> But I can't take a tripod with me skiing....:)) > (Kodak HIE with #87C is an even larger pest, at an effective 12 ASA) Do not forget, at one time, Kodachrome had an ASA of 8 to 12, depending on the film type and the meter. For example, Weston Vs. GE. Many great slides were produced using these slow films and in all lighting conditions. > Just look at what generation of automotive emissions they allow in > brand-new plants....all 10-20 years behind on US/EU. The effluents produced mean absolutely nothing. How they are handled is all that matters. Well, the laws apply as well. Do not assume just because a process produces by-products they will not be properly taken care of. All new plants producing Kodachrome would meet the required standards. > But: the argument of toxic/carcinogenic waste is mooth, as long as > Kodak still makes at least 1 type/size of Kodachrome. It is "moot" because all plants making the stuff would follow the laws and regulations. > I doubt any essential Kodachrome patent is younger than 20 > years....after which there *is* no patent left. And you are sure about this? Bob
