There is nothing like Everest and the only thing remotely like the north pole is the south pole. The differences between Kodachrome and existing, readily available and affordable E6 products just aren't worth the costs and effort.
Look at (there was a url link here which no longer exists) and you will quickly realize that it won't cost 50 million US$ to create and operate a small scale K14 processing line. (there was a url link here which no longer exists) that he would teach anyone showing up in his lab for a year.
This is nothing like private space travel, an expedition to the top of Mt. Everest or to the north pole, both in terms of of cost and in terms of personal risk involved. Unlike the other examples given here, Kodachrome seems to lack committed people to make it happen.
There is nothing like Everest and the only thing remotely like the north pole is the south pole. The differences between Kodachrome and existing, readily available and affordable E6 products just aren't worth the costs and effort.
My posting implied this and you stated it: while many would like to see Kodachrome back in its old glory, it doesn't seem to be that much superior to currently available products that anyone would go out of his/her way to make it happen. There is a market for (there was a url link here which no longer exists), but not for US$ 2000 Kodachrome slides ...
There seems to be this tendency to say that Kodachrome was not any better if not as good as many current products or the ones that replaced it in broad terms. While that may be true for the mainstream happy-snapper, it was not true of everyone. Kodachrome film had a very narrow window of seeing it's stunning potential met that few could actually impart. In terms of recent imagery, one such photographer is Alex Webb. The way he took light, tone and color and paired it with Kodachrome film even in modern times simply left most photographers in the dust.....actual photographers, not photo enthusiasts.
I am pretty confident in saying that those who claim they got better results from other films were simply not up to the task of using Kodachrome, it took another level of talent entirely to fully realize this film's potential. I would choose it over any other color film available if it were still around, it demanded my absolute best.
I am pretty confident in saying that those who claim they got better results from other films were simply not up to the task of using Kodachrome, it took another level of talent entirely to fully realize this film's potential. I would choose it over any other color film available if it were still around, it demanded my absolute best.
As stated before, artists are willing to pay US$ 6000 and more for a single color print, but won't pay the same amount for Kodachrome's color palette. Offer that amount of money for a roll of Kodachrome developed to specs, commit to 100+ rolls per year (alone or with others), and labs will beat down your front door to do it for you even on weekends and holidays if needed.
Well said.Superior is relative, I love Velvia's over saturation, and I love Kodachrome skin tones because it gives a look that's unique, it's by no means accurate or "superior" just what I appreciate.
. . . . .
It's unreal how not into actual picture making people are, it's better to just keep on beating the same dead horses of lost materials instead of producing mind blowing photographs that will help companies like Ilford, Kodak and even Fuji continue to sell great existing products.
. . . . .
Superior is relative, I love Velvia's over saturation, and I love Kodachrome skin tones because it gives a look that's unique, it's by no means accurate or "superior" just what I appreciate.
I've commented on this before too.
The average customer does not want true color, they want exaggerated color!
PE
You make this sound a lot like "whatever sells" has replaced "whatever it takes" now. Am I reading this correctly?And in a 5 year period, I paid several tens of thousands of dollars to use and process the film. I would pay top dollar to a real lab to soup my existing film if the chance ever arises. But I am not going to risk thousands of dollars on some experiment when it could go towards funding other projects or bodies of work that are a sure bet.
This whole "it was the greatest thing on earth but now it's gone and will never come back!" will sure help sell remaining artwork at inflated prices, at least as long as nobody asks "why did they allow it to disappear anyway?".It's not that people will not put up the cash, it is that the film and the means to process it to be a piece of actual "Kodachrome" film are dead and gone.
I'd really like to see Kodak Gold in 100 again.
LOL. Never had those issues. I figured, if we can wax poetic about an unavailable film, why not add Gold 100 - mostly being sarcastic, considering how these Kodachrome threads typically go.
That said, I liked Gold 100 for snapshots and vacations.
30 dollars, I think we should request Kodak to give a revival thought.
What people say they will buy in market research surveys and what they will actually buy Steve when the product is put on the the market are two different things ( read The Hidden Persuaders by Vance Packard ) so I hope you aren't going to base any important business decisions on this survey.
All these internet posts by people bemoaning the demise of Kodachrome if they had to "put their money where their mouth is" and pay what the current commercial cost would be would be a different story.
I worked out how much it would cost me on a material level, not factoring in the cost of my time and foolishly asked people here if they would pay it. I did so more to make the point that it has no commercial future. Without automation and a guarantee of high throughput the capital required to commenc makes no sense for any business to touch it with a ten foot barge pole.what is his price ?
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?