No more Kodacrome?

[rolfe_tessem]

Jay,

 

You should really lighten up a little and take all this a tad less seriously (and less

personally).

 

I was shooting KII when the transition to K25, etc. occurred and I didn't notice much

difference frankly. There was a much bigger change from Kodachrome-X to K64, IMHO. KX

was never a film I thought very highly of and was primarily marketed to the amateur

market in those days. K64 represented a considerable upgrade over the older film. Of

course K200 came much later and I've actually never shot it at all so don't have any

opinion on it.

 

Like many, I've moved away from Kodachome over the years, but I still shoot some of it

because I value it for its unique characteristics and am very glad we still have it available.

 

Remember, for many years the Ektachrome films were pretty horrible and just couldn't

hold a candle to Kodachrome. Only in the past 10 years or so have the E6 films caught up

and I have to say that the 100 speed films from both Kodak and Fuji are very, very good. In

fact, I would argue that only since Kodak introduced their current E100 line has that

company had a reversal film that could go toe to toe with Kodachrome.

[kevin m.]

You're right, Jay, the link is broken for some reason.

 

But if anyone care's to see it, it's the "Good Old Leica" post by

Olivier Reichenbach from July 26th. Ray took the time to make

links to all of Jay's pics in one thread, so it's pretty handy in that

regard.

[jay_.]

Great idea for everyone to check that thread Kevin! It's the one where you try in your ineffectual way to bully me, Al Feng *and* Mark Wahlster. It's the thread where Frank Petronio changed his profile to my name (without the hero icon)and dropped his low-class crap all over the place. Sure does prove that I'm the bad boy. Once again Kevin, I have to thank you for doing a belly-flop into your own doodoo. I hope you never learn or give up, it's more fun than watching a puppy chase his tail.