"Kodachrome doesn't scan well."

The Urn does not approve...

D
The Urn does not approve...

  • 1
  • 2
  • 0
35mm in 616 test

A
35mm in 616 test

  • 0
  • 0
  • 0
Smiley

H
Smiley

  • 0
  • 1
  • 27

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
197,478
Messages
2,759,812
Members
99,383
Latest member
BaldwinHills
Recent bookmarks
3

2F/2F

Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
8,031
Location
Los Angeles,
Format
Multi Format
Hello,

I have heard several times on these forums that Kodachrome does not scan well...whatever that means.

I have a project coming up soon in which I will need to shoot a lot of transparency film and have it scanned. I think, due to subject matter, that Kodachrome is one of the films I am considering.

So, what does it mean when people say it doesn't scan well?
 

Pinholemaster

Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2005
Messages
1,566
Location
Westminster,
Format
8x10 Format
Kodachrome can scan well, but it requires a different color profile. My Nikon 8000 scanner has a built-in Kodachrome setting in its software to tell the machine that it is not scanning an E6 style film.

It comes down to operators proficiency in matching the scanner to the film.
 

jd callow

Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Jan 31, 2003
Messages
8,466
Location
Milan
Format
Multi Format
Get it scanned professionally if you don't have a good film scanner. I've scanned it on Nikons and Imacons and the scans were great.
 
OP
OP

2F/2F

Member
Joined
Apr 29, 2008
Messages
8,031
Location
Los Angeles,
Format
Multi Format
Thanks. Good to know that it is, as I assumed, not true.
 

Yorkhork

Member
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
2
Yeah, you'll need a good filmscanner. But even more important is the software.
When not using the Nikon 9000 you need SilverFast for getting rid of dust and scratches. http://www.silverfast.com/show/kodachrome/en.html

If you want perfect scans, consider buying a special Kodachrome IT8-Target. This is for calibrating the scanner for kodachromes.
 

PKM-25

Member
Joined
Nov 25, 2004
Messages
1,980
Location
Enroute
Format
Multi Format
I use a Nikon 9000ED with Silverfast Ai Studio software and the IT8 Kodachrome calibration target. For what it is worth, I have heard the 9000ED is a better scanner in terms of dust and scratches than the 5000ED even with 35mm due to the larger imager and light source.

I did a few scans today from Kodachrome 64 and 25 and it takes virtually no time at all to get a great scan with about 90-95% of the shadow detail properly rendered and with dead on color. As someone said earlier, the software makes a huge difference.

When it comes to larger batches, I group my slides according to density and color casts. It usually makes about 6-8 groups, 4 in terms of density and 2-3 in terms of color casts. This way, if I have a tendency to reduce the red saturation in a heavily tungsten lit shot, I have them grouped. Same thing with blue casts in shadow, greenish in fluorescent and of course light, medium and dark shots.

This speeds things up considerably and allows me to engage in tone specific settings without constantly re-adjusting the sliders for each slide if they were all mixed up. And if needed, more fine tuning is easily done post scan.

But honestly, if you use Silverfast Ai and the IT8 calibration target for Kodachrome with a better scanner, you will have a lot less adjusting to do to begin with.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Jon Harwood

Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2009
Messages
40
Location
Fallbrook, C
Format
35mm RF
Kodachrome Doesn't Scan Well

Hi,

I use a Coolpix 5000 and get fine results with Kodachrome.

It may be that some scanners don't do well with it, that some autofocus devices are fooled by the "relief" on the emulsion side of the film or that some scanners have trouble with the Kodachrome color profile.

I have never had a problem with Kodachrome and the coolpix or with my previous Polaroid film scanner.

It has been said that negatives don't scan well either, but I actually prefer to use negatives for scanning. With the coolpix Portra films scan wonderfully.

jh
 

Pupfish

Member
Joined
Mar 21, 2008
Messages
307
Location
Monterey Co,
Format
4x5 Format
The Kodachrome process has had several different iterations throughout the years; K14, the current version, reputedly doesn't retain as much silver in the processed emulsion. But it is this retained silver in older Kodachromes (anecdotally) that causes problems with some scanners that employ an IR channel and Digital ICE to automatically scan defects and dust-- and then automatically clone them out. In scanning for enlargement-quality files, ICE is a significant time saving tool; cloning manually can take ten to thirty minutes per image in 35mm.

Personally, with a body of work containing many older Kodachromes (thankfully post 1976, all K14) that had been in circulation a couple of decades (some being rather beaten up) ICE was a very big deal. I've forgotten which scanners at the time had a bad reputation with Kodachrome, but I ended up buying the excellent Minolta DiMage Scan Elite 5400 v.1. The latest version of Minolta Scan Utility with it's proprietary version of Digital ICE has proven very stable and works as intended with all my Kodachromes, both K25 and K64.

Another thing with K64 is that it can hold a very long dynamic range when intentionally underexposed (Galen Rowell's "Kodachrome 400"). I've actually had better success at digging deep into the shadows with certain difficult slides using this 16-bit MDSE 5400 with 16X multi-sampling, than with Tango drum scans I've outsourced.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

BetterSense

Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2008
Messages
3,151
Location
North Caroli
Format
35mm
I recently shot a roll of Kodachrome on vacation, and when I scanned it with my Epson V500, the results were rather less sharp than I was expecting. The image is just unsharp, as if it was OOF but it couldn't be, because some shots were taken at small apertures.

My problem isn't color (I can adjust that), but sharpness. Perhaps my camera recently broke somehow. I have had no trouble scanning other transparency films; has anyone noticed a lack of sharpness when scanning Kodachrome on a flatbed?
 

cooltouch

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
1,677
Location
Houston, Tex
Format
Multi Format
I have a lowly 5yo Epson 3170, and have scanned several hundred Kodachrome slides (all K14) with it. This scanner doesn't support ICE and I just use the Epson software that came bundled with it. Color rendition has been accurate, sometimes requiring a bit of color manipulation, but usually not much. However, the scans are not as sharp as I'd like. But that's the scanner's shortcomings, since this is a "feature" demonstrated with all emulsions, not just Kodachrome.

Best,

Michael
 

mhanc

Member
Joined
Sep 5, 2008
Messages
329
Location
NY
Format
Multi Format
I recently shot a roll of Kodachrome on vacation, and when I scanned it with my Epson V500, the results were rather less sharp than I was expecting. The image is just unsharp, as if it was OOF but it couldn't be, because some shots were taken at small apertures.

My problem isn't color (I can adjust that), but sharpness. Perhaps my camera recently broke somehow. I have had no trouble scanning other transparency films; has anyone noticed a lack of sharpness when scanning Kodachrome on a flatbed?

I have had OOF problems with my v500 when scanning mounted slides. Film in strips is fine so I don't have my slides mounted - can always do it later if I need.
 
Photrio.com contains affiliate links to products. We may receive a commission for purchases made through these links.
To read our full affiliate disclosure statement please click Here.

PHOTRIO PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Ilford ADOX Freestyle Photographic Stearman Press Weldon Color Lab Blue Moon Camera & Machine
Top Bottom