Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/06/21
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Ben Holmes wrote: > > K-14 is an environmental nightmare! Some of the chemicals are just flat out > poison - sodium cyanide being one. Go back and look up the cost to clean up > Rochester and you'll understand. A fine E 6 line can be had for $250,000US > or less, Kodak's attempts to market their mini K-14 line several years ago > at $1,000,000.00+ was a flop for this reason. It is a fact that Kodachrome > use is down each and every year since the sixties. When you consider the > quality of the Fuji E-6 emulsions, and those of the E-100s makes using > Kodachrome somewhat silly. I say let it die. > > Regards, > > Ben W. Holmes > Boulder, CO Almost any chemical, no matter how toxic you wish to make it sound, can be managed with today's technology without creating the environmental nightmares you wish to conjure up. I seriously doubt that there is anything any worse in the Kodachrome scenario than what goes into the manufacture of automobiles and the petroleum products that they need to run. Do you wish to let our petroleum based transportation die also? If so then lead the way by getting rid of your car(s)! E-6 films have their place in the palette of tools we photographers have at our disposal but Kodachrome has many desirable aesthetic and technical qualities that the E-6 films can only attempt to emulate. Fortunately, Kodak's production of the previously mentioned K-14 minilabs (which have been pictured in photographic magazines) show that others are taking a more reasoned and less emotional approach. Mike Gardner