Kodachrome

[andy m.]

I love Kodachrome too Gerard. A lovely film, and a lot cheaper than "digital" too ;-) Thanks for sharing.

[jean_.]

I don't know what everybody is complainng about kodachrome scanning, it scans fine in my scanner, a rfs 3600, a scanner that has only mediocre reputation.. I just think that a lot of common wisdom found on the net is not really based on facts, but just repeating of things that were stated someplace.

[samuel_dilworth]

I haven't bought any Kodachrome in several months because I'm trying to wean

myself off it before it disappears. Superb stuff, lovely rich colours (even higher red

saturation than Velvia, but without the colour contrast), and beautiful grain structure.

It's very high contrast, but that's useful sometimes. Its scanning characteristics don't

concern me. I wasn't aware the lab in Lausanne had that sort of commitment to

developing the film, but it's reassuring to know that processing might be available for

a useful time after the film's discontinuation. I'll be making an order shortly.

 

I must admit I haven't the slightest sympathy for the current state of Kodak (the

company). It has betrayed its customers too many times. Tri-X is decent, but I'd much

rather support a company that respects its customer base, so I now use HP5.

[terry_rory]

Another Scott Eaton classic! Whoosh in, dump all over the place then whoosh out again. The only impression he ever leaves is a Scott shaped hole in the forum wall and a strong bitter smell. The impression he would like to leave is that of a genius who has graced us with his infinite wisdom and helped us in our pitiful confusion but he never knows how to quite pull that one off.

 

It has always amused me how this guy always comments on the habits and equipment of 'real professionals' but never from the perspective of being a pro himself. It seems to me that Scott is a frustrated wannabee pro. I have NEVER seen him write anything beginning with.. "in my own experience as a professional I can say....."

 

Heck, I am a wannabee frustrated amateur but I haven't let the frustration turn me bitter. Its all fun whether I succeed or not. I love doing what I do and I love learning things from people who inspire. Scott will never inspire anyone with his extensive knowledge of film, paper, process and digital all the time he bludgeons people in the way we have just witnessed.

 

I think Gerard wrote a very informative and heartfelt piece for us here. I dont use Kodachrome but I feel better informed after Gerard's insight. Thankyou.

 

Gerard, I dont know if you have come across Scott Eaton before but please dont be discouraged from posting like this again. He attacks everyone from the very knowledgable to (worst of all) complete newcomers with equal gusto.

[__jon__]

>Scott Eaton , jun 22, 2004; 03:29 p.m.

 

Hey look, the king of drive-by trolling! Don't worry, old "beatin' Eaton" won't respond.... back to whatever rock you climbed out from, raisin sac.

 

Thanks for the post, Gerard. I hope Kodak keeps KC around...

[Karim Ghantous]

I used to shoot Kodachrome as it was the best value slide film around. Now I prefer Ektachrome and Fujichrome as they have finer grain. Even when Ektachrome Elite 100 first came out it had finer grain than K25. Mind you EE100 should really be exposed at ISO 80.

[Aoresteen]

Gerard,

 

A great write up! Thanks! Perhaps some forum member who lives near Fairlawn NJ could tour the Kodak lab and give us the lowdown on how Qualex does K-14.

 

I think it is a great idea to talk about Kodak transfering the Kodachrome technology to another company. If K25 were available again I would buy it in 100 roll lots and would not mind shipping it to Lausanne to be processed. I would also buy K25 in 120 rolls in 100 roll lots. Please make K25 in 120!!!

 

DuPont did the same thing with the ADOX film formulas, transfering them to EFKE and we still can get this wonderfull B&W film in many formats, 127 & 620 included

 

Attached is a picture of me that my Dad took in Sep 1960 with a Contaflex Super, 50mm f/2.8 Tessar when we were living in Honduras. The quick scan doesn't do it justice; it still projects well.<div></div>

[feli]

>"Oh really? When did allah drop from heaven and grant you this devine insight that your

>Leica is superior to a 16mp capture back? Oh, I forgot {shucks} You own a Ger-muhn

>camera and we own Jap-Pa-nese cameras! All those magnificient images in your

>portfolio superior to 16mp capture backs are just so much better than mine. "

 

I guess you have never seen a drum scanned K64 or K25 slide, that was shot with modern

Leica glass on a tripod...

 

Feli

[stephen_persky]

Btw, I have gotten some good information from Scott Eaton. On the whole he gotten a tad sour lately. I don't know why people take this digital vs film so personally. On another hand, people take Leica vs other brands very personally. You can tell that Scott Eaton post was not based in fact, just a personal rebuttal for some apparent insult.

 

You can tell show me that Canon or Nikon is better than Leica. I do not get upset. I think each person has different methods/equipment of getting good results. I just want to enjoy good pictures.

[jack_lo_..._t_o]

When I first joined PN, way, way back in 2002, Scott was a regular dive -bomber on this forum. Say something nice about the Leitz product and he would come swooping down fom Canon-Land, or Nikon City, or wherever he lives, drop a whole bunch of smelly verbal turds, and return to the sky.

 

There is a change in the reaction though, and it's all for the better. People didn't take him too seriously, answering word for word, and letting his negativity take over the thread. Rather pointing out with humour and surprise that he's out of line.

 

This forum seems to be coming back. More and more interesting threads, it seems. Beauty.

[jack_lo_..._t_o]

Oh yeah, by the way, Scott's a pretty damn good photographer.

[rolfe_tessem]

For what it's worth, I still have about 50 rolls of K25 in my freezer and enjoy using it on appropriate subjects. I'm not happy that A&I has discontinued their Kodachrome line, but I'll continue to send Kodachrome to Kodak as long as feasible.

 

I would like to think that as long as there is demand for Kodachome, there will be at least a single source for processing. I think this is possible, since it is apparently easy to manufacture -- the processing is the only hangup.

[rolfe_tessem]

A favorite Kodachrome scan<div></div>

[Troll]

When Kodachrome I was discontinued, a small company called MacGregorColor took it over and provided processing. It was just as good, if not better and just as archival, than the origninal product. Unfortunately, at that time processing was included with the price of Kodachrome film and MacGregor only lasted a couple of years. I see no reason why the same couldn't be done with the current Kodachrome product when (not IF) Kodak discontinues it.

[ronald_moravec1]

First goes Kodachrome, then E 6 was king reguardless of quality. Speed counts. Now most of the E6 labs in New York closed. The king is dead, long live digital. Speed reigns in our society.

 

A work mate just bought a new N70. He firmly believes if he just presses the shutter enough time he`ll get a good picture sometime. A million monkeys with typewriters will write a great novel too.

[rolfe_tessem]

Actually, speed reigns only in certain segments of the photographic universe. And most of

the E6 labs in NYC are certainly not closed -- where in the world did you get that

information? Some, yes. Most, no. For those who aren't familiar with the New York scene,

there are some areas with 4 or 5 E6 labs in the same block.

[doug herr]

feli wrote: <I>I guess you [scott] have never seen a drum

scanned K64 or K25 slide, that was shot with modern Leica

glass on a tripod... </I><P>

Here's a drum-scanned K25 made with the 280 f/4 APO, with

shoulder stock & monopod:

<CENTER>

<A HREF="http://www.wildlightphoto.com" target="_blank">

<IMG

SRC="http://www.wildlightphoto.com/birds/raptors/haha00.jpg">

</A>

<BR>

<B>Harris' Hawk</B>, captive - Sacramento, California<BR>

<I>Leicaflex SL, 280mm f/4 APO-Telyt-R, Kodachrome 25</I>

</CENTER>

<P>

Obviously a re-sampled .jpg isn't going to do justice to the

original.... the detail in the chrome is stunning.

[steve_mcallister]

"Tony Rowlett , jun 22, 2004; 06:16 p.m.

 

He said it was in his opinion, Scott. What gives with you? Why would I need Allah to show me what my opinion is? And why do you insist on bringing up the German v. Japanese thing? What difference does that make? So what if our German cameras kick butt over your plastic crap"

 

This can't be the same moderator who banned all those guys a few months ago, now fanning the flames himself :-)

[gsbhasin]

Scott dont like no people who like allah. nor does Herr Eaton like Deutsche pieces of exquisite craftsmanship. and the ever patriot Mr Eaton who responds in a D-day fashion on some photo of a Berkely campus dont like all American big yellow Kodak either!!!

<p>What is the world coming to? C'mon someone tell me?

<p>Why stop at 16MP dude? Why not 22MP, how abt the gigaMP releasing in 2010? Oh wait, that might be Kodak!!! Fuji would be fine, but hey that might be Japanese. Canon , Nikon, oh gosh, what are we gonna do Scott Dan? What can we buy since we dont like no body?

[gsbhasin]

hey i have asked this before too, remove Herr Scott Dan's hero icon.

<p>he dont deserve no hero icon, he just behaves like a hoodie all the time, he is a foto gangsta. lets put the hero icon away for starters and give him a 3 strike ruling with this being the first (in the past it has been countless but statue of limitations prohibits searching all archived forums and the countless unarchived threads that are lost (unless hidden somewhere by the elves with a hidden=true flag, aided by ever cheaper storage)).

<p>Where is the Uncle Bob, the Gandalf when the hobbits need him in middle earth?

[mr.wind-upbird]

On the other hand, if it hadn't been for Mr. Eaton, I might never have had the chance to see a drum-scanned K25 shot on a Leica (even if it was only a jpg). Wonderful shot!

[._._z]

<i><blockquote> Its scanning characteristics don't concern me. </blockquote> </i><p>

 

Scanning ought to be a concern. So what do you do with your, Samuel -- project them?

Stare at them under loupe? Good printers are hard to find and generally expensive.

[tony_brookes]

Thanks for the interesting information about Kodachrome. Of course they are right in saying that it's just business and as soon as costs exceed revenue exit Kodachrome. However that point might be quite some way ahead if manufacturing costs are low - processing it is simply a pricing problem. They may find that they can continue slightly increasing the price for some time especially as it is a unversally known brand amongst photographers.

 

As for Scott Eaton's remarks, methinks he doth protest too much. Heavy cumbersome gear ? No sparkle in his pics ? Can't photograph silver or gold ?

 

Well there is an answer Mr.Eaton.

[ronald_moravec1]

Speed reigns king because that is where the sales are. Film sales are falling faster than excepted according to Kodak. I hate it!

[david k.]

"Oh yeah, by the way, Scott's a pretty damn good photographer."

 

To bad about his intense dislike for "Ger-mahn" photographic gear and anyone who uses it.

 

Very informative article Gerard, will have to talk to Kodak Canada about processing in Switzerland, they currently ship to Qualex in the US with a week turnaround. The quality of the processing has never been the same since the closed down the local line.