of converting raw film to a visual image is (historically) "developing".

Martin

--------------------
Retired TV Service Engineer
Ongoing interest in Telecine....

| IP: Logged

Bill Brandenstein
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1632
From: California
Registered: Aug 2007

posted January 05, 2010 10:42 AM

Spoke to the owner of a local lab recently about a gorgeous used Kodachrome processor listed for sale. Apparently in the 80s Kodak put a fortune into their Kodachrome colorlabs even though the demand was about to tank (no pun intended. OK, why not? Pun intended). Here's the key: the machines that do slides can NOT do Super 8. I am not familiar with any of this enough to know if modifications are possible or if the results would still be sub-par. Also, the cost for the color chemistry from Kodak is astronomical, which pays off over time because it does last awhile. If you have clients. A lot of them.

| IP: Logged

John Whittle
Jedi Master Film Handler

Posts: 791
From: Northridge, CA USA
Registered: Jun 2003

posted January 05, 2010 01:48 PM

I remember that as well. There was a big push to get professional photographers to go back to Kodachrome. The still film machines were often "dip & dunk" which handled the film in hanging strips. This doesn't work for a continous strip of film like you need for Super8. About all that would work for both would be the chemical storage tanks. The entire machine and transport are different.

These machines could develop 35mm or 620 or even sheet film in hangers.

Memories of a bygone time.

The other question is just how long the special color developers and couplers will be available. Kodak was the only source and manufacturing was extremely costly as were the chemicals.

Back in the 1960s there were 35mm color motion picture film processes that used black and white 5302 with special processing and printers that produced color film on the back and white stock by using a modification of the Kodachrome process and chemistry. Remember Kodachrome was just three black and white laters with color filters in between. In the motion picture process, each color was exposed from a negative in the developing machine and then developed and coupled.

John

| IP: Logged

Jim Carlile
Film Handler

Posts: 95
From: Burbank, California, USA
Registered: Apr 2007

posted January 07, 2010 01:24 AM

We use the word "process" as synonymous with "developing" here. When a lab says "yes, we process that film," the message is that they do the actual developing.

If they only did the legwork and subbed it out to some place else, they would say, "we handle that film."

In the U.S., developing would apply to small amounts, like still films. Processing would apply to motion picture film. Rarely would you hear someone say that "we develop motion picture film." They could, but more often they'd say "process." It's the more industrial term.

So, in other words, if that lab says that they process K-14, that means they do all the work. That's how I'd take it at least.

| IP: Logged

Brad Miller
Administrator

Posts: 525
From: Dallas, TX, USA
Registered: Jun 2003

posted January 07, 2010 01:49 AM

quote:
Here's the key: the machines that do slides can NOT do Super 8.

That is absolutely true. I got the chance to work with the main guy at the Dallas Kodak lab around 1991'ish with processing 8mm Kodachrome. The machine was quite large and took up 3 times the space of the average home's living room. Various scratch testing had to be done between each reel of film where they sent clear film into the system (a couple of hundred feet easily) and then had to be meticulously checked frame by frame for a few feet to make sure there was no scratching before the next batch of reels were loaded.

The head lab tech showed me how he could tell who the professionals were just by the way their cartridges were submitted. Those that were smart enough to force-wind the tail of the film into the cartridge were the pros. Why? The only way to get the film out was to pop the cartridge open, instead of grabbing the tail end and winding onto a reel before processing.

Essentially, the film had the best chance of scratching as it was being pulled from the cartridge. When that was no longer an option, the cartridge around the film was removed and the possibility of scratching was substantially reduced.

| IP: Logged

Bill Brandenstein
Phenomenal Film Handler

Posts: 1632
From: California
Registered: Aug 2007

posted January 07, 2010 10:34 AM

Drat. I have had isolated instances of scratching by Dwayne's, and never thought of forcing them to open the cart.

But i AM a prophessunnul!

Just not at filmmaking!

Thanks, Brad.

| IP: Logged

All times are Central

Printer-friendly view of this topic

UBB.classic^TM 6.3.1.2