So you agree with me.
Kodak puts out Kodachrome 2k or some nonsense and it'll sell like hotcakes. A few greybeards will have aneurisms and everyone else will happily shoot Kodacrome2k and move on.
Thing is, Provia is a better film overall than Kodachrome ever was (even archivability is probably up there).
In fact, it's probably the best colour film ever made.
And it's available right now.
Go shoot it, instead of yearning for something that would probably become old hat to you after a few tries.
is tmax400 better than tri x (400/320)?
I agree with you 100%. but you know, there's tri x and then there's tri x .. I hope they alert the ICU when they do the release so they can stock up on iron lungs and O3 tents, it's gonna be crazy times! my butler was good at deciphering my blinks, but I also had a twitch that made it tough .. "2 twitches and a blink" meant "your other left" ..
Kodacrome2k
Kodachrome2K is so twenty years ago!
I've shot both Tri-X's and have loads of the Soviet emulsions from FSU countries. Tmax 400 is nicer. I know this is sacrilege here but that's my opinion. I did not grow up in the heyday of film, Tri-X before I knew anything was just another kind of film. Shot side by side with Tmax I preferred the Tmax off the bat. I wouldn't say no to Tri-X but I'd chose Tmax over it.
Sounds like where Kodak is. Maybe iKodakhrome2.0
sounds good. not sure what you mean by both tri x's there's been like 30 of them just in the past 50 years ... they keep "fixing" it to look tmaxy-digital. LOL
whatever ... none of it is that important in the grand scheme of things. LOL. im glad you enjoy what you enjoy that's what's its all about ..
It's not that nobody cares about Kodachrome.....but some of us who do care also acknowledge that it's not coming back due to insurmountable obstacles including the K14 process. Those obstacles will remain insurmountable unless some huge lottery winner decides to be altruistic and lose their entire fortune on it, or the film market increases in size 100-fold.
It's about what feels good and the nostalgia. Tmax-400 is a-ways better than Tri-X but people will die on that hill and claim Tri-X is the greatest ever. Even though it's not the same Tri-X as it was.
Tri-X is evocative, it's an emotional attachment. Brings back memories of the greats who used it.
what a waste of research time and money. Kodachrome™ look can be achieved easily with any color film with a heavy cyan cast no one really cares about Kodachrome film. maybe Sinopromise or LOMO can make a cheap Chinese knockoff that says Kodachrome™ .. it will look and act like same thing except it will be better because it won't cost 300dollars a roll to process.
Sounds like there's an analogy here with the Alamo. The last man to die in the 1960 film was Jim Bowie if I remember correctly. Anyone here like that? Answers on a post card, please
pentaxuser
You know, I wouldn't mind a Lomochrome slide film...
I remember Davy Crockett banging away with a musket and the movie fading out. One of the first films I ever saw mind you.
Silly rabbit.
It's not about what's better. It hasn't been for decades when it comes to film. It's about what feels good and the nostalgia. Tmax-400 is a-ways better than Tri-X but people will die on that hill and claim Tri-X is the greatest ever. Even though it's not the same Tri-X as it was.
Tri-X is evocative, it's an emotional attachment. Brings back memories of the greats who used it.
...not sure what you mean by both tri x's...
The movie ignores that the whole reason that Mexico attacked is the Davy Crockett, Jim Bowie et al where in Texas to bring slavery into Texas. Mexico had no problems with Americans settling in Texas as long as they did not have or bring slaves. This movie like other Disney movie white washed the facts to make the movies palatable to the general public.
My (usual cynical) thoughts on all this.
Kodachrome is now ancient history. It was also, before Kodak pulled the plug on it, an entirely different film from the K-25 and K-64 I recall from the 1970s. The glorious Technicolor-like hues of the past had been quite muted in the last avatar, or maybe "mutation". 120 Kodachrome was, for me anyway, a complete disaster. None of my publishers would use it, the plate makers all said it was too iffy to scan with the equipment of that era.
Kodak made its decision many years ago and out it went, along with many other films we now all fondly recall (I won't go into my quest to get them to bring back Panatomic-X).
Poster #4 has a Nikon D800 but wants to race back to Kodachrome. I have a D800 too, in fact I have two, they are such great image-making machines. However, unlike him, I won't be jogging off to buy K-whatever, not at the price they would surely ask for it. And send it back to Rochester for processing?? Not in ten lifetimes. Kodak did that with K-120 in the '80s and it bombed, massively. I was told by one of their reps in Australia that it went to Japan for processing. Two of my 'shoots' got lost and eventually turned up, many months later. By then my client had insisted I reshoot the assignment (an architectural one), which I did. With Fujichrome Velvia.
Let us not forget that eventually we all have to learn this - life in the real world isn't what we want it to be, but as it is.
Investigate what it would take to make HIE-2, instead. At least an IR film where just a yellow filter will give you the Wood Effect.
HIE and Ektachrome IR were considered National Asset by the US Defense Department so for decades the department paid Kodak to keep the production lines open and running. That of course included the supply line up and running. When money because tight and the department was convinced the digital electro-optical infrared sensors were superior for all of the department's need the financial support of the two films was discontinues. The short version is that those two films will not be coming back. We will never see IR films with those capabilities again.
Rolls (135 and 120) of TX400 vs sheets of 320TXP. Two extremely different films:
Their characteristic curves are very unlike each other.
The movie ignores that the whole reason that Mexico attacked is the Davy Crockett, Jim Bowie et al where in Texas to bring slavery into Texas. Mexico had no problems with Americans settling in Texas as long as they did not have or bring slaves. This movie like other Disney movie white washed the facts to make the movies palatable to the general public.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?