How did the "Original" Kodachrome hold up to KII?

[tfunch24]

I have a roll of Kodachrome II that I bought in a thrift shop. Someone filmed about half of it, and I filmed the other half of it as a lark, knowing full well that the odds were against me in getting any kind of image. I'm not sure if I want to send it off to Rocky Mountain Film Lab or not--it's a lot of money for film that may or may not come out. RMFL does not refund your money, no matter what the results.

So was the sequel really better than the original? It's impossible for me to tell, as RMFL develops the film as a b&w negative and transfers it to video. What advantage did it have over the original Kodachrome? Any disadvantages?

Tom

[BK]

Hello Tom,

Had the same experience, except with K40 that was sitting in a Canon 518 that I bought at the flea market. I was surprised when the film came back from Switzerland, seeing shots of some lady getting out of her car, and then the same lady hanging up her washing, it all came out very well, no colour or exposure shift at all. From the clothing and the model of the car I can tell it's the late 70's, however, the remaining 20 feet or so that I shot was all under exposed, flat colours due to the age of the film. I had another roll of K40 which came with another camera I got from a secondhand shop, the camera must have been stored next to a heater or something the complete roll was "clear" It's the worst roll that I have had from these secondhand cameras. So again,it all depends how the film was stored, under what enviornment.

I don't think it's worthwhile for you to send it to RMFL to get your KII processed, like you say, you just don't know whether anything will come out. It's a little too expensive to find out unless it has some personal or historic value.

Regarding the KII, I remember when Kodak replaced it with K40 and some member at the cine club actually wrote to "Kodak" and the British magazine "Movie Maker "and complained about how crap the new stock is, washed out highlights, less contrast, colour saturation. Remembering seeing some old movies that I have on KII and I agree it does look richer. Wonder why KII was replaced? Financial reason or enviornmental ??? What stock was before KII? Was it just K25?

Bill

[tfunch24]

Kodak dumped KII because the chemicals needed to develop the stock were extremely toxic and very, very dangerous.

The film's "process by" date is May 1969. Odds are nothing will come of it, so I don't think I'll bother processing it. Seeing an old home movie of someone opening birthday presents followed by some faded underexposed foggy shots of myself riding a bike through the woods is not worth paying the $$$ to have it developed.

Tom

[Angus]

I recently (this month) had a K25 (same K14 process as K40) std8mm reel with a proceess before date of 1978 returned and apart from perhaps 1/2 - 1 stop underexposure it was perfect! The film was exposed in April this year.

RMFL won't refund you because the cost to them is the same regardless of whether you get any pictures, they use the same chemicals and lab time.

Yep, KII was discontinued in 1973 due to the Environmental Protection Agency putting pressure on Kodak to stop use of certain chemicals which were polluting and dangerous. I am not sure of the identity of these chemicals, but for their use to be banned in 1973 they must have been pretty horrible.

Kodak finally stopped offering KII processing in 1982 or 1983, some 10 years after the actual film was discontinued and at least 7 years after the final rolls would have expired.

I inherited 5 hours of 8mm KII from my grandfather, and I have to say it looks fantastic even though most of it was shot 35 years ago. I would say, subjectively, that it has finer grain than today's K40 and slightly better colours but obviously I am comparing a daylight stock with a tungsten stock + filter.

[MovieStuff]

I inherited 5 hours of 8mm KII from my grandfather

I would say, subjectively, that it has finer grain than today's K40 and slightly better colours

Agreed. KII was, in my opinion, superior in every way to the present Kodachrome. Much finer grain and the colors of KII were not as overly saturated to the point that reds would bleed and the skin tones always had a nice, organic matte quality to them instead of the plastic reddish look so often associated with today's Kodachrome. In all, I wish KII were still around though I certainly understand why they dropped such a toxic process. Ironically, today's Kodachrome isn't really a huge improvement, environmentally; ust a different set of poisons but, back then, they were a set of poisons that the EPA didn't care about. ;)

Roger

[studiocarter]

http://www.8mm.filmshooting.com/scripts ... phy.super8

It is being sold by J. Schwind, but, where and how would one get it processed? Especially in the UK?

[filmbuff]

I inherited 5 hours of 8mm KII from my grandfather, and I have to say it looks fantastic even though most of it was shot 35 years ago. I would say, subjectively, that it has finer grain than today's K40 and slightly better colours but obviously I am comparing a daylight stock with a tungsten stock + filter.

I have 6 Kodachrome II carts unopened and they are all Tungsten balanced. I am pretty sure Kodak never put a daylight balanced Kodachrome film into a Super 8 cart.

[studiocarter]

Send it to the Switzerland address on your mailer. I think the UK address
may be closed but you would have to check.

Mr Schwind's answer,
Thank you

I no longer have a S8 mailer so if someone could confirm the address from John Schwind's linked pages being:

Kodak Photo Service SA
1 Avenue de Longemalle
CH-1020 Renens
Lausanne
Switzerland

Telephone (41) 21 631 0111

Include a credit card number and a return address?

[Angus]

I inherited 5 hours of 8mm KII from my grandfather, and I have to say it looks fantastic even though most of it was shot 35 years ago. I would say, subjectively, that it has finer grain than today's K40 and slightly better colours but obviously I am comparing a daylight stock with a tungsten stock + filter.

I have 6 Kodachrome II carts unopened and they are all Tungsten balanced. I am pretty sure Kodak never put a daylight balanced Kodachrome film into a Super 8 cart.

I'm sure you are correct.

The KII I talked about was standard 8mm spools, and as far as I know that would have been daylight stock. Not having actually being alive then i can't be sure but I'd imagine it was the KII equivalent of K25.