[ARC5] WW II Aircraft factory pictures

[Bob Macklin]

My memory of Kodachrome says that Kodachrome was only processed by Kodak 
labs?

I have been using Exctachrome for slides for may years. Still have 6 rolls 
in the fridge.

Bob Macklin
K5MYJ
Seattle, Wa.
"Real Radios Glow In The Dark"
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Richard Knoppow" <1oldlens1 at ix.netcom.com>
To: <jfor at quikus.com>; "Christopher Bowne" <aj1g at sbcglobal.net>
Cc: <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>; "Clare Owens" <clare.owens at gmail.com>
Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2013 9:40 AM
Subject: Re: [ARC5] WW II Aircraft factory pictures


>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "J. Forster" <jfor at quikus.com>
> To: "Christopher Bowne" <aj1g at sbcglobal.net>
> Cc: <arc5 at mailman.qth.net>; "Clare Owens" <clare.owens at gmail.com>
> Sent: Sunday, February 17, 2013 8:57 AM
> Subject: Re: [ARC5] WW II Aircraft factory pictures
>
>
>> That's why the demise of Kodachrome was so lamented. It was a far more
>> stable process than the Kodacolor (C-41) process, used in the 'drug 
>> store'
>> labs for 30 odd years.
>>
>> -John
>
>     There was  more: Partly it was the color rendition of Kodachrome and 
> partly the nearly grainless images.
>     All multiple layer color films are very complex but Kodacrome got 
> around a problem by putting some of the complexity into the processing 
> steps.  Kodacrhome requires four development steps while color negative 
> film requires only one and modern color reversal film requires two.  At 
> about the same time as Kodachrome was released to the public as 16mm 
> motion picture film (1935) AGFA in Germany was able to produce a "modern" 
> type of color film. However it was never made available to the American 
> market.  Quite a lot of this film has survived. This is all rather off 
> topic here but those interested in the history of color films can find 
> quite a lot on the web.
>     The demise of Kodachrome was only partly due to the general swing from 
> chemical photography to digital or electronic photography; Kodak had been 
> trying to kill it off for years due to its difficult processing. 
> Photographers who shoot stock photos particularly miss it due to its 
> excellent archival properties.
>     There was a difference in the method AGFA and Kodak used in 
> "sequestering" the dye intermediates used in Agfacolor and Kodacolor (not 
> needed in Kodachrome). Both methods were used for decades but it appears 
> that the AGFA method is the one currently used.
>
>
> --
> Richard Knoppow
> Los Angeles
> WB6KBL
> dickburk at ix.netcom.com
> ______________________________________________________________
> ARC5 mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>