[LRflex] Kodachrome and Dr. Ted.

At 6/23/2009, you wrote:

David offered:
>>> And, to my surprise, I then heard the dulcet tones of our own Dr. Ted, being interviewed about the loss of Kodachrome to photographers! Naturally, I had to pull over and listen to the rest of the interview.
>>> Ted: I have only one argument with your comments. You said it was "impossible" for anyone to home develop Kodachrome. Not true. I have been in the darkroom of a chap who was probably the only guy in North America, to do it, but I've seen it done. (And yes, I have a witness!) Back in the early 1970's, I interviewd him for Modern Photography, an article which was never published. He lived in Nanaimo and, some day, I'll tell you the whole story.<<<<<<<<< 

Good day David,
My comment saying it was "impossible" to home process Kodachrome still stands! Certainly on the bases of "it wasn't something one could drop by their favourite photo store" pick-up chemicals and soup the KR in their basement darkroom on a regular basis.
Your experience was quite unique indeed. As my understanding is, "kodachrome processing chemicals" are quite toxic and not really what any amateur or pro would want to be fiddling with on a daily basis.
In point, when the Commonwealth Games were held in Victoria in '94 the local city environment people near freaked out that used chemistry was going to be flushed out the regular sewer system. So it created a major problem for Kodak and the Games organizing committee, not to forget all the photogs who would be shooting KR. So an arrangement was made that all used chemicals of any nature would be tanker trucked away to an environmental safe dump site.
You may have had the opportunity and good fortune to see it done in a personal darkroom. But I bet the local sewer system people didn't know the chemicals were being poured down the drain. So my dear friend my comment still stands as "it isn't a film and chemistry that was regularly used by photogs as we did B&W films." And yes I'll stick with "it's impossible" for home processing on the bases of mass processing by regular everyday amateurs and pros.
I'd be interested in hearing how the chap got the chemicals from KODAK in the first place? 


Good Mornin' Ted!
How did the chap get his chemicals from Kodak? Well, for the most part, he didn't.
The chemistry to develop Kodachrome was, apparently, well known. No "trade secrets" there. However, Kodak sold very few of the chemicals in "consumer" quantities. He told me the problem was not in obtaining the chemicals, but in obtaining them in other than 50 gallon (190 liter) drums! For many of them, a small jam jar's worth would be a lifetime supply - for him. Many were purchased from Fisher Scientific, while others came from School Chem-Lab supply firms in the US. He said that it took him nearly 6 years to trace down all the required chemicals in small quantities.
Whilst these chemicals are certainly bad for the environment, he didn't believe any of them were "toxic"... at least not to the degree that he felt the need to wear rubber gloves when working with them. (Remember, your Commonwealth Games experience was in 1994. This story dates back to between 1969 and 1972, when the environment was not thought about,as it is today.)
He didn't shot 35mm, but 16mm Kodachrome movies. He'd built all the necessary machinery out of wood and, I must say, it was beautifully made. He told me that when his wife invited people over for an evening, who he didn't really care for, he'd shoot home movies of them arriving, and then disappear into the darkroom, emerging some hours later to show them the footage of their arrival, just before they left!
The sad part is that over 40 years, many moves and one divorce, his name, my photos of him and his darkroom; as well as the draft of my still unpublished article have all been lost. Now, only the memories remain.
So, "impossible"? No. Exceedingly difficult, environmentally risky and just plain stupid? Yes.
But, after Dwayne's Photo (the Kansas lab is the world's only remaining Kodachrome processor) gives up processing it, sometime after the end of 2010, it will still be possible, if not practical, for the few remaining Kodachrome fans to use up their freezers full of film! They'd just better be sure their town fathers don't know their doing it! 


On another note! J
The Blue Bird is without question beautiful! An excellent photo. Good on you. That has to become a "Weekend Fair" best seller for bird folks. 
Dr. ted. J
Thanks, Ted. I don't feel it's as good as my offering from last week ... and now that I look at yesterday's "take", in the light of day and after a good night's sleep, I think I may have better ones to show. Watch this space! 

Cheers!

---
David Young
Logan Lake, BC

Wildlife Photos: www.furnfeather.net
Rodeo Photos: www.galleries.furnfeather.net
Personal Website: www.main.furnfeather.net

Other related posts: