Ye olde Kodachrome look

[Michel Hardy-Vallée]

Not much of a question here, just an observation. I've been going through a few rolls of Kodachrome 64 (reg. and pro) and by comparing it with the Ektachromes, the KC has a very distinct look that I'm growing to like.

It looks rather desaturated in comparison with the E films, but it still gives a lot of punch with color light sources (traffic lights, cars, etc). It looks less "real", as in "less intense reality". Judging by magazines, it seems as if fully saturated colors are a rather recent development. Anything in color older than 1990 looks brownish, desaturated, or lacking shadow details. The KC has just a bit of that feel, not enough that it makes it a period film, but if the color saturation of modern films feel like a binge-drinking adolescent, the Kodachrome is like your older, more sober cousin.

I can't describe exactly what makes it special (because some will do better than me) but compared besides modern neutral balance films like Fuji Astia, Kodachrome is in a genre of its own.

 

[Papa Tango]

Dont judge a film by its color...

Michel, here is a little experiment for you. Throw a polarizing filter on the lens, and bracket your exposure under the "metered" normal exposure. I think that you will find all the saturation you need...

Ahhh, but for a roll of ASA25...

 

[nworth]

I don't think anything gives quite as good color as Kodachrome. As was noted, it has punch, but it is also very accurate and detailed. The latest editions of Kodak's Ultra 100 and Ultra 400 negative films also have that punch, but I think they are far less accurate. They look a bit like the old ASA 10 Kodachrome, with somewhat less contrast.