Kodachrome, is it the best ?

[Dave Parker]

p.s. What I'm about to say has nothing to do with our discussion, but I notice you judge yourself as a photographer through the opinion of your clients, who are probably not photographers. Maybe you should not do that for your own sake. People really pay for all kinds of things. Setting customers as your standard of quality is a pretty low standard to set for yourself, unless your customer is an art-director that hired you for some ad campaign.
Isn't it?
I'm sure your taste for art in general is probably 100 times more sophisticated than that of your avarage layman client. So why judge yourself based on their opinion instead of your own, and that of those similar to you?

Ed,

I don't judge my abilities as photograher based on my clients, I base my ability to eat on my clients willingness to pay, as far as my fine art photography and other work, I am very happy with that, I can see you have never worked in the commercial photography field..

R.

 

[Steve Roberts]

K64 - YES !!!!! (but not as good as K25 was)
K200 - that's another story!!!

 

[Edwardv]

Haven not found a replacement for Kodachrome 25 and probably never will.

 

[Thomas Bertilsson]

I don't know much about the process itself, but I do know that the chemicals used are extremely toxic. Much more so than the E6 process. That's a good reason to move to a different film. I have seen some Kodachrome 25 chrome prints that looked stunning, but the 64 and 200 look pretty average. I can understand the archival standpoint, however. Some slides shot in the beginning of transparency film hardly have any color dye left in them, while others have fared better. Kodachrome seems to be outstanding in this respect.

Have fun in trying it,

- Thom

 

[Iskra 2]

I don't know much about the process itself, but I do know that the chemicals used are extremely toxic. Much more so than the E6 process. That's a good reason to move to a different film. I have seen some Kodachrome 25 chrome prints that looked stunning, but the 64 and 200 look pretty average. I can understand the archival standpoint, however. Some slides shot in the beginning of transparency film hardly have any color dye left in them, while others have fared better. Kodachrome seems to be outstanding in this respect.

Have fun in trying it,

- Thom

Compared to the toxicity of the transportation, chemical, agricultural etc. etc. industries Kodachrome toxicity is a non factor in the scheme of things.

Recent K64 under a J8. Regards.

 

[digiconvert]

Thanks for all of the opinions, surprisingly positive about K64. I had another look vs a fujichrome, with a good sky/building balance, and the K64 is definitely far more as I recall the sky looked and seems sharper (though the fuji was sensia so a somewhat unfair test). Upshot is I've bought another roll, in the UK processing involves postage to Switzerland and it takes about 10-15 days to return.
Ive also found a lab that can scan/print from K64, I may even try for an Ilfochrome from some prints- is that possible ?

Thanks CJB

 

[PKM-25]

I have been shooting since age 9. That is 30 years. I have never come across a film quite as brilliant as Kodachrome. As some on here can attest, I am doing a long term tribute to it. I even have 60 rolls of 2002/2003 K-25 in my freezer......pure gold!

You can piss and moan all you want that you need to get it back quick and don't get it back quick. But you know what? Some oil paitings take weeks if not months to dry. That is the art bizz. If I am on deadline, I shoot full frame digital. If I want to shoot film and I often do, I shoot the good E-6 stocks.

But when I shoot Kodachrome, I treat each frame like a hunk of fine canvas.

Good thread. Curious to see what all the deletions were.....

 

[Earl Dunbar]

PKM-25: Make sure you have the freezer well-guarded...

You are right, hunks of gold. I only have 2 rolls, so deciding when to shoot them is worse than deciding to open the last two bottles of the vintage of the century.

 

[PKM-25]

PKM-25: Make sure you have the freezer well-guarded...

You are right, hunks of gold. I only have 2 rolls, so deciding when to shoot them is worse than deciding to open the last two bottles of the vintage of the century.

Freezer in locked gear area, airport film bag ( lead ) lined. I bought a Hasselblad XPan and all three lenses for the specific reason of shooting the 25. I worked tirelessly for nearly two years to amass the 25 speed stuff, It cost me a fortune...but so does gold.

I agree with you on the when to pop the cork thing. Dwayne's thinks that they will have at least 10 months to a year of processing and chemistry once the film is officially nixed. Quite frankly, I don't trust Kodak, they have been really struggling, so who's to say what might happen?

 

[Matt5791]

I have a very soft spot for Kodachrome - for these reasons:

- I LOVE the look

- I have found slides stored in the attic of my Mother from the mid '50's which look like they were shot yesterday - really spooky to see every one dressed in 1950's clothes and hair styles, leaning against a 1950's car, but with a modern colour - looks like a set up.

- I have a box of slides from the early 60's mixture of Kodachrome and Ektachrome - the kodachrome look like they were taken yesterday, the Ektachrome, sadly, have a lot of colour drift and look "old fashioned"

- I got into still photography after first being fascinated by cinematography. Kodachrome has been the main stay of Super8 since its inception. Sadly us super8 shooters are mouning the recent loss of Kodachrome 40 in Super 8 - Kodak processing ends August 31st.

If it was not for the processing I would use it a lot more.

Matt

 

[battra92]

- I have found slides stored in the attic of my Mother from the mid '50's which look like they were shot yesterday - really spooky to see every one dressed in 1950's clothes and hair styles, leaning against a 1950's car, but with a modern colour - looks like a set up.

I found a Kodachrome slide in a projector I bought at a tag sale and it's vintage 50s and it's amazing at how well it keeps up.

Dead Link Removed

It's even a nice photo too. Scanning Kodachrome to make prints is a b1tch though.

 

[battra92]

I just look at the state of the film industry and the current generation is the "Velvia" generation...

What's interesting is you can shoot portraits with Kodachrome but good luck shooting them with Velvia.

My standard slide film is Elite Chrome 100 or Provia 100. I love Kodachrome but I won't pay several times more for it.

 

[Tom Duffy]

I loved Kodachrome II, which was discontinued in about 1975, to make way for K25 and K64. For some reason, they always seemed like a big step backward. Kodachrome II was the high water mark, in my opinion.

Now when I shoot transparency, I usually shoot EPP or Ektachrome GX.

Take care,
Tom

 

[Matt5791]

What's interesting is you can shoot portraits with Kodachrome but good luck shooting them with Velvia.

My standard slide film is Elite Chrome 100 or Provia 100. I love Kodachrome but I won't pay several times more for it.

This is a really valid point - I really like Velvia for its vivid colour saturation, and I think that there is a current trend for this kind of look. However Kodachrome is a much better all rounder.

 

[DBP]

Having heard all these wonderful things about Velvia from photo magazines, some years ago I decided to try a roll while at the beach with friends. They wanted a group portrait on the last day, so I set the TLR up on a tripod and took a couple of shots, then decided to finish off the roll in the Nikkormat (Velvia). I'll never do that again. I still use the film, but never point it at actual humans. Kodachrome I use for all sorts of things.

 

[digiconvert]

I picke d my Kodachrome up on one of those 'wonder what that's like ?' moments. But it was a revalation after Fuji vision. I am currently compiling two photo projects. One of local views (urban and rural) to be taken over the next ten years as a historical record, the other of one particular scene on the first of every month in the year. I want a true record of how things look so the K64 is an ideal choice (plus it will keep for that time). I just hope it will be around at the end of the first project- along with yours truly

 

[Sal Santamaura]

K25 was my primary color film for decades. Not selling photography, I was only concerned with what pleased me. I tried K64, including the 120 version, but its higher contrast and different image structure wasn't as satisfying. Contacting Kodak's CEO failed to elicit K25 in 120. So I stayed with 35mm K25 until processing reliability dropped off.

Today an OM-1n + K25 + Kodak Carousel, though still in my possession and used to view the archive, have been replaced by a Bronica RF645 + Astia 100F + KR1.5 filter + Rollei 66P for travel and documenting life. Slightly larger, and a bit more work inserting the transparencies myself in Hama glassless mounts, but results are sufficiently satisfying. Fuji's latest generation Astia seems to have dark storage life roughly comparable to K25; it's far longer than my remaining actuarial life anyway. And Fuji transparencies' useful projection life has always been much greater than Kodachrome.

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

I also found that shooting Astia in a larger format was what led me to let go of K25.

 

[HerrBremerhaven]

Another agreement on Fuji Astia 100F. I was mostly a Kodak user, though rarely Kodachrome, until after the Fuji reps gave me some Astia 100F to try out. I was hooked from the first processed roll of 35mm, and now I use it in 35mm, 120, and 4x5 Quickloads. Probably the best people film colour pallette I have yet tried.

Ciao!

Gordon

 

[xtrout1]

I still have rolls of Kodachrome 25 that has been in my frigerator for years.
If I expose this film, could I still have it processed?

 

[Amund]

I still have rolls of Kodachrome 25 that has been in my frigerator for years.
If I expose this film, could I still have it processed?

Yep, no problem..