Kodachrome regret?

When I look at old pictures that are throwaways and nothing more, I wince more if they happen to be Kodachrome. Gee, I think, I wasted that precious stuff on nonsense. Anyone else look at old slides with feelings like this?

Interesting! I guess I 'd regret the Kodachrome way more, if I 'd discover a stunning keeper I 'd want to scan on it. - I shot some, but my allowance bought me more frames on Tura Chrome E6 stock.

I go through and occasionally ask myself "Why did I take this picture?" Quality is generally fine, but it doesn't quite make sense with the rest of the box.

I go through and occasionally ask myself "Why did I take this picture?" Quality is generally fine, but it doesn't quite make sense with the rest of the box.

 

Often those shots are at the end of the roll, when you were rushing.

There are often, very often, last shots on the roll, but I have also discovered in scanning and manipulating in PS, that there were features in the slide that were visible to the human eye, presumably, that were beyond the capabilities and range of Kodachrome, as great as it was. Don't be too quick to throw things away.

I still shoot a fair bit of E6 and look at photos shot only 2 weeks before and ask myself "Why?" ... especially with wide angle shots, for some reason (maybe the detail is lost in the wide field of view ...?)

 

BTW, I did discover on my trip to India in April that Velvia 50 captures the colors of India beautifully! I always thought of it as a film just for fall colors, not people.

When I was younger, my dad shot Kodachrome.

 

Then about 1975 when I started shooting slides, I started with Ektachrome, and

I think he mostly switched about that time.

 

Then in college years, I had some Unicolor E6 kits, just at the time E6 arrived.

 

Some part of me misses Kodachrome just because it isn't available now, but mostly

I am happy enough that Ektachrome is available. I could also miss E4 Ektachrome,

but not so much.

 

Unless I know of a specific shot that I could have taken instead, I normally

don't think about the waste of film.

Like others, I often finished off the last few frames of a roll of Kodachrome so I could get it sent off for processing as soon as possible. Many years later I've started looking at those slides again in hopes that I may find an interesting image or two. For the longest time I mostly shot Kodachrome 64 with an occasional roll of the 25, but other films were beginning to interest me. I show several rolls of short dated Fujichrome R100 with Fuji processing included and found that I really liked it. What really cut down on my Kodachrome usage was the introduction of Kodak's Ektachrome 400. But I came back to Kodachrome later when Kodachrome 200 was introduced.

I look at my uncles Kodachrome slides and they are still sharp.

Some part of me misses Kodachrome just because it isn't available now,

This is a hint as to what I think is going on: with the modern mindset, where Kodachrome is simply not available, we look back and forget that Kodachrome was quite ubiquitous and was always in stock. So if Kodachrome were available today, and if it were in limited supply, we would absolutely not want to be wasting a single frame of it.

(snip)

So if Kodachrome were available today, and if it were in limited supply, we would absolutely not want to be wasting a single frame of it.

 

But also if it was so easily available, as it used to be, we wouldn't wonder about it at all.

 

Reminds me that when I was young, and knew a little about the complications of processing

it compared to Ektachrome, of wondering why processing cost was the same.

 

The only roll I now remember, way buying a (recently) outdated roll of KR126 for a canoe trip,

along with a cheap Instamatic that I already had. It was sunny so I didn't worry about exposure,

and wouldn't feel so bad if it fell into the river. (It didn't.)

Honestly, I don't really get all the Kodachrome nostalgia. When I was a kid, colour negative film was the norm. People preferred prints to slideshows. As I got more into photography and I decided to experiment with reversal film, I immediately ruled out Kodachrome because of the requirement to send it away for processing. It somehow made me sceptical that it needed such a specialised process. So I've never shot a single frame on Kodachrome. But I wonder if it's really the memories - the contents of the photos - that conjure up the nostalgia, and not the actual film stock itself.

 

It's my understanding that the beginning of the end for Kodachrome was Fujifilm coming along with "better" emulsions - Velvia, Provia, Astia. I continue to shoot film in my Rolleiflex - Kodak Portra 400 is my film of choice - and I absolutely love the colours I get with it. I've never seen any Kodachrome image and thought it was better than what I can achieve still with Portra.

 

It would be nice if, along with all the discussion here, users posted some of their own favourite Kodachrome shots.

Kodachrome was rarely used by professionals because of the processing delay - unless you were one of the few pros that had rapid access to a Kodachrome line, like National Geographic staffers and stringers. Then there was the lack of availability in other than the piddling 35mm format.

 

So, pretty much only lauded in the enthusiasts' realm. I did shoot some for my own use. Nice fine 'grain' and neutral colouring, but worth the hassle of shooting at 25 ASA (K64? - not so great) and waiting 10 days + for the results? I tended to pass on that.

I took a lot of bad shots with Kodachrome just like I took a lot of bad shots with digital. It's the same for me. Back in the days if we didn't buy them the price would be higher.

All manner of things to regret about the past. Move on. My dad shot lots of Kodachrome and I shot my fair share. Under the right conditions it was great, but it was easy to blow out highlights and the results could be dark if you didn't. Fill flash must have been invented for Kodachrome. Nobody wants to see slides and I don't think I've pulled out my projector and screen in many decades.

Loved Kodachrome, so much better than Anscochrome. Slides and slideshows...right up there with home movies...all slightly behind those B&W TVs. All kidding aside, I did love Kodachrome. Yes there were processing delays, but until I began home processing, it was the same for my Verichrome Pan, Plus-X and Tri-X sots. I still have several trays of slides, mine and some of my father's from the late 1930s and early 1940s. About once every 2-3 years I haul out my projector and screen and immerse in the past. My daughter refuses to visit at those times, remembering my slideshows when her boyfriends came to visit. Now it is simply "put your stuff online"...same old stuff, but new photographers.

When I first started shooting paintings for artists my go-to film was Kodachrome Professional Type A--balanced for 3400 K, since I was shooting with tungsten lights. I used an 82A filter on the camera lens to compensate for 3200 K lights. The color was excellent and the artists, who knew what their colors looked like, were happy with the results. When I got studio flash I switched to Fuji slide film, because I didn't like Ektachrome color rendition and because Kodak processing of Kodachrome had become unreliable. Kodak pioneered 48 hour processing of slides and their labs were consistent and excellent until the late 1980's in the US. They even brought back Kodachrome 64 in 120 which I shot for clients until the processing time grew to two weeks from two days which was unacceptable for professional work. Then they sold off the processing operation to another company with far lower quality standards--a decision that could only make sense to an accountant. I date the decline and eventual fall of Kodak to that decision.

One thing I like about Kodachrome is my 50 year old Kodachrome slides have faded the least of other color and especially color prints. Knowing what I know know I wish I had shot more of it because of its permanence.

Faded slides?

This is what an old Agfachrome(?)

had become after over 50 years of non-too-careful storage -

 

And this is how much it could be restored using the curves and hue-sat tools in PS -

I'm not even convinced that this reached the limit of how far faded colour layers can be boosted, since there was no obvious posterisation in the histogram.

 

OK, I admit I colour-flooded the blank sky, but that was the only 'artificial' manipulation.

When I was young, there was a Kodak slide lab (it seems that the labs had specialties) almost on my dad's way to work.

 

Drop off in the morning, with "Will Call" on the mailer, pick up on the way home. One day service, and no mail costs.

 

Though the post office used to do mailers for the 2 ounce rate, no surcharge for the shape.

 

But viewing scanned slides on a big LCD TV is easier than getting out a slide projector.

 

I still don't have a digital projector.

 

You could almost recreate the old slide show with a digital projector, though.

click....click...click

(+ gentle snoring sounds in the warm darkness)

 

It's hard to recapture the past entirely, though.

click....click...click

(+ gentle snoring sounds in the warm darkness)

 

It's hard to recapture the past entirely, though.

There has never been a slide show (or a PowerPoint) that was too short...

JDMvW said

It's hard to recapture the past entirely, though.

Yes I've accepted that for many things, although I still enjoy buttermilk with crumbled cornbread in it as much as I did in my youth.

I have good scans of my favorite Kodachromes and although not the same as a slide projector, the images are easier to access at least.

Whether Kodachrome or B/W, genuinely successful pictures are hard to achieve. As G B Shaw noted, about the same chance as a salmon successfully mating upstream.

I shot a lot of Kodachrome. I also shot Ektachrome. Kodachromes still look great while Ektachromes have faded away.

For a while there was Kodachrome in 120. Projected slides were overwhelming when compared with the still fantastic 35mm slides.

Living only about an hour’s driving from Kodak processing lab, could get film processed and back in one day. Not to mention Super 8.

Sadly none of this will come back. Although a favorite of professionals and serious amateurs, manufacturing depended on the huge numbers of vacationers. They now use phone or digital capture.

One thing I like about Kodachrome is my 50 year old Kodachrome slides have faded the least of other color and especially color prints. Knowing what I know know I wish I had shot more of it because of its permanence.

I did shoot some Kodachromes but don't know where they are. Then I shot Ektachrome which make up most of my 35mm. I would have slide shows all the time. Then I discovered Velvia 50 and haven;t looked back once I started shooting medium format and now 4x5.

 

My father in laws Kodachrome shots from 50 years ago. Amazing how the colors held up.