Return of Ektachrome!

[Dave Luttmann]

I always found that my Canon 7D at 18mp was a pretty good match for Ektachrome 100 and Provia 100 in terms of rez.

The film could edge out the DSLR on high contrast subjects for rez. For color data, the film easily beat 24mp of digital. I

dont really care in the end...I liked the look of Ektachrome over any DSLR.

[eddy_d]

<p>My uncles Kodachrome slides have held up the test of time. Other types of slide films not so much. I have been given expired cold stored slide films they do not make anymore. But I always cross process all my slide films. I like the color shifts.</p>

[a._t._burke]

<p>Gentlepersons: </p>

<p>Mr. Calhoun said, “...As I understand it there are technical problems that prevent any of the previous Ektachromes from coming back in their old exact form so the new film will be a reformulation. To reformulate and test will take some time so that's why the delay.” </p>

<p>And Mr. Ghantous said, “.....I wonder if "lines" should be "cycles" or "line pairs"?” </p>

<p>Perhaps some of the ex-Kodak employees like the knowledgeable Ron Andrews could clarify? For Kodak at least, when they advertised a film as having a certain low/high resolution number, was it in line pairs (cycles) or was a black space and a white space each a “line” for the line number stated. </p>

<p>And, could Kodak still make the same formulation for the Ektachrome if they so choose? </p>

<p>Also as a general question to everyone..... Any guesses whether Kodak will make a faithful reproduction of Ektachrome (look and feel wise) itself or will it sub contract with others for production or re-brand using their faded reputation in an effort to exploit a has-been, used-to-be name brand? </p>

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

[m42dave]

<p>According to the press release, Kodak will produce EKTACHROME at its film factory in Rochester, N.Y., so it doesn't sound like they plan to sub-contract or re-brand the film.</p>

[glen_h]

<p>In the E4 days, there were Ektachrome X (ASA 64) and High Speed Ektachrome at ASA 160.</p>

<p>With E6, those translated to Ektachrome 64 and Ektachrome 200. After no so long, as well as I know it, Ektachrome 100 replaced Ektachrome 64 for consumer films, though professional films continued with an ISO 64 version. Also, tungsten balanced versions at 50 and 160.</p>

<p>Not so long after the E6 introduction, came Ektachrome 400, with a more complicated, more layered, emulsion than the others. Ektachrome 400 could also be pushed. </p>

<p>And finally, there was an Ektachrome designed to be pushed to 800 or 1600. That is, optimal development is for a longer time than standard E6. </p>

[glen_h]

<p>http://wwwuk.kodak.com/global/en/professional/support/techPubs/ppi929/ppi929.pdf</p>

<p>is a poster of the different C41, E6, and K14 films at some point in time.</p>

<p>I do remember having two rolls of EPH (P1600) designed to be used at EI 1600, with development times corresponding to a two stop push. One I used on a tour have caves on Lake Shasta. </p>

[steve m smith]

<blockquote>

<p> Just be prepared for higher film and processing prices when Ektachrome arrives later this year</p>

</blockquote>

<p>It still has to compete with Fujifilm, so I hope the prices will be similar.</p>

[glen_h]

<p>Seems that the Fuji E6 films are USD10 to USD12/roll for 35mm 36 exposure rolls.</p>

<p>That is about the price range for E6 processing at labs I know of. </p>

<p>The new Ektachrome better come out close to that price range.</p>