A "New Kodachrome", why didn't they? ...

[Keith Tapscott.]

One itty bitty problem here: Astia looks NOTHING like Kodachrome. It just looks too, well, too much like a Fuji film (what do you expect it to look like?). Ektachrome E100G is a MUCH better Kodachrome replacement.

...and it produces excellent skin-tones in portraiture, glamour, beauty and fashion photographs.

 

[JBrunner]

seeing big yellow is selling their printers
(you know, the ones that are supposed to change the world)
on the cartoon network inbetween episodes
of chowder, spongebob and flapjack, it seems they have
their priorities in a different place.

it is unfortunate, but true.

Being in advertising and marketing, I have to admit Kodak's strategies are a continuing source of puzzlement.

 

[gr82bart]

I can't wait for JB's taco factory to start up. With new and improved tacos of course.

Regards, Art.

 

[Prest_400]

Give them a few years, we Kodachrome users will age, our minds become less agile and they'll "resurface" the Kodachrome name on something not film. "We" won't remember or our comments will be taken as the babblings of those "living in the past" to whom no heed is paid.

Dave

I'm not a kodachrome user, but I'll remember the name. They can wait... If nothing bad happens I'll be around for a long time.
I'll have to remember that in June 2059, It will be 50 years since kodachrome left
And I'll be 64 the end of that year
I just hope that I won't need to coat plates by myself...

 

[nsouto]

One itty bitty problem here: Astia looks NOTHING like Kodachrome. It just looks too, well, too much like a Fuji film (what do you expect it to look like?). Ektachrome E100G is a MUCH better Kodachrome replacement.

Forget old Astia. Try a new batch, from about two years ago.
It is a completely different film.

 

[accozzaglia]

Being in advertising and marketing, I have to admit Kodak's strategies are a continuing source of puzzlement.

Indeed and right with you there. I used to be in marcom, too. Kodak's approach is baffling and nebulous, putting it mildly. Even if they aped a contemporary brand campaign *cough* *Apple* *COUGH* this would at least offer a solid direction of brand image now seemingly all over the place.

One could start just by asking people of all ages and backgrounds in a survey, "What does 'Kodak' mean to you?" I don't dispute that Kodak employ many of the traditional brand indicators, but I do wonder the kinds of questions they ask to arrive at the analyses they do and under what controlled circumstances.

 

[jd callow]

Forget old Astia. Try a new batch, from about two years ago.
It is a completely different film.

If that is true and I was a long time user of 'old' Astia I'd be very unhappy.

 

[StorminMatt]

Forget old Astia. Try a new batch, from about two years ago.
It is a completely different film.

I've tried the new Astia, and was not impressed. It just looked like desaturated Provia to me. It most definitely did NOT have the look of a Kodachrome. So E100G, it will be.

 

[lxdude]

I'm not a kodachrome user, but I'll remember the name. They can wait... If nothing bad happens I'll be around for a long time.
I'll have to remember that in June 2059, It will be 50 years since kodachrome left
And I'll be 64 the end of that year
I just hope that I won't need to coat plates by myself...

You're 5 years old?

 

[ricksplace]

You're 5 years old?

64-50=14

Please tell me you are not a math teacher.

 

[Sirius Glass]

64-50=14

Please tell me you are not a math teacher.

64-50=14
1+4=5

New Math!

Steve

 

[dmr]

pssssst!
it's called: Fuji Astia
use it or lose it...

Astia is probably the closest Fuji reversal film to the look and feel of Kodachrome, but it really isn't the same!

 

[StorminMatt]

Astia is probably the closest Fuji reversal film to the look and feel of Kodachrome, but it really isn't the same!

I always felt that Provia actually came closer to Kodachrome than Astia. Astia is just WAYY to low in contrast and too unsaturated. But regardless, I still think Ektachrome E100G comes closer to Kodachrome than either. And some people say Ektachrome E100GX is the closest you can get to Kodachrome in an E6.

 

[spark]

My guess is the "Kodachrome" brand will reappear in a year or two on "premium" (priced) inkjet photo printing paper and quickly seize a 0.2% share of that market.

 

[nsouto]

I always felt that Provia actually came closer to Kodachrome than Astia. Astia is just WAYY to low in contrast and too unsaturated. But regardless, I still think Ektachrome E100G comes closer to Kodachrome than either. And some people say Ektachrome E100GX is the closest you can get to Kodachrome in an E6.

Here are a few examples of the "wayy low in contrast" of Astia:
(click on image for larger)

Dead Link Removed
and
Dead Link Removed
and
Dead Link Removed

This was K64:
Dead Link Removed


Like I said: pick a new roll of Astia, expose it bang on 100 ISO (ignore all the old advice to over/under expose it), and check the results.
To me, the latest emulsions are right up there with the best Kodachrome could produce. And it scans with even smaller grain than K64!
I've tried E100GX and it's nowhere near as colour true, although it can be as saturated as Astia. Have not tried E100G recently.

Fuji is constantly improving their film. Sensia 400 for example is nowadays one of the best high speed colour negative films I've ever seen. It used to be cheap and nasty, not anymore. In Winter, I use it almost to the exclusion of anything else: it just works wonders with the lower levels of sunlight.

I don't know why they do this and why so low-key advertising of the changes, but I've seen consistent enough changes to warrant a switch.

Of course: YMMV.

 

[nsouto]

and that of course should be superia 400, not sensia 400....
<groan>

 

[StorminMatt]

Like I said: pick a new roll of Astia, expose it bang on 100 ISO (ignore all the old advice to over/under expose it), and check the results.
To me, the latest emulsions are right up there with the best Kodachrome could produce. And it scans with even smaller grain than K64!

Last February, I actually gave Astia a try. Given what people say about Astia looking like Kodachrome, I felt quite positive about it and bought three rolls (feeling quite sure I would like it). Unfortunately, I just didn't like the way it looked. It looked completely like a Fuji film, and looked nothing like Kodachrome. So I ended up throwing the other two rolls in the trash. After all, it's not like there is going to be a situation where I would actually RATHER shoot Astia than Kodachrome or E100G. I just look at this whole experience as one of those situations where you take a risk and lose. So for me, there will be no more experimentation with Astia.

 

[Mark Antony]

Matt
I'm not sure Astia is like Kodachrome, and while a films colour palette is a matter of choice I find Astia probaly the most neutral of positive films.
Different people like certain films for different reasons, in fact I use different films with varying types of light and with certain subjects.
Astia for me is quite accurate:

Of course YMMV as they say, and rather than chuck those films spread the love and donate them to a student- thats what I do with stock I can't get on with.
Mark

 

[StorminMatt]

I'm not sure Astia is like Kodachrome, and while a films colour palette is a matter of choice I find Astia probaly the most neutral of positive films.

I'm not sure about the accuracy of Astia vs Kodachrome. But one thing I found is that Astia has the same problem as other Fuji film: it overemphasizes subtle colors in comparison to the way it reproduces bolder colors. This is a quality I NEVER liked about Fuji.

Of course YMMV as they say, and rather than chuck those films spread the love and donate them to a student- thats what I do with stock I can't get on with.
Mark

I certainly wouldn't have minded giving those rolls of Astia to someone who could have used them rather than simply chucking them in the trash like I did. But I didn't know anyone who would want them. And I really didn't want to deal with having to find someone who wanted them or having to deal with shipping the rolls to someone.

 

[Vonder]

Digital Kodachrome makes sense

Now that I'm coming to terms with K-14 being nearly gone, I would certainly give a fair trial to an E-6 substitute which successfully replicated Kodachrome as near as humanly possible.

If it really were that good, I wouldn't object to them calling it "Kodachrome-E", or whatever they like....but I don't think it will happen.

And I can't see even Kodak being misguided enough to label anything digital with the brand "Kodachrome" (but anything is possible ).

Given the digital nature of this very forum, and how often someone posts a SCAN of Kodachrome which is greeted with hails of how "There ain't nothin' like THAT in digital!", why can't a digital Kodachrome be made? If you sample enough Kodachrome slides, and run the spectral characteristics through a computer, you can come up with a pretty good algorithm to mimic the look, at least in a purely digital medium such as the web.

Several digital cameras (Fuji comes to mind) have a "chrome" setting which mimics the look of chrome film.

Personally, if Kodak made a Kodachrome-mimicing camera and marketed it as such, and that helped keep Big Yellow in the black and making film, I'd be the first one in line to buy it.

 

[PhotoJim]

You can probably make a Photoshop plug-in that would make digital images look like scanned Kodachrome, but you can't make an image that looks like projected Kodachrome.

 

[wogster]

Given the digital nature of this very forum, and how often someone posts a SCAN of Kodachrome which is greeted with hails of how "There ain't nothin' like THAT in digital!", why can't a digital Kodachrome be made? If you sample enough Kodachrome slides, and run the spectral characteristics through a computer, you can come up with a pretty good algorithm to mimic the look, at least in a purely digital medium such as the web.

Several digital cameras (Fuji comes to mind) have a "chrome" setting which mimics the look of chrome film.

Personally, if Kodak made a Kodachrome-mimicing camera and marketed it as such, and that helped keep Big Yellow in the black and making film, I'd be the first one in line to buy it.

You would never get the colour response quite right. I tried for a while to emulate B&W film with digital and was never happy with the results, so currently use a hybrid process, which looks better to me. In B&W you only have one colour to deal with, with colour film it gets only harder, because everything moves in 9 directions at once. Bumping the blue response means that the red and green responses also change, then you need to emulate the way the couplers and dye layers work, so it's not 3 ways, but 3 times 3, or 9.

It would be easier to make another slide film look like Kodachrome, because your using similar technology. Even this would not be easy, you would need the film sensitivity layers to be identical, then play with the dye layers and couplers to tune the representation.

Makes me wonder if anyone has tried processing Kodachrome in E6 chemistries to see what happens. Would the result look like E6 or Kodachrome or like a bad acid trip?

 

[Aurum]

IIRC you would just end up with a blank roll.
Kodachrome does not contain couplers in the film itself, it is in effect B&W multilayer film.
E6 contains couplers in the gelatin, (as does C41) so the colour developer solution acts on those and generates the colour.

Basically, from what I understand, using E6 chems would not generate dye clouds in Kodachrome, so when you finally bleached the film to remove the remaining silver, you would have no dye, and now no silver remaining. therefore no image at all, a blank roll