kodachrome

But people wanted E6 and C41 films, not Kodachrome. How fun or practical is it to have to wait 3 weeks to get the rolls back from development as has been the case for more than 10 years in my country? This is due to low volume and difficult processing. I can get E6 in a few hours, and the quality (especially grain and colour accuracy) is better than that of Kodachrome. Kodak stopped the development of Kodachrome because people didn't want it, while E6 films had much room for growth.

John Wire

 

For cinema, negative film is being used. It is typically lower in contrast than still negative film and the latest films have huge latitude, they also have subdued colors when compared to still film.

The slower ones are quite good in resolution, as high-end post production houses report from their tests that detail can be seen even beyond 4K, which is about 4200dpi,and their resolution is closer to 5K.

 

Very little reversal is used in cinema. There was this film called "Buffalo 66" which was shot on an old outdated reversal process called VNF-something (now discontinued due to environmental issues), that I can remember. Currently there is only one Kodak 35mm E-6 film for motion pictures, it's Ektachrome 100D, could be compared to E100VS, but not quite the same. Sometimes it is used for commercials and stuff like that.

Fuji was making Velvia in 16mm for some time, but I think not anymore.

 

Who processes Kodachrome for motion pictures? Don't know

<I>"How fun or practical is it to have to wait 3 weeks to get the rolls back from development as has been the case for more than 10 years in my country?"</I><P>It used to be different. Once demand began to drop Kodachrome processing started to take longer, which caused demand to drop further... a vicious circle which began when Kodak decided not to support Kodachrome anymore. In fact, Kodak developed a Kodachrome minilab in the 1990's. That could have made Kodachrome processing as ubiquitous as E-6, but they chose not to market it.<P><I>"...the quality (especially grain and colour accuracy) </I>(of E-6)<I> is better than that of Kodachrome."</i><P>That's because Kodachrome still uses 1970's technology! Until the early '90's Kodachrome had far and away the best grain and color fidelity of any slide film, even with 15-20 year old technology. It still would, had Kodak continued to support it.<P>It's true that Kodak stopped the development of Kodachrome because people didn't want it, but the reason people didn't want it was because Kodak had already cut back on support. Once the process started (and left the door wide open for Velvia) it was too late to stop it.<P>

 

I'm sure these looked like smart choices to Kodak at the time, but they sure lost a lot of money in the 1990's! And as all those E-6 and C-41 images fade away we'll lose a lot of great photography from the 10-15 year period between the end of the Kodachrome age and the start of the digital age.<P>Of course the process continues... soon our only choices will be Kodak Max or digital. We can only hope digital will have matured by then.<P>Karl Lehmann <a href="http://www.lostworldarts.com/new_page_3.htm">Lost World Arts</a>

Edgar, thanks for the info. Curious, are you going to try a roll of Kodachrome before it's gone? Regards.

About the future of Lausanne lab... I shoot also S8 and there has been a lot of discussion about Kodachrome on S8 message boards. As far as I know Lausanne will stop at the end of next year (2006). Check:

 

http://www.hi-beam.net/fw/fw29/0294.html

 

Ilkka... How fun is it to wait 3 weeks... I'm ready to wait if that is the way to get great results. For me it is not very long time since the whole process (planning, traveling, shooting etc.) takes much longer. When it comes to photography I think of months and years, not days... BUT I do understand very well that in business there is no way to wait for 3 weeks or so.

 

Kodachrome has survived years and years without any promotion and updating... Somebody must have be shooting & loving it.

Kodachrome is a great Film, and I've neve had to wait three weeks. My Wal-Mart is averaging a 6 day turnaround. Now granted for many things that is too long. I'v found I'm shooting less and less k64, It's been more or less replaced with Astia and RSXII 100. I also love EPR when I can geta good deal on it. K200 though has a look all it's own. Imagine a color film with the shrpness ans grain of Say tri-X. Now it sure can't be my only 200 speed slide film. Pushing it is out of the question, and I can't always wait six days. So that is where RSXII 200 comes in. Nothing loks like k200 though, and I'll shoot it as long a sit is around. Try a coupel rolls, you may love it, you may hate it. I'm not one of those to preach Kodachrome as the only film to use, but it has a charm all to itself.

Karl;

 

Demand fell off long before Kodak reduced or eliminated development on new Kodachrome products.

 

I have mentioned before that a superb 400 speed Kodachrome was ready for release with quite modern technology, but there was no interest generated in it when it was trade trialed, and sales of the other Kodachrome films were decreasing at a rapid rate. What other option did Kodak have?

 

With sales going down, labs had to close. If they don't run 24/7, the process goes out of control and you lose customers by ruining their pictures.

 

I said before that this forum may have a very large portion of the worlds remaining Kodachrome lovers. I am beginning to believe my words after reading all of this. In general, sales of all reversal films have fallen off much more than those of negative film sales.

 

Ron Mowrey

Almost everything <a href="http://mineisnodisgrace.com/">here</a> is Kodachrome. Mostly 200, some 200 pushed to 500, a little 64.<P>

 

But yeah, the best thing would be to get your hands on some and try it out for yourself.