Kodachrome as a B&W positive Ron Andrews help

<p> I have become pretty good at removing remjet since I started using Vision films and I thought that well Kodachrome is really a B&W emulsion. So if I was to put it through a B&W positive process would it be better to try and remove the remjet before light exposure or after? will this even work? I see so many rolls around and for free most times I was just wondering.... Ron Andrews maybe you can help me here on this one. If so what EI would I even try to shoot it at if it was 64 new last run? </p>

<p>The reason Kodak used Remjet, is to minimize photon scatter in initial exposure, improving the resolution of the image. Regarding the re-exposure for image reversal, I don't think it matters. After soaking in photoflo solution, the remjet will come off, but you don't want it (colloidal carbon) to migrate to the image side, so be careful.</p>

<p>I used the kodak "direct positive developing key"<br>

to prosess panatomic x as a reversal film.<br>

I tries with plus x and the results were so so.<br>

Panatomic x was suggested by kodak as working well with this kit.<br>

I think the B&W emulsin on a roll of Kodachrome may or may not lend itself to reversam processing.<br>

the original B&W emulsion was not present in the final color slide.<br>

and I do not know the exent to which the orginal emulsion afected the final image.<br>

Most other films have some toplerances.<br>

I think Kodachome was much less tolerant of variations.</p>

<p>the other fact is that the supply of Kodachrome is limited. Many rolls are sold at a premiu to folks who are collectors or those who have no idea processing has been un avaalable for several years.<br>

it may be a short-livbed plan.<br>

I don't think we will ever see such a film again nor any e-6 kodak film.<br>

It is interesting that dynachrome was able to clone kodachrome<br>

and likely procss it and Kodachrome.<br>

mayve with the secret halp of Kodak techs.</p>

<p>As far as I know, there is no advantage to reversal processing of Kodachrome as black and white, compared to any other black and white film. </p>

<p>I have a request in to a chemical company for pricing on the Kodachrome couplers. Likely way too expensive, though. </p>

<p>ASK SOMEONE about the kodachrome process.<br>

it is quite different than all the other procsses.<br>

ektachrome, agfachrome, anscochrome, fujichrome, kand all the otherts shjare a common heritage.<br>

Kodachrome and dynachoe are dfferent.<br>

Yu m,ay have sucess reversing a B&W film.<br>

But the whjat?<br>

you can only project a slide.<br>

there is NO reversal paper.<br>

you can scn and print.<br>

there are enlargers that connect to a copmputert.<br>

but tjey are expensiv.<br>

Possibly you have a goal n mind. But we do not know whay it is.<br>

Just to say " I did it" may be your goal.<br>

but what then?</p>

<p>The advantage of processing Kodachrome in a reversal process is that the bleaching should remove the yellow filter layer, which is Cary Lea silver (very fine particles). If processed as a negative, that yellow filter layer is quite dense, making scanning or printing very difficult.<br>

But TMAX 100 would probably provide better results processed as reversal film, as it will have much finer grain than Kodachrome 64.<br>

Plus, contamination by the rem-jet layer is very likely in processing, getting flecks in the emulsion.</p>

<p>My Reason for even asking this question is #1 is it even possible. and #2 as stated I have removed remjet many times as I process Vision movie film so that is a non problem. I was just wondering if it could be done. I have reversal processed many B&W films before and I found that Rollei 80s is one of the better ones to do this with. I was just looking for a different way to help others who still have unprocessed Kodachrome as noted by John when processed as a negative that yellow filter is a PITA.<br>

Thanks for all who have worried about why I want to try this. I guess the only thing to do is to do it.<br>

Thanks.</p>

<p>I wish I could help more. I've never seen any results from B&W reversal processing of Kodachrome. All I can say is that it should be possible. Normally I would warn about the difficulties of removing rem jet, but if you've got that problem solved you are probably half way there. <br /><br />As for the EI, I would run a significant exposure series to find out what works. If you shoot at 8, 16, 32, 64, 125, 250, and 500, I'll bet that at least one of those conditions will be close (assuming you get some sort of image). </p>

<p>I can also predict that a B&W film that is intended for reversal processing will almost certainly produce better results. Kodachrome film was optimized for processing in Process K-14. Any other process will likely yield less than optimum results. </p>

<p>One more comment about rem jet. It is normally thought of as an antihalation layer. It does serve that purpose, but it also has ideal frictional properties for a movie film. (You may recall that the first Kodachrome product was a movie film.) Rem jet has a low coefficient of dynamic friction and a high coefficient of static friction. That is, it moves easily when it is supposed to move and it stays put when it is not supposed to move. I once worked with some Ektachrome super 8 movie film that did not have rem jet. The cartridge designers had to pull out every trick in the book to get it to transport properly through a camera.</p>

<p>Rem jet also offers scratch protection. Light scratches on the base will wash off when the rem jet is removed. </p>

<p>Rem jet (being composed of conductive carbon) dissipates static. That Ektachrome film I mentioned without rem jet, required the addition of a UV filter layer to make the film blind to static. Many daylight films have UV layers to improve color reproduction, but this is not necessary for a tungsten balanced movie film. (There is not much UV energy in tungsten light.) That extra layer slowed down the bleaching so I was assigned the task of optimizing the bleach-fix solution to get the silver out within the allotted process time. If any of you are interested in experimental design and optimization problems, check out this web page: http://stats.randrews4.com/MyFirstDOE.pdf</p>

<p>Thanks Ron that is what I wanted to hear and thanks for the link.</p>

<p>The reason I previously heard for Rem-Jet is that it allows one to load a spool of film, no cartridge just film on a reel, without light going through from the outside. </p>

<p>I once had a Russian roll of 35mm film that had a spool but no outside cartridge. It came wrapped in foil, and you carefully load it and unload it. As well as I remember it worked, though I don't believe it was Rem-Jet, just enough silver bromide it keep the light out. Or maybe other anti-halation light absorbing layer.</p>

<p>Good going Larry! PLEASE put the results on here, sounds like an innovative experiment.<br />I've processed Koda as black and white (I think I used guidelines for Tri-X and added two minutes for safety). The pictures had a really beautiful feel to them. I'll attach one.<br /><br />Remjet is no big deal, seriously. The worst I had was wiping a few black marks off of the bathtub. Do you know the sponges that you use for washing, that have one side with a sorta rough material? (Scourer, I think). I started out by repeatedly adding water, shaking, and removing the water. When the colour was clear (I think it starts yellow or brown) then I started developing. Next I do the same water wash (this time the colour starts out black). <br /><br />After it's fixed, I rinsed and hung it up. If you can make a claw with your hands, that's how I held the sponge. My fingertips touched each sprocket side ('under' where I was wiping) and my thumbs held the sponge against the film. Just slide down, rinse, keep going, then do it for the other side. <br />------------<br />Since BW reversal is done on 'ordinary' film, I would remove the remjet before fogging. Otherwise you will have streaks of remjet and fogging would be inconsistent.</p><div></div>

<p>That is what I was thinking too Ciraran. Thanks.</p>