OMG...I just shot my first roll of Kodachrome!

[randrew1]

<p>If you would like to experience a faded Kodachrome, leave a slide in a projector all day with the lamp on. Sunlight will also do it.</p>

<p>Predicting dark fading is not too difficult using Arrhenious methods. Film is kept is a series if different temperatures (up to 95 C) until fading occurs. The results are used to predict what happens at room temperature. For things that are verifiable (that fade in 30 years or less), there predictions work pretty well. To predict what will happen in 100 to 200 years requires a leap of faith. </p>

<p>When considering Ektachrome dark fading, New E-6 < Old E-6 < E-4 < E-3 < E-2. Like many other people, I can say that my old Kodachrome slides are in much better shape than my old Ektachrome, but I can't see any fading on 35 year old E-6 film and the newer E-6 films are predicted to be much better than the early E-6 films. </p>

<p>I'm a Kodachrome fan, but I don't want to sell Ektachrome short. </p>

[jeff_drew4]

<p>I am in the "Kodachrome Rules!" camp, but also shoot some Fujichrome and Ektachrome when the opportunity arises. Dittoes on the archival qualities of properly stored K25/K64 and have some near-perfect slides from my long-dead grandparents. BTW: They also used a Stereo Realist camera with KII and the viewer still works. Yes it is a big "WOW!" and 3-D eye-popping colors and people/places. I hope my freezer stash of it lasts a few more years . . . :-)</p>

[g._armour_van_horn]

<p>Ron, I'm not trash-talking your baby here, just wanted to point out that the "Kodachrome is the most archival" spiel is based on only a single factor. While K may still beat E on pure dark-storage color retention, that isn't how slides are used. Assuming that the images are actually of interest to someone, they do get brought out into the light for sorting and projection, and some are likely to get left out on light tables for a couple of days here and there. <em>En balance</em> , I don't think that modern E-6 is likely to give anything up to Kodachrome in terms of long-term fidelity. At the same time, I don't think E-6 trumps Kodachrome either. It's just that as long as we're not including GAF-Ansco and Agfachrome slides in the mix, the archival character of the film shouldn't be the primary factor in choosing a film.</p>

<p>Steven, you are remembering the glass beaded projection screens that were standard several decades ago. They are super bright at angles close to the lens axis, but they aren't nearly as bright even 20 degrees to either side. The glass spheres also limit the sharpness of the image.</p>

<p>One of the replacements is a silvery grid material, which has a significant light gain although short of the glass beads, and because the lines are horizontal it's able to preserve that brightness to left and right of the lens axis, at the expense of above and below it. (As if the flies on the ceiling care. Not!) The elimination of the coarse glass beads increases the clarity.</p>

<p>Most recent is the bright matte white screen surface, with the sharpest possible image because there is no grid and no beads. However, there is no enhancement of the brightness at all. On the other hand, the guy standing 45 degrees to the right of the screen benefits as there is no directional character at all.</p>

<p>And monitor the projection area on eBay from time to time. I've bought magnificent Buhl lenses for $30 that originally sold for $1200. I think I even once bought a projector I had no interest in because of the lens that it came with.</p>

<p>Jeff, if you give a rip about Kodachrome, do not let your freezer stash last a few more years. Shoot it now to keep Dwayne's volume up, and replace it to keep Rochester's volume up. Otherwise the day will come when you have Kodachrome in the freezer and no way to get it souped.</p>

<p>Van</p>

[Robin Smith]

<p>Kodachrome <em>used</em> to have the best archival qualities, but those days have passed. My E6 films from the 70s and 80s are just the same as they were and quite as good as my K25 and K64. The only thing that K-14 has for it is that it has proven archival qualities (as shown by 50+ year old slides) whereas the E6 films do not have this. But I agree with Ron the predictions of fading publicized by Wilhelm follow excellent scientific logic so I do believe them. However for sceptics I suppose there is nothing quite like having the proof with the pudding.</p>

[robert lee]

<blockquote>

<p>The only thing that K-14 has for it is that it has proven archival qualities ...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>And that is the finest reason to use Kodachrome. Archiving should be like banking (or rather that banking should be like Kodachrome these days) - no excitement, no surprises.</p>

[jeff_drew4]

<p>Hey Van! Good point! I just put a few rolls in my pack with my G2 and am headed for "Motor City." Different question: does anyone want to speculate on how long Detroit stays "Motor City?" Have a good weekend!</p>

[greg_campbell1]

<p>There's nothing like a chrome on a light table. :)<br>

If a puny 35mm slide looks good, think what a 6x7 will do for you! You can buy a medium format camera for next to nothing these days. <Evil Chortle!></p>

[Vlad Soare]

<blockquote>

<p>There's nothing like a chrome on a light table. :)</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Oh yes, there is. A chrome projected on a screen.<img src="http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/3245/tongueh.jpg" alt="" /> <img src="http://img179.imageshack.us/img179/8017/grin.jpg" alt="" width="24" height="24" /></p>

[silverscape]

<p>Greg, I can imagine! I actually have several medium format cameras...a few TLR's, and a couple of Zeiss Ikon Nettar folding cameras. I've shot plenty of rolls of black and white 120 film, but not color yet. I think the first color roll I want to try is the new Kodak Ektar 100. I'm going to order a few rolls (or probably a whole box) when Freestyle Photo Supplies has it available.</p>

<p>I'm actually planning on seeing the slides on a projector. A guy at the local camera shop where I live is going to sell me a projector, which I'll hopefully be getting this weekend. This is the first time in my life that I've ever used slide film, and the anticipation of actually seeing my pictures projected on a wall is driving me crazy. Instead of showing a few little 4x6 or 5x7 prints to my friends, it'll be like "oh, so you want to see a few of my pictures, huh? HERE we go!" and BAM, they're on the wall or on a screen. HA HA! </p>

<p>Actually, I think I probably will invest in a screen. I like shooting with vintage 8mm movie cameras sometimes too (I've shot about 6 rolls so far). I really like the look of 8mm movies...so I'm anxious to see what a 35mm still photo looks like projected. I just hope I got the exposure right. The slides themselves look good, with really nice colors. </p>

<p>Eventually, I do want to shoot medium format slides...but I'll bet the projector for that has to cost a LOT more :( </p>

 

[patrick_mont]

<p>You can have amazing prints made from those slides on Ilfchochrome....I found the cheapest Ilfochrome printer on the planet.....Amazing prices! Most people charge $40-$50 per 8X10!! Check out Visual-Imaging. <a href="http://www.visual-imaging.com/">http://www.visual-imaging.com/</a></p>

[jack_welsh]

<p>Chris, you will probably love the slides from 35 and 120 film so much. That, you might get a 4x5 Graphic! Or, a monorail. Got my Cambo SCII for $210.00 from Keh.</p>

[silverscape]

<p>Thanks for the link, Patrick! I'm definitely interested. Have you actually had prints made from Kodachrome slides at that place? I'll look through my slides, and if I see any that I would want to have prints of, I'll definitely try that place.</p>

<p>And yeah, Jack, you never know! When I first joined Photo.net a couple of years ago, I barely even knew how to use manual exposure. Then, that was <em>all </em>I was using...vintage cameras with completely manual exposure. I learned how to develop my own B&W film a little over a year ago. Then I wanted to try 120 film, and now I have 4 or 5 medium format cameras. Now I'm shooting Kodachrome! I definitely seem to be progressing to different levels, and actually faster than I thought I would. So who knows...eventually I might be using large format field cameras. I'd have to save my money first. But who knows? If you had asked me if I would be doing that a couple of years ago, I would have said no way. But now, it doesn't really seem to be such a crazy thought.</p>

<p>I <strong>really</strong> also want to try developing my own <em>color</em> film. I keep hearing that it's a lot harder to do than B&W. But I would like to try it eventually. I mean, for me, I would feel like I've reached a whole new milestone if I ever managed to do that. Is it really <em>that</em> hard to develop color film? I guess I should start a new topic for that, though.</p>

<p>By the way, this has probably been one of the funnest and most productive topics I've been involved in on Photo.net :)</p>

[Robin Smith]

<blockquote>

<p>I <strong>really</strong> also want to try developing my own <em>color</em> film.</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Well you won't be able to develop K64 yourself, that's for certain!</p>

[silverscape]

<p>LOL...yeah, I know Robin. Dwayne's Photo has that market cornered...literally. (It's kind of ironic that usually a total monopoly results in crappy service. But Dwayne's does an awesome job.)</p>

<p>I was thinking of just regular color print film, C-41. But that probably wouldn't be for a while anyway. From what I've read, you need to have a machine? Can you develop C-41 by hand?</p>

[patrick_mont]

<p>I have not had any prints back from that place yet. Yesterday I mailed off a few slides. I can't wait to get them back!!!</p>

[jack_welsh]

<p>Never did color film developing. I've always heard that the temperature has to be exact.</p>

[g._armour_van_horn]

<p>Yes, temperature control is crucial for consistent E-6 processing. About the same as for taking a shower.</p>

<p>In fact, as human body temperature is generally 37 and the correct temp for E-6 is 38, your hands are extremely sensitive to temperature changes in this range. (Yeah, that's 98.6 and 100.4 for civilians, but nobody in a lab should bother converting to those nasty little Fahrenheit degrees.) That means it's just not a problem to use stainless tanks in a water bath using an aquarium heater and a simple instant-reading dial thermometer from the kitchen section of the local hardware store. In fact, you can even do it by occasionally running some straight hot water out of the tap into the water bath when it cools off a bit.</p>

<p>And no, typical rubber gloves like you'd use for washing dishes do not seem to interfere with sensing when to take a closer look at the thermometer.</p>

<p>Van</p>