Kodachrome Usage

PKM-25 · Mar 27, 2009

Ian Grant said:
K25 was way superior toK64 which is why people keep make those comments. Unfortunate it was withdrawn you re dependent on how well it's been stored.

I have over 300 rolls of perfect KM-25 from a single source. I sold over 100 rolls to people like Ektagraphic and other project members and a few bricks on Ebay to get some of the film to people who deserve it and to offset the massive cost of what is most likely the largest remaining batch in the world of perfect Kodachrome 25 that has been frozen since purchased new.

I use the stuff and I can tell you that yes, it is finer in grain and yes, it has really good color & sharpness, especially with Leica glass, but current Kodachrome 64 is simply outstanding, nearly as good as 25.

I think what happens here is that one person hears it from another person and so on and so on and before you know it, a mountain of BS casts a shadow over the truth.

The truth is that if you loved KM-25, then you would love KR-64 right now. Otherwise, folks will wax poetic and miss the chance to be part of history, add some great Kodachrome images to their archive and instead will piss and moan about how much it sucks and some will likely regret it later.

That's my story and I am sticking to it.

Ektagraphic · Mar 27, 2009

Thanks Dan! Hopefully some people will atleast try some Kodachrome 64 even though they loved Kodachrome 25. They don't know what they are missing!

2F/2F · Mar 27, 2009

I do not use it. I have used it, and I saw no point in continuing to do so once they discontinued the 200. Often I want to use it for certain projects where nostalgia or Americana might be part of the concept, but not at any other time.

I do not use it for many reasons:

0. Because it is a transparency film. For general purpose and/or 35mm color pix, I almost always use negative film. However, since it can be assumed that I want a transparency film if I am considering Kodachrome in the first place, on to the real reasons.
1. It cannot be processed quickly, or at home.
2. It is not as flexible as E-6 films. Even if you could convince Dwayne's to push or pull, the results would not be as good as with E-6, and the cost would be ridiculous.
3. It is only available in 35mm, and it is too slow for most of the work that I like to do with 35mm film.
4. The one time I planned to do a large project with it, no place was willing to make the effort to sell it to me in large emulsion-matching quantities...not even Freestyle. Additionally, even if they did get off their asses and get matching batches for you, no local place stocks it in large enough quantities to do such projects.
5. It does not have color rendition or contrast characteristics that would make it anything other than a special-purpose film for what I shoot.
6. I do not like my film being in the mail, nor do I like using a lab where I cannot go in and speak to the employees in person, nor do I like dropping my film off at Wal-Mart (which I boycott), or any other place that will get it to Dwayne's in a roundabout fashion.
7. There is no "support network" for it. Hardly anybody knows anything about working with it any more. Photo store employees, lab employees, litho printers, etc. The same is becoming more and more true about E-6, and even C-41 and black and white.

Now, Kodachrome 200 was another story. That was some good stuff, and far more useful for my purposes. IMO they should have killed the 64, not the 200. Then I would shoot Kodachrome fairly frequently.

PKM-25 · Mar 28, 2009

2F/2F said:
7. There is no "support network" for it. Hardly anybody knows anything about working with it any more. Photo store employees, lab employees, litho printers, etc. The same is becoming more and more true about E-6, and even C-41 and black and white.

Actually, I have something in the works for this, but you have listed a variety of other reasons so I doubt this will do much to gain your interest.

Not everyone is going to want to use it, anyone would understand that, it is the nature of the craft, subjective reasoning.

I set a goal with this project not to save Kodachrome but to have Kodak keep it around long enough for us to celebrate 75 years in a visual sense. That is happening, the Kodachrome Project is succeeding in what I had envisioned for it.

But other possibilities are surfacing, one very exciting one as I type this, so one step at a time, one dream at a time.

I wish I had a manager though, I am just a photographer who had an idea. But now the idea is bigger than me, so I welcome all who might want to travel this road.

And for those who don't want to travel it like your self, no harm, no foul, there is plenty of passion in the world looking for a place to live.

2F/2F · Mar 28, 2009

PKM-25 said:
Actually, I have something in the works for this, but you have listed a variety of other reasons so I doubt this will do much to gain your interest.

Not everyone is going to want to use it, anyone would understand that, it is the nature of the craft, subjective reasoning.

I set a goal with this project not to save Kodachrome but to have Kodak keep it around long enough for us to celebrate 75 years in a visual sense. That is happening, the Kodachrome Project is succeeding in what I had envisioned for it.

But other possibilities are surfacing, one very exciting one as I type this, so one step at a time, one dream at a time.

I wish I had a manager though, I am just a photographer who had an idea. But now the idea is bigger than me, so I welcome all who might want to travel this road.

And for those who don't want to travel it like your self, no harm, no foul, there is plenty of passion in the world looking for a place to live.

Just because I personally don't have a huge use for it doesn't mean that I don't support it staying around or your project! The reasons against must surely be understood, however, and I am sure they are. The more tools we have, the better, and at least Kodachrome is not redundant like Ektar or T-Max 400 II. It is ridiculous that the "market" demands no fewer than 10 medium speed color negative films. (Fuji Reala, 160S, 160C, Superia 100, Superia 200, Kodak 160NC, 160VC, Ektar 100, Gold 100, Gold 200, plus Ferrania, Solaris, Rollei, etc.), yet the really cool stuff has been ignored by shooters since digital. 320T, 160T, Portra 100T, NPL, MS 100/1000, about 50 different types of finely-tuned reversal film, and now T64 are canned *forever* (let us not kid ourselves; films like this will never exist again), while we have an excess of middle of the road, standard films.

PKM-25 · Mar 28, 2009

2F/2F said:
Just because I personally don't have a huge use for it doesn't mean that I don't support it staying around or your project! The reasons against must surely be understood, however, and I am sure they are. The more tools we have, the better, and at least Kodachrome is not redundant like Ektar or new T-max.

Absolutely they are understood, and I appreciate your support for the project. I just wanted to touch upon the support end of it since I thought you raised a good point and I saw that as an area in need of improvement as well.

PKM-25 · Mar 28, 2009

Ektagraphic said:
Thanks Dan! Hopefully some people will atleast try some Kodachrome 64 even though they loved Kodachrome 25. They don't know what they are missing!

We have to show them what they are missing, the photos we make right now on Kodachrome have to speak loudly.

But you already knew that

2F/2F · Mar 28, 2009

PKM, do you happen to have any K200 that you would sell (or "donate" )? I could definitely do something for the project with that film, and I would love to shoot a gross or so (HA!) of rolls before it all goes totally bad...

P.S. How funny that your project began in Pie Town! I recently took a cross country trip from L.A. to the presidential inauguration and back. On the way to Las Cruces out of East-Central AZ, I stayed on U.S. 60 specifically to pass through Pie Town, as opposed to heading into Cruces via U.S. 180/Silver City. I had never heard of it before; just saw it on the map. A group of friends and myself celebrate an annual "Pie Day", so I had to stop in for a photo in front of the sign.

I will be making a similar trip to Detroit this summer (all U.S. Highways and other non-Interstate roads). One of my only regrets on the inauguration trip was not shooting at least *some* color 35mm. I shot 50 rolls of HP5, nearly 20 rolls of Delta 3200, plus about 20 shots on 5x7 FP4, but only about six or seven 120 rolls of color; all landscapes on a tripod using a Mamiya M645. I knew I would just not have the time to shoot everything I wanted to shoot exactly how I wanted to shoot it, so I picked something and stuck with it: black and white high-speed small-format negs. I am glad I stuck to my guns, though there are some shots that I wish had been in color; not to blend into the main project, but simply for the sake of a beautiful image. My main interests are photojournalism and diaristic travel photography and landscapes. I consider my inauguration trip the first in a lifelong series of trips photographing the people and landscape of this country. Before the trip, I had only really photographed relatively local areas.

Unfortunately, I shoot in low light or while moving a lot of the time, often from the car, where I want '1000 *and* a healthy amount of D of F. EI 64 just doesn't cut it. It would work for some things, but not for what a lot of what I shoot. K200, which is easily pushable one stop, is a better film for me.

Q.G. · Mar 28, 2009

Ektagraphic said:
Hopefully some people will atleast try some Kodachrome 64 even though they loved Kodachrome 25. They don't know what they are missing!

Some actually do.
And, you know, it's Kodachrome 25.

But i 'still' wish the project the best of luck!

PKM-25 · Mar 28, 2009

2F/2F said:
PKM, do you happen to have any K200 that you would sell (or "donate" )? I could definitely do something for the project with that film, and I would love to shoot a gross or so (HA!) of rolls before it all goes totally bad...

P.S. How funny that your project began in Pie Town! I recently took a cross country trip from L.A. to the presidential inauguration and back. On the way to Las Cruces out of East-Central AZ, I stayed on U.S. 60 specifically to pass through Pie Town, as opposed to heading into Cruces via U.S. 180/Silver City. I had never heard of it before; just saw it on the map. A group of friends and myself celebrate an annual "Pie Day", so I had to stop in for a photo in front of the sign.

I will be making a similar trip to Detroit this summer (all U.S. Highways and other non-Interstate roads). One of my only regrets on the inauguration trip was not shooting at least *some* color 35mm. I shot 50 rolls of HP5, nearly 20 rolls of Delta 3200, plus about 20 shots on 5x7 FP4, but only about six or seven 120 rolls of color; all landscapes on a tripod using a Mamiya M645. I knew I would just not have the time to shoot everything I wanted to shoot exactly how I wanted to shoot it, so I picked something and stuck with it: black and white high-speed small-format negs. I am glad I stuck to my guns, though there are some shots that I wish had been in color; not to blend into the main project, but simply for the sake of a beautiful image. My main interests are photojournalism and diaristic travel photography and landscapes. I consider my inauguration trip the first in a lifelong series of trips photographing the people and landscape of this country. Before the trip, I had only really photographed relatively local areas.

Unfortunately, I shoot in low light or while moving a lot of the time, often from the car, where I want '1000 *and* a healthy amount of D of F. EI 64 just doesn't cut it. It would work for some things, but not for what a lot of what I shoot. K200, which is easily pushable one stop, is a better film for me.

I have about 50 rolls of KL-200, enough to pepper my aspect of the project with it when I need it. I used some for the Stimulus Bill signing in Denver not long ago. I too shot the inauguration, but I flew there as it was a last moment decision. I shot all K64 in two Leica bodies, for 24 hours straight. You can see some of that work here:

Dead Link Removed

I understand what you are saying about low light, but I think this film handled it very well, especially with fast Leitz glass. Yes, there are times I wish I had the faster 200 in my rigs, but I find I can work more consistently with one speed in scenarios like this, so that is why the KL-200 stayed home on this trip. My only regret was not taking the Hasselblad XPan which would have proved stunning for some of the crowd shots.

Best of luck on your road trips, I agree with the road less traveled approach..

Fredrik Sandstrom · Mar 28, 2009

2F/2F said:
Even if you could convince Dwayne's to push or pull, the results would not be as good as with E-6, and the cost would be ridiculous.

You know, they do advertise this service openly, so I don't think they'd need much convincing. The price is an extra $10.

Ektagraphic · Mar 28, 2009

PKM-25 said:
I agree with the road less traveled approach..

Me too!

Ian Grant · Mar 28, 2009

PKM-25 said:
And for those who don't want to travel it like your self, no harm, no foul, there is plenty of passion in the world looking for a place to live.

Not sure why that remark applies to me Dan

I travel rather widely, but all my personal work is B&W at the moment. I do have a colour project in mind and I may well return to using 35mm to shoot it, in some ways it would be an ideal project for K25, or even K64. My dislike of K64 is based on using it in the poor light often found in the UK on over-cast days were K64 is lack-lustre compared to K25, however it would be quite different in the light here in Turkey.

However the logistics of my using Kodachrome are just far too dependent on an erratic postal services, only 1 in 5 of the post/parcels sent to me from the US has arrived in the past year, 3 have disappeared and one was returned to the sender, in comparison I had no problems when I lived in the UK. So I'll be trying the new Ektar 100 instead over Easter.

Perhaps I'll use a few rolls of K64 for one last nostalgic set of images, while I'm in Cornwall (UK) for the APUG Spring gathering, if the qualities poor I'll blame you

Ian

2F/2F · Mar 28, 2009

Fredrik Sandstrom said:
You know, they do advertise this service openly, so I don't think they'd need much convincing. The price is an extra $10.

Well, whaddayaknow! A lab that actually does stuff! Thanks for the tip.

B&Wpositive · Mar 28, 2009

Fredrik Sandstrom said:
You know, they do advertise this service openly, so I don't think they'd need much convincing. The price is an extra $10.

As one who has actually done this a few times over the last few years, I have to say the results are pretty good. I pushed K-200 the full 3 stops not long ago.

StorminMatt · Mar 28, 2009

Ian Grant said:
My dislike of K64 is based on using it in the poor light often found in the UK on over-cast days were K64 is lack-lustre compared to K25, however it would be quite different in the light here in Turkey.

Most of the complaints about KR64 vs KM25 seem to center around color saturation. SO many people like KM25 because of its increased (but not 'over the top') color saturation vs KR64. Of course, KR64 WILL produce some REALLY vivid colors in the right situation (for instance, grand vistas in bright, sunny places like California's Sierra Nevada). But in rather dull, dim lighting conditions, the colors are not the most vivid in the world.

2F/2F · Mar 28, 2009

B&Wpositive said:
As one who has actually done this a few times over the last few years, I have to say the results are pretty good. I pushed K-200 the full 3 stops not long ago.

K200 was my favorite film in the Kodachrome line, and pushed way better than K64 when I used it.

Did they charge you $10 per stop, or $10 total?

Do they charge a $10 fee per batch, or per roll pushed? Most labs charge per batch. For instance, if you drop off 10 sheets of 4x5 film, and their push charge is $5, they only charge $5 extra for pushing all ten sheets.

Looks like Dwayne's charges the push fee per roll, with a $100 max. push fee. Ouch!

B&Wpositive · Mar 28, 2009

PKM-25 said:
I use the stuff and I can tell you that yes, it is finer in grain and yes, it has really good color & sharpness, especially with Leica glass, but current Kodachrome 64 is simply outstanding, nearly as good as 25.

I think what happens here is that one person hears it from another person and so on and so on and before you know it, a mountain of BS casts a shadow over the truth.

True, and well spoken, Dan.

I want everyone to know that when I started reading Dan's posts a few years ago, I didn't believe it that KR-64 could be as good as KM-25 (both of which I felt looked equally spectacular in Galen Rowell's book Mountain Light). But as I shot more and more Kodachrome 64, I learned that Dan was indeed right. My change in attitude didn't come overnight.

It turned out that I had been shooting it in crappy lighting. As I began to shoot more often under different lighting and atmospheric conditions, I started having a roll here and there that looked really good. I started identifying which lighting conditions the film liked. Soon, almost every roll looked good, as I started learning what conditions the film likes. Recently, a roll I shot on Veteran's Day of a memorial dedication ceremony has confirmed in my mind that there is no better all-around slow-speed color film than Kodachrome 64 currently on the market.

For those who are new to KR-64 say the color of KR-64 and PKR-64 is too bland or doesn't match KM-25: you probably haven't given yourself enough of a chance to learn the film properly. Kodachrome 64 doesn't like cloudy, high color-temp, low-contrast days. It doesn't like the middle of a hazy, high-ozone, 85-F summer day where there is not a cloud in the sky. It DOES like the magic hours, it likes side-lighting, rim lighting, gelled fill flash, etc. As some of us relatively new Kodachrome shooters have been learning, it's possible to learn the film. I found that concentrating on mostly one type of film helps me to learn it a lot faster.

It really is a great film when used right under the right conditions. If I can learn it, you can learn it. The real trick with any medium you're new to is to experiment, experiment, experiment! It's NOT Kodachrome 25...but it's very capable in it's own way, and the look of the two seem to be very similar. (And you get extra ISO speed for handholding.)

Good luck!

B&Wpositive · Mar 28, 2009

2F/2F said:
Did they charge you $10 per stop, or $10 total?

Do they charge a $10 fee per batch, or per roll pushed?

That's right; it's $10 per roll for altered development, regardless of the direction or number of stops. A 1/2 stop push costs the same $10 per roll as a 3 stop push or a 2 stop pull.

Max push/pull charge for a single order is $100 if you have 10 or more rolls to push or pull (in addition to the $9 per roll processing fee).

It ends up being around $23 in the US for developing, push/pull, and shipping for a single roll when all is said and done.

nickandre · Mar 28, 2009

good thing 64 speed isn't meant to be pushed :-\

PKM-25 · Mar 29, 2009

StorminMatt said:
But in rather dull, dim lighting conditions, the colors are not the most vivid in the world.

Gonna have to disagree there, technique will solve that issue, I have had great results from the film in all the light you refer to.

After shooting for over 34 years, nothing has taught me more about the nuances of light better than Kodachrome.

PKM-25 · Mar 29, 2009

Ian Grant said:
Not sure why that remark applies to me Dan

It was a metaphor, not a get on the bus journey but a creative one of the mind and mindfulness

PKM-25 · Mar 29, 2009

Thanks BWpositive, this is exactly what I found too. There were times when I thought I had bunk film, but it was the light.

But it is funny you mention this, I was having lunch with my girlfriend today while skiing. We were at the top of one of the local ski areas at about 11,000 feet at around 1 PM, we were inside the lodge with a window view. It was a beautiful blue sky day but kind of milky blue as it can be when a little bit of moisture is in the air in the Rockies.

As I ate my lunch, I looked outside and noticed a few people eating at one of the tables on the concrete patio. There was an amazing lack of color in nearly everything I saw and I thought to my self how flat Kodachrome would look in that light, they were fairly backlit too. The reality of it was that the light was that flat in real life and that it would not be the film's fault if the photos came out that way.

Our eyes are used to seeing life in the full spectrum so we are kind of, well, blind to just how easy it is to change the *actual* color in something. If a skier wearing a tan ski jacket had walked by the group outside, we would normally never notice that it might have reflected a cast in the objects around it, but in a Kodachrome image taken at that time, the difference would be readily apparent filling the subject with warmth.

I think this is why people get so frustrated with Kodachrome, not only does it have narrow exposure latitude, it has narrow color latitude as well.

In my opinion, when one gets in synch with these limits, the real fun begins with Kodachrome so technique and a keen eye for light plays a big role in getting a pleasing image.

B&Wpositive said:
True, and well spoken, Dan.

I want everyone to know that when I started reading Dan's posts a few years ago, I didn't believe it that KR-64 could be as good as KM-25 (both of which I felt looked equally spectacular in Galen Rowell's book Mountain Light). But as I shot more and more Kodachrome 64, I learned that Dan was indeed right. My change in attitude didn't come overnight.

It turned out that I had been shooting it in crappy lighting. As I began to shoot more often under different lighting and atmospheric conditions, I started having a roll here and there that looked really good. I started identifying which lighting conditions the film liked. Soon, almost every roll looked good, as I started learning what conditions the film likes. Recently, a roll I shot on Veteran's Day of a memorial dedication ceremony has confirmed in my mind that there is no better all-around slow-speed color film than Kodachrome 64 currently on the market.

For those who are new to KR-64 say the color of KR-64 and PKR-64 is too bland or doesn't match KM-25: you probably haven't given yourself enough of a chance to learn the film properly. Kodachrome 64 doesn't like cloudy, high color-temp, low-contrast days. It doesn't like the middle of a hazy, high-ozone, 85-F summer day where there is not a cloud in the sky. It DOES like the magic hours, it likes side-lighting, rim lighting, gelled fill flash, etc. As some of us relatively new Kodachrome shooters have been learning, it's possible to learn the film. I found that concentrating on mostly one type of film helps me to learn it a lot faster.

It really is a great film when used right under the right conditions. If I can learn it, you can learn it. The real trick with any medium you're new to is to experiment, experiment, experiment! It's NOT Kodachrome 25...but it's very capable in it's own way, and the look of the two seem to be very similar. (And you get extra ISO speed for handholding.)

Good luck!

Ian Grant · Mar 29, 2009

PKM-25 said:
It was a metaphor, not a get on the bus journey but a creative one of the mind and mindfulness

I'd realised but your post got me thinking, and I'll definitely shoot 3 or 4 rolls of K64 in a months time

Ian

Q.G. · Mar 29, 2009

So Kodachrome 64 is superrealistic, and we have to learn to appreciate that it renders things the way they really are?
Or it is supersensitive, and we need to treat it with respect, entice it to make it show that it can deliver decent pictures after all?

I don't buy that. It just isn't as 'nice' as other films.
Kodak discontinued the wrong Kodachrome.

Kodachrome Usage

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency