[ARC5] WW II Aircraft factory pictures

[Peter Gottlieb]

 From someone with a high level connection to Kodak I heard it came down to 
economics.  Sure, environmental regulations plays a part of that, but I suspect 
the collapsing consumer demand was the key driver.

I used to do E6 upstairs in the student center darkroom.  Kodachrome processing 
chemicals were available but it was something like a 14 step process with very 
tight temperature and pH demands so not at all practical for manual use.

On a consumer scale the immediacy of digital, the cost savings, the ability to 
more easily share have made film processing a niche service.  The problems with 
digital that you mention will be solved (and to some extent are with cloud storage).

What about radio?  Will SDR replace analog?


On 2/17/2013 12:52 PM, J. Forster wrote:
> My understanding is the rise of the EPA was a big part of the issue. They
> all but killed E-4 and E-6. Probably Kodachrome also.
>
> I do not think that 'going digital' will eventually be seen as a 'good
> thing'. You can still get something from even a faded picture, but not
> from an ureadable HD or Flash card..
>
> -John
>
> ====================
>
>
>
>
>
>> ----- 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
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 10.0.1430 / Virus Database: 2639/5610 - Release Date: 02/17/13
>
>