Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 73,582   Posts: 1,622,144   Online: 698
      
Page 27 of 39 FirstFirst ... 172122232425262728293031323337 ... LastLast
Results 261 to 270 of 386
  1. #261
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,502
    Quote Originally Posted by wogster View Post
    I never actually used Kodachrome, the results I saw were grainy with weird colours, and it was slow, and more expensive to process. 75 years ago, it was a brilliant idea, but, really, Kodachrome was on life support when I started shooting colour in 1978, there were other transparency films with better colour accuracy, finer grain, higher speed and easier processing even then, 34 years ago now.
    No to most of that. It was rather slow, granted. But it wasn't remotely grainy, except the short lived 200 stuff. In fact it was so sharp that well into the 80s commercial shots and some stock agencies preferred either a 35mm Kodachrome or an 8x10 Ektachrome. Anything else wasn't as sharp. The colors were not subjectively weird, whatever the curves may look like. As I posted before, sometimes Caucasian flesh tones can be a bit pale, but overall the color is rich and vibrant. It does have its own look.

    There's a fair amount of Kodachrome from my 2010 "farewell to Kodachrome" on my Flickr page. Some do look grainy, but those are on Kodachrome 200, which was also all well past expiration by then too. I bought it all off eBay all stores being out of it by the time I started buying it, and had no way to know how it had been stored before I got it.

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/rogerco...7625927349242/

  2. #262
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    24,073
    Images
    65
    Quote Originally Posted by wogster View Post
    What I mean by it was on life support in 1978, is that already Kodachrome was starting to lose market share to other film technologies, like E6 and C41, even if digital had never been invented, we would still have seen Kodachrome fade into history.
    Market share was not lost until 1990 or therabouts.

    PE

  3. #263
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,826
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    Market share was not lost until 1990 or therabouts.

    PE
    Thanks for stating that, PE. Kodachrome was not "on life support" in 1978, or anything close to it. It was used extensively. That's 4 years after K-14 was introduced. If it had been on life support, would Kodak have come out with 120 format K64 and K-200 8 years later?

    The E-6 films were improving, but they had to overcome a Kodachrome user base that had found nothing to replace it, and many were going to continue to use the K-films because they were so familiar with them.
    Myself, I found Fujichrome oversaturated and Ektachrome to be bluish. I have wildflower slides from 1982 that were taken at the same time, Ektachrome in one camera and K-64 in the other, and the California poppies on the Kodachrome were orangeish the way they really were, and on the Ektachromes they were yellow. It took a long time for E-6 films to be widely preferred over the K-films, not just accepted in their place.
    Last edited by lxdude; 11-09-2012 at 11:03 PM. Click to view previous post history.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  4. #264
    wogster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Bruce Peninsula, ON, Canada
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,266
    Quote Originally Posted by MattKing View Post
    On the market share issue, I have no disagreement with you.

    I did, however still prefer the qualities of Kodachrome right through the early 1980s. When the Kodak lab in western Canada closed, that definitely started to wain.

    I assume that you weren't in Canada at the end of the 1970s, or bought Kodachrome from outside the country, because as far as I am aware all Canadian sold Kodachrome included processing until the early 1980s.
    I was here, born and raised, I got into serious photography in the late 70's and into slides in the early 80's, the Kodachrome I saw shot by friends was not impressive, I used some other chrome films myself, and then gave up on it, when I realized I wasn't going to be projecting them, and printing negatives was cheaper and easier. This is one of the problems a lot of people here are running into, printing from slides now that the successor to Cibachrome, Ilfochrome is history, is only really possible using digital technology.
    Paul Schmidt
    See my Blog at http://clickandspin.blogspot.com

    The greatest advance in photography in the last 100 years is not digital, it's odourless stop bath....

  5. #265

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    1,703
    Quote Originally Posted by Photo Engineer View Post
    Market share was not lost until 1990 or therabouts.

    PE
    Not wanting to drag up what I posted some two years ago (and was well discussed then)....here, in the UK, this was just about the time when the previous high-quality factory processing went to pieces, with scratched films, poor mounting, slow service, which should never have happened with a "flag-ship" product.

  6. #266

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    8,093
    Images
    228

    Reports of (Colour) Kodachrome Home Processing Emerge from Sydney

    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
    No to most of that. It was rather slow, granted. But it wasn't remotely grainy, except the short lived 200 stuff. In fact it was so sharp that well into the 80s commercial shots and some stock agencies preferred either a 35mm Kodachrome or an 8x10 Ektachrome. Anything else wasn't as sharp. The colors were not subjectively weird, whatever the curves may look like. As I posted before, sometimes Caucasian flesh tones can be a bit pale, but overall the color is rich and vibrant. It does have its own look.

    There's a fair amount of Kodachrome from my 2010 "farewell to Kodachrome" on my Flickr page. Some do look grainy, but those are on Kodachrome 200, which was also all well past expiration by then too. I bought it all off eBay all stores being out of it by the time I started buying it, and had no way to know how it had been stored before I got it.

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/rogerco...7625927349242/
    Roger were you there at the lab on the last day with Dan (Bayer) and I? There were a bunch of photographers so it's hard to remember them all.


    ~Stone

    The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

  7. #267
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,826
    I just want to corroborate what you say on your flickr page.

    Your wife is indeed lovely. She also looks like she's a delight to be around, and I will venture to say that you are one lucky guy.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  8. #268
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,502
    Quote Originally Posted by StoneNYC View Post
    Roger were you there at the lab on the last day with Dan (Bayer) and I? There were a bunch of photographers so it's hard to remember them all.


    ~Stone

    The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Nope. Never been in any Kodachrome lab.

  9. #269
    Roger Cole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Suburbs of Atlanta, GA USA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    4,502
    Quote Originally Posted by lxdude View Post
    I just want to corroborate what you say on your flickr page.

    Your wife is indeed lovely. She also looks like she's a delight to be around, and I will venture to say that you are one lucky guy.
    Thanks.

    I shot a lot more Kodachrome than what's there, but much of it was documenting family and friends that year so I've not posted that kind of stuff.

    One slide I value greatly is a photo of my then new girlfriend, now wife, and my mother, then 82 years old and having been very sick earlier that year, hugging at Christmas, the first time they met. My mom loves my wife and liked her immediately. It's a shot with a lot of personal meaning but not one for Flickr.

    Dwayne's also managed to scratch it. It doesn't ruin it, but I'd rather it weren't scratched. I thought about getting an Ilfochrome of it when I could but didn't. I don't know if the one or two commercial labs doing Ilfochrome still have any or not.

  10. #270

    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Connecticut, USA
    Shooter
    8x10 Format
    Posts
    8,093
    Images
    228

    Reports of (Colour) Kodachrome Home Processing Emerge from Sydney

    Quote Originally Posted by Roger Cole View Post
    Thanks.

    I shot a lot more Kodachrome than what's there, but much of it was documenting family and friends that year so I've not posted that kind of stuff.

    One slide I value greatly is a photo of my then new girlfriend, now wife, and my mother, then 82 years old and having been very sick earlier that year, hugging at Christmas, the first time they met. My mom loves my wife and liked her immediately. It's a shot with a lot of personal meaning but not one for Flickr.

    Dwayne's also managed to scratch it. It doesn't ruin it, but I'd rather it weren't scratched. I thought about getting an Ilfochrome of it when I could but didn't. I don't know if the one or two commercial labs doing Ilfochrome still have any or not.
    Granted Dwayne's had a lot of film coming through at the end, but they certainly had their issues, lost about 3 rolls of film to them, just blank, from different cameras all sent at the same time, they said "must have been my camera" but again, multiple campers a, sucks because its basically all of my Hollywood LA stay is gone, a missing part of my book, it sucks.

    Another reason K didn't survive, too muck risk in error...


    ~Stone

    The Noteworthy Ones - Mamiya: 7 II, RZ67 Pro II / Canon: 1V, AE-1 / Kodak: No 1 Pocket Autographic, No 1A Pocket Autographic

    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin