Guest equator Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 I heard a lot of people talk about this series of films and that they want to emulate its look... Can someone tell me in a few words,what is so special about it? What kind of look did it have,and how is it different from todays ektachrome films? Or maybe could someone provide me with some link where i can see some images captured with it? thank you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Wells Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 Or maybe could someone provide me with some link where i can see some images captured with it? Capture your own images ! Get a roll of Kodachrome 64 at a photo store, shoot some slides. (64 slightly different than the current 16mm stock, but you'll get the idea). -sam Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeorgeSelinsky Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 (64 slightly different than the current 16mm stock, but you'll get the idea). I don't know if Kodak still makes their Type A K40 for still 35mm photography. I remember they used to. Speaking of still photography, the absence of K25 does suck - although I must confess I'd hardly find a practical application for it these days. I always did want to shoot a comparison test of K-25 in 16mm against 7245 and check the grain (including overexposing 7245 a stop, maybe even pulling it). - G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeorgeSelinsky Posted January 29, 2004 Share Posted January 29, 2004 Can someone tell me in a few words,what is so special about it? Contrasty, finer grained than the Ektachrome films (at least the pre-Tgrain ones), and a natural to slighly saturated color reproduction. If we're to compare it with the current lower con Vision look, it would be more saturated. It had its own color pallete which looks different from Ektachrome and color negative. Lots of home movies were shot in Kodachrome, 16mm (usually the fifty ft mag cameras) and Super 8/Regular 8. Kodachrome is also more archivally stable than Ektachrome. The film does not have dye couplers - the dyes are added in the processing chemistry, which makes it a very involved process (therefore it's difficult to get the film developed, fewer places have a Kodachrome rig). For many years Kodachrome was not a 'professional film' (at least for still photography), so it required testing by the batch to look for color shifts. You'd shoot a grey card and then pop in different CC filters until it looked neutral to your eye. Kodak only recently added its cine Kodachrome films to its professional catalog. When I once saw a student at NYU with a roll of 16mm K-40 I was like "They still make that?" - I never knew it still existed because it wasn't in their professional MP product brochures, while the Ektachromes were. We actually wanted to shoot a test but at the time Qualex wanted like $40 to develop 100 ft. That precluded that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Premium Member John Pytlak RIP Posted January 29, 2004 Premium Member Share Posted January 29, 2004 Kodak Kodachrome films: http://www.kodak.com/eknec/PageQuerier.jht...pq-locale=en_US http://www.kodak.com/global/en/professiona....22.5&lc=en http://www.kodak.com/country/US/en/motion/.../tech7268.shtml Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now