Which film did you shoot after Kodachrome.

[zack_zoll]

<blockquote>

<p ><a name="00ZaW8"></a><a href="../photodb/user?user_id=829026">Larry Dressler</a> <a href="../member-status-icons"><img title="Subscriber" src="../v3graphics/member-status-icons/sub9.gif" alt="" /><img title="Frequent poster" src="../v3graphics/member-status-icons/3rolls.gif" alt="" /></a>, Nov 10, 2011; 06:18 p.m.</p>

</blockquote>

 

<blockquote>

<p>John all Slide film has blue shadows.. it shows the truth your brain filters out the blue...</p>

</blockquote>

<p>Yeah, but the black emulsion and silver content helped. If I'm not mistaken you <em>can </em>process it E-6, but the blacks will all be washed away; meaning that even though the label says 'Kodachrome', that's not what you get back.</p>

<p>As others, I've switched to CN films as well. I prefer Fuji 160S and 400H for colour work, but usually shoot black and white. These days the quality of slide processing isn't what it used to be, and I'm dissapointed with the results more than I once was. Or maybe I've just gotten more demanding in the last several years. Either way, I find that I get the most consistent results shooting 400H or Portra, or just doing it all myself.</p>

 

[dave_wilson1]

<p>I just, today, pulled out the last of my 120 Ektachrome Professional from 2001. It was in the fridge since I bought it. I want to use it up on some fall abstracts and have it souped and scanned. I guess I'll use Dwayne's, anybody have a better idea? Then, I guess I'll go to Fuji Velvia. I want slow, like 50asa. I don't even know who makes what, I'll work on it.</p>

[cj8281]

<p>Plus-X</p>

 

[brian_quinn2]

<p>I shot about 100 rolls of KR64 between the date that Kodak announced that Dec 31 2010 was the last day to process Kodachrome and when the end finally came. I also tried out several other films during that time searching for a replacement and settled on E100GX but found that was also on the way out then tried Elitechrome 100 and picked that. Now Kodak has just announced they are no longer making any Elitechrome film. I really do not like the blue shadows if E100G so we will see if there is any Kodak film I can buy in the future.<br>

PS I also WAS a big shooter of PX 120 until they also did away with that.</p>

[brian_quinn2]

<p>I shoot slide films because I want slides. If in the future they only offer negative film I will just shoot digital. That is what i use now if I only want prints or digital files.</p>

[lex_jenkins]

<p>Mostly Provia 100F. It was a better film in almost every way. Astia was my second choice when I preferred less punchy saturation and contrast.</p>

<p>The main thing I liked Kodachrome for was skin tones - it loved every skin color on earth and treated all well. Other than that, when I look at my Kodachromes dating back to the 1960s, I realize I was mostly looking through nostalgia tinted glasses.</p>

[randrew1]

<p>It's not that I have sworn off film, but I haven't found a reason to use film since shooting my last roll of Kodachrome last December (except for a roll of off-brand color neg in a one-time-use camera while sailing last summer). Next time I need medium format, I will probably use Portra 160 or Ektar 100. </p>

[stp]

<p>Mostly Velvia 100 Pro and Astia. I've also used Provia 100F (good), Ektachrome 64 (so-so), Ektar 100 (didn't like it at all), and an occasional color negative film (but I like the light table experience). With the loss of Astia, significant decline of 220, significant decline of local labs, and some inherent advantages of digital, I've given up film entirely but not without regret. Digital can't touch film when a bright sun is in the frame, and the rate of evolution of digital technology (a good thing) has made it relatively expensive (not a good thing) although for my needs it has reached a plateau (a good thing).</p>

[jeff_z.]

<p>E100g replaced Kodachrome 64 for me, starting in 2003. I think that E100g is better than Kodachrome in every way except for absolute acutance or edge sharpness, but I don't think that even this difference is very significant for me, and all the positives of this E-6 film outweigh the negatives of Kodachrome by a mile. For skin tones, I find E100g to be outstanding. I think that the "blue shadow" characteristic of E-6 films that was mentioned is SO EASILY remedied with the use of a mild warming filter. </p>

<p>E100g is a great film, imho. I love ALL the current Kodak films I've tried, both negative and positive, color and b&w, and have little to no interest in digital capture photography for almost all of my interests. I've recently tried Provia 400x for lower light situations because of the discontinuation of E200, and hope to finish the first roll soon. I love E-6 for certain subjects like nature or outside portraiture, and E100g is a film I've loved for years, and have recently come to even better appreciate.</p>

 

[User_4136860]

<p>Fuji Provia 100F and Fuji Velvia 100F</p>

[Robin Smith]

<p>I used Astia 100F or Velvia 50/100F. Never liked Provia much. Haven't shot any slide film for 3 years. I guess I would use E100G if I was to shoot some today. I used to shoot E100S in the late 90s and it was a good film, although I much preferred Astia for its skin tones (there was a touch of Velvia in E100S, a "roast beef" look of faces in shadow). I think that E100G may be better than 100S; that is, unless it's actually the same film: it's difficult keeping up with Kodak and their endless name changing.</p>

[Paul Lewis1664881697]

<p>I've been doing low-light photography recently and have switched almost exclusively to Provia 400X.</p>

[matias]

Ektachrome 100 VS and Provia 100 in formats 35&120

[a._t._burke]

<p>Gentlepersons:</p>

<p>I shot Kodachrome for the last 70 of its 75 years.</p>

<p><a href="../photodb/folder?folder_id=983141">http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=983141</a></p>

<p>For the last 20 years or so I shot at least 90% of my 35mm with Kodachrome. I shot it not because I loved Kodak, or even liked slides per se, but because I liked to look at Kodachrome on a light box. Since the end of Kodachrome I’ve not shot 35mm.</p>

<p>I still shoot a little medium format, mostly with Velvia 50, some with Ektar 100. Perhaps I should have said "very little" rather than "little" because the last time I shot any film was Kodachrome (35mm) before 11-16-10. I also use an older digital (ugh) Panasonic 8MP FZ30 for folks who want me to take a snapshot for some occasion. I no longer take many photo opportunities and certainly create none. For me the fun went out of photography with Kodachrome.</p>

<p>To each to his own,</p>

<p>A. T. Burke</p>

[d_f11]

<p>Delta 100, PanF+.After my period of mourning & grief, I've enrolled in a beginners darkroom B&W course for experianced shooters who've never done the darkroom. It felt like photography was over for me after Kodachrome's kapute, but sometimes you can pick yourself up, and carry on, in a different way that is. I don't seem to care much anymore about color(nor Kodak, to say the least).</p>

[david_olsen5]

<p> I have old ektachrome slides from about 50 years ago, but they have faded and slightly changed colors. My Kodachromes did not change at all, they look new. I don't know if the new Ektachrome has been changed to address this issue. I do not know if the Fuji slides hold their color and thickness though.</p>

<p>DaveO</p>

[jeff_z.]

<p>David, I remember talking with a very knowledgeable Kodak guy that had been involved with Kodachrome and Ektachrome, and he mentioned that some advances had been made in regards to longevity with the last generation of Ektachrome. I can't remember the specifics as the conversation took place at least seven years ago, but I do remember him saying that. Perhaps someone else here knows more about this.</p>

 

[francois_p._garnier]

<p>I stopped shooting Kodachrome about 20 years ago, because at that time the new Fuji E6 emulsions surpassed Kodachrome in overall quality.<br>

I am a very happy E6 shooter since then and will continue to shoot slides. It is a unique medium which cannot be replaced by other mediums, neither by CN films and especially not by digital.<br>

I love my pictures being very big and brillant. Slide projection is by far the best for that (both color and black&white).</p>

<p>I've made direct side by side comparisons of the latest and most expensive beamers and my slide projector, and the beamer completely sucks, because of it's ridicoulos low resolution and bad colors.<br>

Digital technology is decades behind film technology concerning projection quality.</p>

<p>Currently I am enjoying Provia 100F, E100G, E100VS, Elietchrome 100 Extra Color and Provia 400X.<br>

E6 developing in Europe is easy. Lots of labs, excellent quality and excellent mail order service.</p>

[nick_h5]

Modern Ektachrome E6 films have dark and light fading rates,which have significant improvements on the Ektachrome film you shot over fifty years ago,Mr Olsen.

 

 

 

 

Modern Fujichrome E6 process transparency films have improved also. Velvia 100 and 100F have longer predicted archival storage,than any other Fuji E6 process transparency film.

 

 

 

 

 

I asked and read a lot of infomation from Kodak,Fuji and from helpful members of Photo.net,regarding archival storage of transparency materials last year. One source of info online is from Wilhelm Imaging Research.

[greg_peterson3]

<p>Ektar 100, though I shoot medium format now.</p>

[talbert_mcmullin1]

<p>Ektar 100 and Velvia....until I find something better. Will probably be a foreign film since American companies are not interested in producing any quality films. </p>