What will you replace Kodachrome with?

[Sal Santamaura]

...when 50D was released which gave comparable sharpness & grain to K25...

I think 50D was the finest Fujichrome ever made -- in large format -- and still lament its loss. However, grain and sharpness weren't even close to K25.

 

[railwayman3]

As, at the moment, I'm using the last of my Kodachrome for scanning and printing, I'm thinking that I might try C-41 again, home process to scan.

And it will be quite good to get back to some serious B&W and darkroom printing.

Shall miss Kodachrome, but won't get too bored with lots of photographic ideas to try.

(I, too, went off Kodachrome for a long time as a result of the poor processing, and the dull results in the frequent poor UK weather! Oddly, I find that the results I'm currently getting with K64 and K200 seem to indicate a much improved emulsion or processing to 15-20 years ago?)

 

[benjiboy]

I think 50D was the finest Fujichrome ever made -- in large format -- and still lament its loss. However, grain and sharpness weren't even close to K25.

I wouldn't think on either of these films the grain structure would be a significant factor in either film, I project 120 Fuji Velvia 50 and 100F on to a 5ft square screen without any visible grain, even 35mm Isn't grainy so you must have some unique uses for 4X5 and larger to show any grain

 

[bblhed]

I believe, or rather I want to believe that at some point, really soon I hope, Kodak will have an E-6 product that is at least as good as Kodachrome. They are saying that Ektar 100 is it on print film, but now I am doing #d and I need slide film, I want a better slide film, one hour slide film processing would be nice too, but I have a better chance of seeing Kodachrome make a come back.

 

[Poisson Du Jour]

Kodachrome was great in the 80s and early 90s when it was a staple stock for all of my photography. Then came supply difficulties. Rather than run after geese, I switched to Velvia. No regrets.

Tape media is passé. Even floppies — remember them, ma? — are considered a quaint relict of a bygone era. It's no great revelation then for me to admit that I have lost d*** photos, and lots of them; they simply do not come up, or "file is corrupted" or "file is in use by another application and cannot be accessed"... . It's the most untrustworthy, unstable, unreliable and pretentious medium ever and I'm heartily sick of its claims and counterclaims as opposed to truth. Meanwhile, old Kodachrome trannies, sleeved and in folders, look as grand today as they did in 1981 — and gee, how youthful and fresh-faced I looked astride a bicycle... . Velvia, too, is up there with the best of them from mid-1995.

 

[StorminMatt]

I believe, or rather I want to believe that at some point, really soon I hope, Kodak will have an E-6 product that is at least as good as Kodachrome. They are saying that Ektar 100 is it on print film, but now I am doing #d and I need slide film, I want a better slide film, one hour slide film processing would be nice too, but I have a better chance of seeing Kodachrome make a come back.

The fact of the matter is that film (especially color film) is a dying market. You're not going to see an E6 replacement for Kodachrome. However, from what I have heard, Rollei Digibase CR200 (not to be confused with CN200 negative film by the same manufacturer) is about as close as you are going to get. I have never tried it myself. So I can't really vouch. But from what I have heard, it looks more like Kodachrome than E100G or E200 does, and MUCH more like Kodachrome than Astia does.

 

[John_Nikon_F]

Switched to Velvia in 1991 and never looked back.

-J

 

[marylandphoto]

I guess I'll replace it with EPP...oh wait...no problem, I'll just replace it with 100GX...really?

 

[railwayman3]

Thanks for that suggestion...I'll certainly give the Rollei film a try. Googling around, it looks as though it's the same emulsion as the old Agfa RSX professional films, which I used a lot and really liked as giving very neutral and accurate colors.

 

[nworth]

Like most people, I don't do slides much any more. Kodachrome had already been replaced by color negative films for most of my work. I will probably be using Kodak Ektar (mostly in 120). When I have the yen for transparencies, it will be Ektachrome, although I will also miss EPP.

 

[lns]

Candidly, I think I'm going to give up 35mm color film. It's not just the loss of Kodachrome. It's mostly the closing of the lab I used and the lack of a great alternative to that lab. So my answer is, Tri-X.

-Laura

 

[lxdude]

When I have the yen for transparencies, it will be Ektachrome, although I will also miss EPP.

If all you have is yen, it's gonna have to be Fuji!

 

[mabman]

Candidly, I think I'm going to give up 35mm color film. It's not just the loss of Kodachrome. It's mostly the closing of the lab I used and the lack of a great alternative to that lab. So my answer is, Tri-X.

-Laura

I hear this - Costco was my go-to place for cheaper (and very clean) 35mm colour neg film development, and they've stopped all processing in Western Canada. Walmart scratches my negs, and most other chains have stopped processing entirely. 120 processing is still available locally, but for $4.25 for dev. only, it gets a little rich.

While these days I mostly shoot B&W, I have some colour neg in 35mm and 120, and some expired 120 slide I acquired a while ago, which I wouldn't mind cross-processing.

I am currently trying to see if I can get c-41 chemistry kits from my local film-friendly photo store - they can get some things from Maco, so the Rollei-branded new (repackaged) liquid c-41 kits may be available (liquid kits can't be imported due to hazmat regulations). Powder kits can be imported, but my preference would be a separate bleach and fix, instead of the blix which is what the powder kits provide. It's not supposed to be that much harder than b&w processing, overall.

I only shot a couple of rolls of Kodachrome - at $13-15/roll for processing, it certainly wasn't an everyday film choice.