Kodachrome - Richness in Muted Colors

<p>I hope I am not duplicating something that has been discussed in other recent Kodachrome threads, but here goes. While Kodachrome does shine with bright colors, I find that it renders a real richness in muted colors as well, such as in the example shown below (and in other examples here http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a314/jamesmck/Kodachrome%20-%20Antietam/11A-700.jpg and here http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a314/jamesmck/Kodachrome%20-%20Antietam/10A-700.jpg). All of these are of the Piper Barn at the Antietam National Battlefield (http://www.nps.gov/ancm/index.htm), taken on K64 with a Bessa R and CV 35/2.5 Color Skopar lens. Got any good examples of this kind of richness?</p><div></div>

<p>Yeah that's been my view too both from reading books off the older books off like Galen Rowell and John Shaw and having seen my own Kodachrome slides. I call it the classical look. But when you look at Galen or John's more modern books they look so much more modern and saturated when they used Fuji Velvia. Maybe that's a reason people's taste changed over time.</p>

<p>Look forward to other's views.</p>

<p>Now, it's, "Mama, don't take my Velvia away."</p>

<p>The "richness" of slightly underexposed Kodachrome was always known to the aficionados, but it doesn't hurt to reminisce about it, (sob).</p>

<p>Many people used to shoot the original Kodachrome (ASA 10) at EI 12. Similarly, lots of people also shot Kodachrome II and 25 at EI 32 just to get that look.</p>

<p>Here's some saturated Kodachrome II or 25.</p><div></div>

<p>Kodachrome 25 exposed at EI 40. These aren't really muted colors but Kodachrome does give this vintage airplane a vintage look!</p><div></div>

<p>In response to the OP's photo, I think that the photo is a bit over-exposed, thus is a bit under-saturated and isn't showing the typical Kodachrome color palette. If you look at the shadows on the roof, you can see that the sun is on the opposite side of the building. To get a reasonable exposure for the shadow side of the building, the photo is probably at least a stop above the highlights. Usually Kodachrome's greens aren't as bright as the leaves on the left side.</p>

<p>Curtis, the 707 prototype was actually called the 367-80 by Boeing. This was before they had a name for the commercial variant. When the plane was first rolled out of the factory to the public in 1954, it was called the 367-80, and thus nicknamed the "Dash 80" from then on. The 707 was heavily modified from the original design, the body made wider for six-abreast seating, and eventually given a new wing and longer body for higher capacity.</p>

<p>James,</p>

<p>Not sure I follow you from your example. It suffers from a strong green cast as seen on my monitor.</p>

<p>Robin - Maybe this one http://i14.photobucket.com/albums/a314/jamesmck/Kodachrome%20-%20Antietam/11A-700.jpg that I linked in the original post is a better example of what I meant. These are economy scans from Dwayne's, which I'm sure could be better.</p>