W/NW Show Your Kodachromes

[mikal_grass]

<p>The following shots are of my two little children, Ivan and Lola. I have others that I will post if possible. All are K25 shot at 40 Leica M6, 50 'lux, scanned on a Nikon 9000 with Vuescan. I have Silverfast with the Kodachrome target but can't seem to get the hang of Silverfast. </p><div></div>

[mikal_grass]

<p>Another of Ivan. </p><div></div>

[mikal_grass]

<p>Ivan 3</p>

[mikal_grass]

<p>Blue Portrait</p><div></div>

[mikal_grass]

<p>Last one - for now.</p><div></div>

[john_liberty]

<p>Nikon N80, 28-200 G ED Lens, Kodachrome 64</p><div></div>

[john_liberty]

<p>Another N80, 28-200 G ED, Kodachrome 64</p><div></div>

[35mmdelux]

<p>Paul,<br>

Your photo from 1951 looks like it was taken yesterday. Amazing.</p>

[patrick_owen]

<p>.</p><div></div>

[DB_Gallery]

<p>Times Square, May 20th, 2009, KR 64, M3, 50mm 1.4 asph:</p><div></div>

[DB_Gallery]

<p>Astoria Oregon, Nov 1st, 2008, KM-25, M3, 50mm 1.4 asph:</p><div></div>

[DB_Gallery]

<p>The day after the Aspen New Year's Bomber, Jan. 1st, 2009, KR-64, M6TTL, 35 1.4 asph, SF-20 flash</p><div></div>

[rod_rhoads]

<p>Here is a 1965 pic from Quebec City=Kodachrome 25</p><div></div>

[joel_stolarski]

<p>Kodachrome slide.<a href="../photo/9386147"><img src="../photo/9386147" alt="" /></a> oops, can't get the picture to show up here.</p>

[ray_dicecca]

<p><a title="Havard Campus by rdc154, on Flickr" href=" title="Havard Campus by rdc154, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3356/3660532515_dc08dd7ff1_o.jpg" alt="" width="740" height="1090" /> </a></p>

<p ><strong>Somewhere on the Harvard Campus - 1980</strong></p>

[larry_kincaid2]

<p>Amazing and very exciting. These photos are the reason I got excited about photography again. How depressing. They convince me again that the medium, film and Kodachrome) does make a difference in the final image. You can always argue that the difference isn't necessarily better, just a different type of image, but the photos shared above (okay, they are among your best) are clearly different and in many ways much better than anything I've seen "made" with a digital camera. Check out all the new photos on photo.net if you don't believe me. So, it's sad. I have one role of Kodachrome that I still have not got around to using. I just found it too hard to get past the taking another (digital) photo of film and slide with a scanner and then using that as the image to print. But it still makes me sad. I feel the same way about black and white film, all of them. Just never made it into the develop them at home yourself group. That's sad too. So, want to see the photo I just took of a deer nursing two fauns in my back yard yesterday? Digital and zoom lens, instant feedback and printing at home. How much better would it have looked on a Kodachrome slide. I'll never know. </p>

[joel_stolarski]

<p>I'm with you Larry, the "gnarling, teeth clenching and hand wringing" group.<br>

Stirring post, that makes me sad, too !!<br>

Looked at some old kodachromes, one of which I put in my gallery here,<br>

(couldn't figure out how to get it included in my forum posting above)<br>

that is about 80 years old (not my shot, taken by my extended family member<br>

now deceased) and it's sad, really.<br>

All hope is not lost. Look at some of the newer Fuji products<br>

The image saturation is there, on some of the sample images I looked, at on the web.<br>

Haven't yet shot any. But reasonable price, and hopefully, local processing.</p>

<p> </p>

[bennett_callow]

<p>KR-64, M2, 90mm Elmar, 1979</p>

[bennett_callow]

<p>Sorry. Permit another try.</p><div></div>

[bennett_callow]

<p>Try another. KR-64, M2, 90mm Elmar, 1979.</p>

[bennett_callow]

<p>KM-64, M2, 90mm Elmar, 1979.</p><div></div>

[bennett_callow]

<p>KM-64, M2, 90mm Elmar, 1979.</p><div></div>

[bennett_callow]

<p>KM-64, M2, 50mm Summicron, 1979.</p><div></div>

[bennett_callow]

<p>KM-64, M2, 90mm Elmar,1979.</p><div></div>

[bennett_callow]

<p>Let's make all of those KR, not KM. I'm slipping!! </p>