# Ektachrome re-birth



## KmH (Jan 5, 2017)

We just have to wait out the gestation period:
KodakAlaris | KodakAlaris


----------



## Derrel (Jan 5, 2017)

Yippee!  The new EKTACHROME film will support 135-36x camera formats and be available in fourth quarter 2017.

I used to really like Ektachrome as my E-6 process film of choice. I shot up the last frozen 120-format rolls of it that I had in the summer of 2014, using a 6x6 Graphic brand rollfilm back and my 1937 baby Speed Graphic 2.25 x 3.25 format camera.

I wish they'd make it in 120 rollfilm, but 35mm format in 26-shot rolls really is more of the higher-volume and typically-expected-use for such a film as this.


----------



## webestang64 (Jan 5, 2017)

SWEET! That was my favorite E-6 to cross-process in C-41.


----------



## jcdeboever (Jan 5, 2017)

Hmmm.... I never shot slide film nor developed it, might have to give it try...


----------



## Derrel (Jan 5, 2017)

jcdeboever said:
			
		

> Hmmm.... I never shot slide film nor developed it, might have to give it try...


Ohhhhh, it is definitely a fun type of film to shoot! The beauty is that the film is developed to a very precise level of development time and contrast (gamma). Yes, it can be push-processed, or pulled, for an extra charge. But normally, with the exact, precise development time given, this allows you to bracket exposures in precise increments, and get subtly different final slides or transparencies. The goal when shooting transparency film is to light it or meter it perfectly, compose and frame well, and then voila! The perfect picture! That is the typical goal. A finalized image, held on a film piece, for decades and decades. And then...they can be projected; a projected image on a good screen looks awesome. Something about being in a darkened room, and seeing the light coming through film, especially in the darker areas of the picture  is different from reflected light viewing of prints in a bright environment. And in dark storage, slides last a loooong, long time, with good color stability.

I saw many, many WW II Pacific Theatre pics from a neighbor who shot Kodachrome slide film and sent it back, wrapped in condoms! weird I know but ship holds and saltwater and all, you know, and had his mother develop the rolls as they made their way back to Portland, OR. His name was Hap. He was an aircraft mechanic, So,so cool to see the base and airplanes and camp life and poker and sandal-making and tanned GI's drinking beer and playing cards,etc.. in FULL color, in 1992, but shot in the 1940's!.

Scanning of slide film is also fairly easy to do, especially if you have a dedicated film scanner.

Shooting color slides is actually very rewarding. On flat-light days, you can underexposure AND over-expose by quite a lot, and get different types of pictures. E-6 films used to be able to be turned around, from drop-off-to you paying for an envelope with boxes,developed slides, in 4 hours in larger cities. In formats from 35mm to 120 to 4x5 sheet. And yes, 4x5 sheet film transparencies on thick-base film are a thing to behold. basically, the FILM itself hold "the picture", and it can be seen by holding it against a light source...that is the allure...not _negatives_...but positive-color pictures. I imagine the allure to the younger, hip age consumers is strong enough that they want to bring back this older technology, at least in 35mm, 36-shot rolls.

The thing was: slide film used to be relatively 'expensive', but developing was fast,easy, and cheap. Slide pictures were typically almost never "ruined" by bad color in the way prints and negative film were. Color prints from negatives often had wonky color casts due to operator error, or bad paper, or bad machine color-analysis of large color areas that fooled the automated printer, etc..  Slides were usually, well...damned near perfect every time, even from regular labs, at low prices.


----------



## 480sparky (Jan 5, 2017)

Time to dig out the Carousel projector and buy a few extra trays off Craigslist!


----------



## jcdeboever (Jan 5, 2017)

Derrel said:


> jcdeboever said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Sounds challenging. Not sure what you mean by bracketing though....


----------



## Derrel (Jan 5, 2017)

bracketing =  *incremental  changes in exposure*, like Zero'd or dead-on, and then 1/3 under the indicated reading, and 2/3 under indicated, and maybe even Minus 1.0 EV under indicated.

Slide film is very sensitive to where the highlight values are metered. "Meter for the highlight tone, and let the shadows fall where they may." That was a very common slide-era shooting strategy. Over-exposing the highlights with slide film pretty quickly blows out the highlights. so, bracketing was common.

Professionals would control shadows by fill-light.


----------



## cgw (Jan 5, 2017)

Don't know whether to laugh or cry at this news. Heard rumors back in the fall about Ektachrome returning but filed them in my "Tales from the Crypt" folder of longshot resurrections. Absolutely no pro lab-quality E6 service left in Toronto. All that survives are several "artisanal" JOBO basement/garage part-time/infrequent labs. Hoping the Kodak news encourages some labs to revive slide processing this year. Fingers crossed for 120 Ekta!


----------



## compur (Jan 5, 2017)

Very good news.

Now just bring back Kodachrome!


----------



## compur (Jan 5, 2017)

Speaking of resurrections, here is an interesting update from Film Ferrania:
FIRSTS!


----------



## Derrel (Jan 5, 2017)

cgw said:


> Don't know whether to laugh or cry at this news. Heard rumors back in the fall about Ektachrome returning but filed them in my "Tales from the Crypt" folder of longshot resurrections. Absolutely no pro lab-quality E6 service left in Toronto. All that survives are several "artisanal" JOBO basement/garage part-time/infrequent labs. Hoping the Kodak news encourages some labs to revive slide processing this year. Fingers crossed for 120 Ekta!



Looked up "E-6 processing in Portland, OR"...pretty confident about these labs, have used them before for years. Citizens has been here for decades.

What about Kodak's famous *pre-paid mailers*? I expect that this is a likely add-on feature...envelopes one can buy that you just drop the film in, seal, and mail away, with the processed slides sent back to the address one wrote on the mailer. 

Pre-paid slide processing mailers were  always a reallllllly handy way to ensure good processing, at a known price, from a reputable and well-equipped, well-run facility wthat had good people, chemicals,and procedures for film develop and slide mounting. I used these in the later days of my slide shooting: more convenient than lab drop-off, return home, lab run, return home.


----------



## Derrel (Jan 5, 2017)

compur said:


> Speaking of resurrections, here is an interesting update from Film Ferrania:
> FIRSTS!



And just LOOK at that cheap-as-he((, bargain basement reloadable film cartridge...with the fuzz at the top, and a thread at the bottom of the film...jeezis...talk about SHODDY bulk-loading procedures and equipment...

first12exp.jpg

I mean LOOK at that massive fuzz-tuft at the top! What is this? A 100-times used 1985 Goldstar cartridge??? Wow! Are the felt lips also filled with pocket-lint and purse-sand?


----------



## cgw (Jan 5, 2017)

Mailers were a PITA in Canada. I got spoiled by fast, affordable, high-quality E-6 service that deteriorated as demand slumped into slow, pricey, inconsistent E-6 service. The collapse of local/regional lab services was very uneven across N. America but survivals were usually far out-numbered by fatalities. Hopefully, this commitment by Kodak to E-6 materials will encourage lab owners to rethink mothballing their E-6 lines. Volume just might bring something of the 90s back again.

Agree that Film Ferrania seems more like a mirage as promises--not product--appear to be all they can crank out.


----------



## Derrel (Jan 5, 2017)

cgw said:
			
		

> Mailers were a PITA in Canada. I got spoiled by fast, affordable, high-quality E-6 service that deteriorated as demand slumped into slow, pricey, inconsistent E-6 service. The collapse of local/regional lab services was very uneven across N. America but survivals were usually far out-numbered by fatalities. Hopefully, this commitment by Kodak to E-6 materials will encourage lab owners to rethink mothballing their E-6 lines. Volume just might bring something of the 90s back again.



You've detailed the end of the era pretty well, cgw. Let us hope that some decent E-6 proicessing solutions crop up.

Found this little *timeline of color photography*  link while looking for my old E-6 lab from Eugene, Oregon...lab is gone.

PHOTOGRAPHIC RESOURCE CENTER at boston university


----------



## KmH (Jan 5, 2017)

Don't hold your breath waiting for Kodachrome.


----------



## Derrel (Jan 5, 2017)

KmH said:


> Don't hold your breath waiting for Kodachrome.



Kodachrome likely will NEVER make it back...the processing is just too complex. Kodachrome was 1937 technology...E-6 is just fine,fine,fine.


----------



## Gary A. (Jan 5, 2017)




----------



## 480sparky (Jan 6, 2017)

Derrel said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> > Don't hold your breath waiting for Kodachrome.
> ...



I've lost count of the number of times I've heard someone say they're going to reverse-engineer K-14.  They're all fired up about it, probably because they think it's as simple as C-41 or E-6.

Then, they disappear off the face of the planet.


----------



## Peeb (Jan 6, 2017)

Gary A. said:


>


Ironically- they took his kodachrome away....


----------



## 480sparky (Jan 6, 2017)

Peeb said:


> Gary A. said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...



But his mama didn't.............


----------



## Gary A. (Jan 6, 2017)

Peeb said:


> Gary A. said:
> 
> 
> >
> ...


LOL ... they took everybody's Kodachrome away.


----------



## SoulfulRecover (Jan 9, 2017)

looks like they are looking into what it would take to bring it back:

Kodak 'Investigating What it Would Take' to Bring Back Kodachrome


----------



## cgw (Jan 9, 2017)

Kodak can count on the Ektachrome halo effect unless or until it walks back the film's roll-out. Q4 is a way away. A Kodachrome revival does seem far-fetched, given the mechanical/chemical complexity of processing a material they axed due to low/no demand, more so than its E-6 stock. Kodak execs can be excused an unguarded CES comment.


----------



## Dave442 (Jan 9, 2017)

I am not holding my breath. The end of year proposed release date makes it sound like it will never happen. I see Kodak mentioned this film for the Super 8 camera (which was announced early last year and still have seen nothing) and I would think they would want the film out before the Super 8 so the still camera people could help build up some business for processing labs for Ektachrome.

The old projector, an empty 80 slide carousel and a stack loader are sitting in the bottom of a closet, don't have a slide sorting table these days. 

The Kodak mailers were excellent, would arrive back home from the trip and the slides would already be there.  I expect it was Paul Simon's mom that wanted to take his Kodachrome away as she was the one buying all those expensive Mailers.


----------



## snowbear (Jan 9, 2017)

Now, if only they would bring back the mailer packs (and the lab on Choke Cherry Road) for those of us that can't process E6.


----------



## Derrel (Jan 9, 2017)

GOTTA' HAVE a guaranteed way to get E-6 slide film rolls developed and mounted. The film is almost useless without a good, solid lab to soup the film, and to mount it, properly and well, in 35mm plastic slide mounts. AS cgw mentioned earlier, 'artisanal JOBO labs' just will not cut the mustard. Bringing back mailers seems to me to be an absolutely necessary first step to selling any of this film in any volume. I have an Ektagraphic carousel projector and four 140 slide trays still filled, and two 80-slide trays, and thousands of boxed slides, PLUS my granddad's projector and his 35mm slides from 1953-1976. In fact, about two months ago, I saw slides of ME as a baby and toddler, *for the first time! *Kodachrome slides, of me, some 54 and 53 years ago! Colors looked good!


----------



## jcdeboever (Jan 9, 2017)

SoulfulRecover said:


> looks like they are looking into what it would take to bring it back:
> 
> Kodak 'Investigating What it Would Take' to Bring Back Kodachrome


They will, I called Jeff Clarke and gave him an offer he couldn't refuse.


----------

