In my mind, the only risk greater than sending my film to Dwayne's and having it come back marred is not shooting the film at all.
Not that I gamble or anything, I just figure that more people waste more time and money in a day in Vegas than I ever will in a month shooting Kodachrome.
When my friend had to cut his arm off in the Utah desert to save his own life after being trapped for nearly a week, he was coming under fire from the media for taking unnecessary risks.
I happily appeared on Good Morning America and defended him. I got to tell the entire country that once upon a time, man was intrepid and self reliant and to not pass judgment on someone else if you personally never step foot outside your modern comfort zone.
Do you know what I want people to do with this project?
Find them selves in a different light, a different place...all before a era comes to pass never to be seen again....ever.
I think you've hit the nail on the head for me. When I still used Kodachrome I felt that I was gambling with both my money and, more importantly, time on each roll I shot. Having rolls of Kodachrome returned poorly mounted, scratched, stained and with debris stuck to them is, I suggest, far worse than not shooting it at all when there are viable alternatives to the sainted Kodachrome which enjoy consistently good processing.
Originally Posted by PKM-25
Make no mistake, I have no reservations about Kodak's product, only the processing of my last rolls and the fact that Kodak appear to have abrogated themselves from any responsibility for the maintenance of the processing standards we previously enjoyed.
On a less crusading note, I've just acquired a large collection of Kodachrome slides from the 60s & 70s, all of which were shot on the old Kodachrome 2. None of the 700+ show any significant fading or deterioration and they are all a cracking advert for the product!