Shooting with Kodachrome 64 in 35mm

TEXTURES

A
TEXTURES

  • 1
  • 0
  • 16
Small Craft Club

A
Small Craft Club

  • 0
  • 0
  • 18
RED FILTER

A
RED FILTER

  • 0
  • 0
  • 17
The Small Craft Club

A
The Small Craft Club

  • 0
  • 0
  • 16
Tide Out !

A
Tide Out !

  • 0
  • 0
  • 10

Recent Classifieds

Forum statistics

Threads
198,893
Messages
2,782,677
Members
99,741
Latest member
likes_life
Recent bookmarks
0

Uncle Bill

Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
1,395
Location
Oakville and
Format
Multi Format
Got a question for the studio audience, I experimented with Kodachrome 64 and I shot the roll with a polarising filter on the lenses I used which for the record is Zuiko with my OM-4. I find the images on the dark side, should I have left UV/Haze/1a filter on the lens? Up until now I have been shooting with Fuji Velvia 100 for the record.

Bill
 

Attachments

  • Old Muscle.jpg
    Old Muscle.jpg
    69.4 KB · Views: 150
  • Vintage BMW.jpg
    Vintage BMW.jpg
    55.2 KB · Views: 134

Dave Parker

Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2004
Messages
4,031
Format
Multi Format
It looks like your meter may have not been working right? they seem to be about 1 stop under what they need to be? did you do any independant metering of the scene? The UV would not have made any difference and did you have the ISO set up correctly in your camera?

Little more information would go a ways to help you out Bill.

If you could, post your exposure data, f/stop, lens, speed or anything else you recorded.

Dave
 
OP
OP
Uncle Bill

Uncle Bill

Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2005
Messages
1,395
Location
Oakville and
Format
Multi Format
I think the meter is fine on the OM-4

I shot some Velvia a few weeks later with the results posted below and we all know how tricky that film is to play with.
I shot with (going by memory here) a 28 f3.5 Zuiko lens opened up about halfway with a polariser on the front. It was a partly cloudy hazy day mid afternoon.

Bill
 

Attachments

  • Canadian Ranger 2.jpg
    Canadian Ranger 2.jpg
    67.1 KB · Views: 114
  • Toronto Skyline 1.jpg
    Toronto Skyline 1.jpg
    84.4 KB · Views: 89

Claire Senft

Member
Joined
Dec 7, 2004
Messages
3,239
Location
Milwaukee, W
Format
35mm
I do not think that using a haze filter would have done much except perhaps add a slight warth to the shadows. To me it looks like it is about 2/3 to 1 stop under-exposed. K64 is a somewhat contrasty film.
 

DBP

Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2006
Messages
1,905
Location
Alexandria,
Format
Multi Format
Are the slides really that dark, or is there a scanning artifact here? Kodachrome can be tricky to scan.
 

copake_ham

Member
Joined
Jan 26, 2006
Messages
4,091
Location
NYC or Copak
Format
35mm
DBP said:
Are the slides really that dark, or is there a scanning artifact here? Kodachrome can be tricky to scan.

I think it is what you are mentioning. I use a Nikon 5000D scanner - and it has a "special" Kodachrome setting.

I also think the image is somewhat under exposed. I did a little brightening (gosh - that sounds like English weather) in PS CS2 and "found" the white door in the upper right hand corner.

Here's a "side by side" - Bill's image first, PS'd on the right. Of course the shot is "deteriorated" by reiteration...
 

Attachments

  • Old Muscle.jpg
    Old Muscle.jpg
    69.4 KB · Views: 111
  • Old Muscle 2.jpg
    Old Muscle 2.jpg
    125.4 KB · Views: 110

Michel Hardy-Vallée

Membership Council
Subscriber
Joined
Apr 2, 2005
Messages
4,793
Location
Montréal, QC
Format
Multi Format
Bill, your K64 looks normal to me. Your highlights do not seem blown up, and the shadows can only be dark as they are, given the nature of the scene ; it could have used maybe a half stop more of exposure, but not much more.

I've always found that that film had a bit more "70's brown" in its palette than modern E6 emulsions. You won't get the same type of saturation you get with those films, so your shadows may become darker more quickly, and the lower saturation/deep shadow makes the overall contrast less intense to the eye. Pictures taken with it always look a bit as if they are coming from a 1974 magazine.
 

Steve Roberts

Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2004
Messages
1,299
Location
Near Tavisto
Format
35mm
mhv said:
Bill, your K64 looks normal to me. .

Agreed (within the confines of the variables of digitising, etc.)
I've found the opposite to be the case. Having been a life-long user of mainly Kodachrome, I was disappointed to hear of the impending US-only processing and inevitable delay when sending from Europe. Thus, I have been looking at alternatives. When I see the Fuji and Ektachrome slides taken by myself and others, my initial reaction is that they are a little overexposed compared with K64, but take a day's break and look at either in isolation and they look OK. I don't think there's any right or wrong, just "different".

Best wishes,

Steve
 

digiconvert

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2005
Messages
817
Location
Cannock UK
Format
Multi Format
From my limited experience your K64s look Ok to me,as someone else has noted it is more contrasty than E6 films , hence the lack of detail in the shadows. If you look at the background in the BMW shot the shops over the way seem to be correctly lit.
K64 is also a beast to scan. If I am going to scan I have found that 1/2 a stop overexposure (yes on slides !) gives a better chance of getting an image you can work with. You can also have a bit of fun with some normally exposed slides and get a 'retro look' as here.
Dead Link Removed
Dead Link Removed

I like K64 a lot, I am trying other slide films but keep going back to it for its contrast and clarity- just me I guess - but it is one of the great advantages of film that you can choose a different film for a different look.

Keep shooting !
Chris
 
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