Tips on Kodachrome 64 + 200

[kennedy_carol]

Hi there,

I've just bought some rolls of Kodachrome 64 & 200 slide film. Never

used it before but i'm keen to try it because i've read of the

excellent natural colour rendition and also because in some prints-

from-kodachrome which i've seen, i've noticed an attractive, almost

vintage quality to the colours. Also, i've gotta try it soon before

it gets whipped off the market!

Anyway, I'm not at all experienced in shooting slide film, other

than trying out films every now and then. so, consequently my

exposure is often off. i've heard it's necessary to be much more

precise in exposing slide film than negs and i've never really taken

the time to do some serious practise.

With negatives, i know it's often desirable to overexpose a but, and

i've heard it's the opposite with slides..is this right? and does it

apply to Kchrome too, and not just E6?

Also, any tips for using this film (64+200) are welcome...like what

kind of lighting conditions come up well. I myself like to shoot in

natural light, hand held or making use of available supports (ie, i

am loathe to lugging a tripod around). and I like shooting people,

streetscenes and landscapes. Though, 64 ISO will probably force some

compromises as i've never gone below 100 ISO before.

thanks!

[vapparn]

"With negatives, i know it's often desirable to overexpose a but, and i've heard it's the opposite with slides..is this right?"

 

Yes this is right, especially with Kodachrome. At least 64, I don't know 200 so well, I'm haven't finished my first roll yet.

 

Some expose 64 as 80 ASA, but I just underexpose according to the situation. I like underexposed stuff anyway;)

 

Some people think that Kodachrome is not good for people pictures, because of the skin colors, judge this for yourself.

 

IMO, Kodachrome produces huge deep colors that I never get when using E6 films. There are many slide films around with only subtle differences, but KC is in a category of its own, and I like that.

 

Funny to see K25 on Ebay... A few years old stuff which is costing more as new.

[berk_sirman2]

K64 is great for shooting people. It is really unique because it has high contrast but no super saturated colors of some E6 films. And the color palette is unique (not necessarily best, but different from others) It has a vintage look but it is very sharp. I have used this film under overcast light, low contrast autumn afternoons in scandinavia and it has performed very well. High contrast of the film prevented muddy looking slides while the colors were still accurate. I have used Kodak E100VS under similar conditions and while the high contrast of that film helped the colors looked much "better" than reality due to high saturation. With K64 you get accurate colors. Therefore it is great for shooting people under low contrast situations. For shooting landscapes etc. Velvia/E100VS is a better choice IMO.

 

I never really used it under very sunny conditions so I cannot say how well it performs then. But I guess it is not as impressive as in overcast days.

 

The shadows block up very easily so you need to watch the exposure. Overexposing is not the solution as you may lose the hightlights. It is a tricky film to expose correctly.

 

With 64ASA you need fast lenses for handheld work. Under the conditions I wrote above I used f/2-f/2.8, 1/30sec. Barely hand-holdable.

[panos_voudouris]

What the others said, plus I'd say that when trying a new film, it is good to bracket +/-half stop. This way you get to see what the film does when over/under-exposed slightly.

[logan_lockhart]

Note on 64, if you don't have an extremely fast lens, then you need a tripod. I use 64 and 25 ASA films all the time and you need a tripod to get everything good or else you will have shakey pictures. The only problem I have with Kodachrome is the fact there is only one lab left in the country that processes it. I recommened personally that you save the Kodachrome for special things and work off other slide films. My last advice- Don't use slide film in a Point and Shoot camera, for some odd reason all of the points and shoots i attemped with have turned out bad pics.

[john_shriver]

Kodachrome has a unique color palette, but it certainly has some notable innacuracies in color. The contrast of the three colors is different. Dark reds go brown. Probably no worse than comptemporaneous films from the late 1970's, but all the other films have been massively reworked since then.

 

Having compared Ektachrome Professional E100GX and Kodachrome 64 recently under similar conditions, it's obvious that E100GX is a much more color-accurate film outdoors. (Save E100G for controlled lighting like flash, it's not the right film for outdoors use.)

 

That said, Kodak has always tuned the majority of their color films for caucasian flesh tones, and Kodachrome 64 is no exception.

 

Kodachrome 200 has a more pastel look than 64. While 200 is grainy, and has even less exposure latitude than 64, the slides don't look as contrasty as 64. (Yes, I know this sounds like a contradiction. I struggle to put in words what Kodachrome 200 looks like.) Some of my favorite Kodachrome slides are on Kodachrome 200.

[jason_fitzmaurice]

The best advice I ever got on Kodachrome was to think of K200 like a 400 speed black and white film. The grain will be similar to a 400 speed b/w film both in amount and style. It is grainy but does not look at all like the grain in modern films. Don't fight the graiin in Kodachrome 200 use it. It is my all time favorite portrait film, and is also often nice for an almost Monet like look for flowers.

[r.t. dowling]

If there was a color version of Tri-X, it would probably look like Kodachrome 200.

[bill_stewart1]

K64 has extremely fine grain and accurate colors. But I'm spoiled on the oversaturated colors of some of the E6 films, so I rarely use it. I've tried K200 once. Colors about the same as K64. It's grainy, but sharp at the same time.

[ronald_smith2]

I'm still amazed that one can get K-14 processing after all these years. I have shot hundreds of rolls of K64 and K200, two of my favourite films of all time. The slower emulsion provides an honest, accurate renditon of colors and is dead-sharp. Greens are somewhat weak, though, not an ideal landscape film. Slight underexposure yields some neat effects with certain colors.

 

K200 has more saturation notably with the warm colors (reds in particular). The grain is a bit more pronounced but not objectionable, kind of "toothy." I have used this film for my photojournalism-style photography, due to its higher speed and color palette.

 

My only gripe about Kodachrome slides is that they scan rather poorly even in a higher-end Nikon Coolscan V; my E-6 images work way better on this regard. Of course, Kodachromes have that long lifespan if not projected that is only bettered by b/w films.

 

Always six of one, half dozen of the other=)

[terence_spross1]

Three comments:

 

One warning: Don't let a family member fill out the processing envelope without understanding that Kodachrome is not a print film! My daughter recently turned in a roll at Sams, where they use Fuji processing.

They do accept Kodachrome (at a very good price), Fuji just subcontracts another lab and it takes about 2 weeks. However, this last roll was designated for 4inch prints and had nothing in the special notes area of the envelope as my daughter filled it out.

The result: It was processed in CN-16 (same as C41) and the film came back clear with a little bit of the jet black backing spoted in places.

apparently they didn't know what happened; the form check list said "film received damaged" ... "or wet". $0 charge. I feel bad for the other people whose film was subsequently in that batch as the jet backing probably compromised their result. (and I have always had very good results from print film from them). .. and I feel bad for the lost vacation photos.

 

2:

Kodachrome is a permanent film - its color- as it is, will out last your other slide film. I shoot a lot of stereo photos and rely on Kodachrome 64 - I can't accept the grain of K200 - I haven't tried it, but if its grain is anything like Tri-X forget it for the stereo viewer.

 

3:

Verify your camera meter with a incident meter. Meter the subject area with your camera and hold that setting before each photo if it has a hold. I use an Minolta incident meter frequently as the old Kodak Stereo camera from the 50s never had a built in meter. Once you know your meters characteristics, weaknesses and you pay attention to it you should get good K64 shots every time. I agree that many point and shoot cameras don't have what it takes for Kodachrome. Use a separate meter and manual override if you can. Keep in mind that the accuracy of shutter speeds can vary from speed to speed. I had a simple camera that was 20% fast at the 1/100 shutter speed and 30% slow at the 1/200 setting. Once I knew that, I took that into account for the f/stop and everything was fine. If you can't set the f/stops in between the settings don't use Kodachrome - it doesn't have the latitude. When in doubt with a gradation of light on the key subjects , close down a quarter stop with K64.

[jeremy_porter1]

Kodachrome is one of the best slide films, in my humble opinion. It is also famous for the most stable dyes, and fading resistant, under the dark storage. Unlike all E-6 films, the organic dyes of E-6 slides will fade over time, even in the dark storage, unless you keep them under the sub zero degree environment with relatively low humidity. The Kodachrome has a unique 3 dimensional sharpness, and the colours are very accurate. There is a very reputable lab in the U.S.A. that process this film called Dwayne's Photo, in Kansas (www.k14movies.com). All processed Kodachrome slides I got from this lab has brilliant colours, great sharpness and dirt free. Try this slide film, either ISO 64 or 200, and you will love it. Something that you will never experienced with the mainstream E-6 slide films.