Kodachrome regret?

[AlanKlein]

When I was young, there was a Kodak slide lab (it seems that the labs had specialties) almost on my dad's way to work.

 

Drop off in the morning, with "Will Call" on the mailer, pick up on the way home. One day service, and no mail costs.

 

Though the post office used to do mailers for the 2 ounce rate, no surcharge for the shape.

 

But viewing scanned slides on a big LCD TV is easier than getting out a slide projector.

 

I still don't have a digital projector.

 

You could almost recreate the old slide show with a digital projector, though.

I do that all the time with both film and digital pictures. I create video slide shows with Adobe Premiere Elements adding background music, intros, credits, fades, etc. They look great on my 75" 4K TV. Easy to play as the show is on a memory card connected to the TV's USB jack ready to go before your guests feign a headache as an excuse to go home early before the show starts. I've downloaded some of them to Youtube which will show them on TVs, cellphones, etc.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDzogShfhgCHh2rVvEsFOJQ

[Alan Marcus]

I was discharged from the U.S. Air Force in 1960. I went to school at Kodak Marketing Education Center -- Kodachrome School -- received life-long certificate to make and process and make and sell the equipment of the process. First job was with 3M making a knock-off called Dynachrome. I was a photofinisher for 55 years. I loved every minute!

[AlanKlein]

I was discharged from the U.S. Air Force in 1960. I went to school at Kodak Marketing Education Center -- Kodachrome School -- received life-long certificate to make and process and make and sell the equipment of the process. First job was with 3M making a knock-off called Dynachrome. I was a photofinisher for 55 years. I loved every minute!

Alan, Is it true that pictures of naked people were checked for by photo processors? What were the laws regarding them back then?

[Alan Marcus]

Alan, Is it true that pictures of naked people were checked for by photo processors? What were the laws regarding them back then?

 

Photo Labs followed the United States Postal Laws regarding Pornography. It was against the law to return photographs that included images of "private parts". Photo Labs inspected every printed picture. This inspection was truly for quality control. Each print was custom adjusted by automatic printers. As each frame was printed, the printer operator was able to see the negative or slide before the exposure was made. This afforded the opportunity for the operator to intervene and apply a manual correction. The back-printing applied to the back of the print recorded the amount and color offset of both the automated and/or the manual correction for density and color. Each finished print went to a high-speed inspection station and was examined. Off-Color prints were flagged for reprinting. The back-printing was consulted, and a revised manual correction was applied. At the inspection station, any print that was deemed to violate the Postal Laws was discarded. The film associated with this print was returned to the customer.

 

Slide film and movie film was also inspected. Again, the primary reason was to double check the quality of the work, not to catch porn. If porn films were discovered, they were put in a safe for 1 year and then destroyed. A letter was sent to the film's owner; they could come to the lab and retrieve orders that could not be sent back by mail.

 

Per -- what was porn? It was up to the discretion of the workers at the lab to make this determination. A Supreme Court Justice had published -- "I can't always describe in words porn, but I know it when I see it".

 

This is true - One experienced inspector, if porn was seen, went to a Catholic Church across the street and said some "Hail Mary's"

Edited July 22, 2022 by alan_marcus|2

[PapaTango]

Oh boy, I still have two undeveloped rolls of K-14 in the freezer--never got them to Dwayne's in time.

 

I shot quite a bit of this in the 70s--and then a friend introduced me to Cibachrome. The world was not the same again. K-chrome was indeed ubiquitous, and E-4 Ekta was not any substitute. Sadly, all of my stuff--stellar and mundane--was consumed in a house fire in the 80s.

 

K-chrome was one of those films that WHATEVER we shot, in our minds it would always come out better. That's a whole nother crazy conversation that belongs on the casual photography board...

 

Speed was not really an issue, as I (and many others) alternatively shot slow-speed BW films like Pan-X, ADOX, and AGFA. Find your light-find your settings, or find a way to light it up!

 

Alan, Is it true that pictures of naked people were checked for by photo processors? What were the laws regarding them back then?[/Quote]

 

Again, in the 70s, I worked for a commercial processor (D&S Color in Florida), and the spotters running the drying drums would call out any nudes. It was all good, unless an image depicted a sexual act, or god forbid, presaged Larry Flint with the spread concept... Lurid photos of children would result in a call to the Bradenton Police Department--but that never happened during my tenure. It was just us with our prurient interests...

 

This got me to thinking about the roiling black and silver tanks of D-76 in the BW processing room. As someone famously said, "The smell of fixer in the morning."

[Alan Marcus]

Next - I was technical manager for Eckerd Drugs (2000 drug stores Southeast USA). Built 7 photofinishing plants each sized 20,000 rolls of film a day. Began installing one-hour labs in drug stores. Next worked as Technical Information Manager Noritsu. All and all, 55+ years in the photo business.

[PapaTango]

I wish I’d shot Kodacwome

 

Yeah, too bad. Somehow you will never measure up now with us real photographers.

 

Moving on now... :rolleyes:

[Alan Marcus]

Outline of steps / times / temperatures K-14

 

1. Removable Jet Black Backing (Rem-Jet) Removal 10 seconds ambient temp subsequently buff-off

 

2. Rinse 15 seconds @ 85° -2 +15

 

3. First Developer MQ formula 2 minutes 0 seconds 99°F ± 0.05

 

4. Wash 45 seconds 85° ± 2

 

5. Red light fogging Corning 2403 filter 2.5 millimeters distance 1000 micro-watt second per sq cm

 

6. Cyan developer 2 minutes 0 seconds 100°F± 0.1

 

7. Wash 2 minutes 100°F± 0.1

 

8. Blue light fogging Fish-Schuman LB3 2.2 millimeters distance 230micro-watt second per sq cm

 

9. Yellow Developer 4 minutes 0 seconds 100°F± 0.1

 

10. Wash 2 minutes 100°F± 0.1

 

11. Magenta developer + chemical foggient 100°F± 0.1

 

12. Wash 2 minutes 100°F± 0.1

 

13. Conditioner 1 minute 0 seconds ambient temperature

 

14. Bleach 5 minutes 0 seconds 100°F± 0.1

 

15. Fixer 3 minutes 0 seconds 100°F± 0.1

 

16. Wash 2 minutes 100°F± 0.1

 

17. Rinse 1 minute 0 seconds ambient temperature

 

18. Dry 105°F ± 5

[AlanKlein]

Photo Labs followed the United States Postal Laws regarding Pornography. It was against the law to return photographs that included images of "private parts". Photo Labs inspected every printed picture. This inspection was truly for quality control. Each print was custom adjusted by automatic printers. As each frame was printed, the printer operator was able to see the negative or slide before the exposure was made. This afforded the opportunity for the operator to intervene and apply a manual correction. The back-printing applied to the back of the print recorded the amount and color offset of both the automated and/or the manual correction for density and color. Each finished print went to a high-speed inspection station and was examined. Off-Color prints were flagged for reprinting. The back-printing was consulted, and a revised manual correction was applied. At the inspection station, any print that was deemed to violate the Postal Laws was discarded. The film associated with this print was returned to the customer.

 

Slide film and movie film was also inspected. Again, the primary reason was to double check the quality of the work, not to catch porn. If porn films were discovered, they were put in a safe for 1 year and then destroyed. A letter was sent to the film's owner; they could come to the lab and retrieve orders that could not be sent back by mail.

 

Per -- what was porn? It was up to the discretion of the workers at the lab to make this determination. A Supreme Court Justice had published -- "I can't always describe in words porn, but I know it when I see it".

 

This is true - One experienced inspector, if porn was seen, went to a Catholic Church across the street and said some "Hail Mary's"

Did he take the picture with him?

[Alan Marcus]

Did he take the picture with him

Pictures sent to a photofinisher are not the property of the lab. If they somehow got distributed a ite would likle

Did he take the picture with him?

Film and prints and slides sent to a photofinisher are not the property of the lab. The lab is preforming a service like a laundry. If the lab mishandles someone’s picture, then likely a lawsuit follows. Once a route driver took a picture envelope and showed nude pictures at a bar. The employee was fired, the lab was found guilty of negligence, big bucks were awarded. This kind of action is serious stuff.

[James G. Dainis]

The famous nude calendar photo of Marilyn Monroe was shot on 8x10 inch Kodachrome. I wonder how that would look projected.

[AlanKlein]

The famous nude calendar photo of Marilyn Monroe was shot on 8x10 inch Kodachrome. I wonder how that would look projected.

I'd settle just for the calendar.

[Dave Luttmann]

While I do miss the vibrant colour of K64, I always found Kodachrome to be rather grainy.

[glen_h]

For reversal films, the image you see is from the grains not developed in the first developer,

the ones exposed to (enough) light, and normally the larger ones. So the image comes

from smaller grains.

 

But then for color films, there are dye clouds and not actual silver grains,

so the look is different, but usually still called grain.