Meme Anarchy

Ishmael

52,430
12,243
Fuctifino
Exactly - when I heard about the last Kodachrome I assumed that was the end of film.

WTF would anyone still use it?

Does it provide a "warmer" image or something (like vinyl sound)?

You have to specify which Kodachrome. 25, 64, or 200. 25 was very fine-grained, with good colour rendition, although the shadows tended to green. 64 wasn't as fine grain, and the colour was a little too magenta for my tastes. 200 was the last of the Kodachromes to come to market, featured reasonably fine grain and fairly good colour rendition.
The main advantage of any Kodachrome was the longevity, which was gained by having very complicated processing requirements. Our lab processed E6 films (Ektachrome, Fujichrome, Agfacrap) which was a much easier process but lacked the longevity of Kodachrome. The advantage was fast turnaround. Kodak owned almost all the Kodachrome processing facilities, so you had to mail off your exposed film and hope for the best. They had very high standards, but nobody's perfect. National Geographic used to send their photographers out on assignment with a case of Nikons and several cases of Kodachrome.
 

Grande Mastere Dreade

Snag's spellchecker
So did Fuji film - it always had a greenish cast to it.

Kodak was the only film to use in those days.

I remember a real "you can't go home again" moment in 2012 IIRC when it was announced that the last roll of Kodachrome had just been developed in NYC.

It was similar to if they had announced that the last Coke had just been drunk - a lifelong institution was gone forever.
not true, i have an unshot roll in my garage frig..
 

chester

Super Anarchist
6,353
1,415
the film cannister was a superior vessel for carrying herb: the size was good in that you could pack a VERY useful amount of dope in it AND it was compact and easy to stash AND the lid was secure while being simple to open and close...holy happy adaptive coincidence batman!
 

Ishmael

52,430
12,243
Fuctifino
Some of the bits and pieces I have lying around. From the left, Nikon film case, Agfa Rapid film case, Kodak film, Ilford container, various Fuji films and containers. I have managed to lose quite a bit of the junk, but I still have a good film camera if the mood ever strikes...

DSC_8131 b.jpg
 

Grande Mastere Dreade

Snag's spellchecker
Some of the bits and pieces I have lying around. From the left, Nikon film case, Agfa Rapid film case, Kodak film, Ilford container, various Fuji films and containers. I have managed to lose quite a bit of the junk, but I still have a good film camera if the mood ever strikes...

i have my dad's 50's canon range finder and my 70's Pentax Spotmatic F ... problem with the pentax is finding batteries that will work with it.. aren't they still making film for the larger format cameras? imagine owning a lot of hasselbaad equipment and not being able to use it..
 

Go Left

Super Anarchist
4,950
412
Seattle
You have to specify which Kodachrome. 25, 64, or 200. 25 was very fine-grained, with good colour rendition, although the shadows tended to green. 64 wasn't as fine grain, and the colour was a little too magenta for my tastes. 200 was the last of the Kodachromes to come to market, featured reasonably fine grain and fairly good colour rendition.
The main advantage of any Kodachrome was the longevity, which was gained by having very complicated processing requirements. Our lab processed E6 films (Ektachrome, Fujichrome, Agfacrap) which was a much easier process but lacked the longevity of Kodachrome. The advantage was fast turnaround. Kodak owned almost all the Kodachrome processing facilities, so you had to mail off your exposed film and hope for the best. They had very high standards, but nobody's perfect. National Geographic used to send their photographers out on assignment with a case of Nikons and several cases of Kodachrome.
They also sent out a field refrigerator for the film into hot climates. My sister found one waiting for her in Timbuktu, before she drove out into Dogon country and in Indonesia before she traveled up some un-named river. With specific orders to not come back without every roll exposed. But not sure about the case of Nikons. She took her own cameras - Nikons.
 

Zonker

Super Anarchist
9,699
5,653
Canada
National Geographic used to send their photographers out on assignment with a case of Nikons and several cases of Kodachrome.
I went to a travel photography lecture/course by some NG photographers. They said if they got 1 image out of several rolls of film that was "publishable" they would be happy. (1 roll = 36 exposures, so at least 100 exposures to get 1 image). And they didn't mean it would make it into the magazine, just that it would show up on the light table for consideration. Very useful advice from them - "your best editing tool is the garbage can"

Do you think they later used Fuji Velvia later? When we were shooting slide film for magazines, that was what 90% of the magazines would actually require. A lot of NG jungle / forest photos look like Velvia to me (super green and very saturated reds).

Nothing like shooting 50 ASA and setting the camera at 40 because that gave a bit more punch to the images.

Christ now I complain when my m4/3 camera is a wee bit grainy at 1600
 

Ishmael

52,430
12,243
Fuctifino
I went to a travel photography lecture/course by some NG photographers. They said if they got 1 image out of several rolls of film that was "publishable" they would be happy. (1 roll = 36 exposures, so at least 100 exposures to get 1 image). And they didn't mean it would make it into the magazine, just that it would show up on the light table for consideration. Very useful advice from them - "your best editing tool is the garbage can"

Do you think they later used Fuji Velvia later? When we were shooting slide film for magazines, that was what 90% of the magazines would actually require. A lot of NG jungle / forest photos look like Velvia to me (super green and very saturated reds).

Nothing like shooting 50 ASA and setting the camera at 40 because that gave a bit more punch to the images.

Christ now I complain when my m4/3 camera is a wee bit grainy at 1600

They quite possibly switched to Velvia later, but there was also a lot of correction/enhancement in the editing process. I shot virtually everything at 1/3 stop under, to get the saturated colours without blowing out the highlights. You could always dig detail out of the bottom end, but once the top end was fried, it was gone.
 

Ishmael

52,430
12,243
Fuctifino
They also sent out a field refrigerator for the film into hot climates. My sister found one waiting for her in Timbuktu, before she drove out into Dogon country and in Indonesia before she traveled up some un-named river. With specific orders to not come back without every roll exposed. But not sure about the case of Nikons. She took her own cameras - Nikons.

I remember when the NYT switched from (company-supplied) Nikon to Olympus, due to an amazing deal from Olympus. Not 6 months later, they had thrown out all the Olympus gear and gone back to Nikon.
 

Go Left

Super Anarchist
4,950
412
Seattle
Your sister has my complete admiration. And envy.
Where she attended a tribal ceremony, apparently survived drinking a goat's blood/banana fermented concoction and slept in a thatched dwelling that had a marvelous chevron patterned frieze in the under-eave area. With better light in the morning, it was clear that it was a very long, sleeping python that had climbed up there to digest a village sheep. The sheep-bulge was almost gone so they had to move out of the village next week while it woke up and left town.

None of the above is fabricated. Yes there are pics. She was a blond, 26-year-old, fearless NYC girl.
 

shaggy

Super Anarchist
9,985
1,048
Co
I went to a travel photography lecture/course by some NG photographers. They said if they got 1 image out of several rolls of film that was "publishable" they would be happy. (1 roll = 36 exposures, so at least 100 exposures to get 1 image). And they didn't mean it would make it into the magazine, just that it would show up on the light table for consideration. Very useful advice from them - "your best editing tool is the garbage can"

Do you think they later used Fuji Velvia later? When we were shooting slide film for magazines, that was what 90% of the magazines would actually require. A lot of NG jungle / forest photos look like Velvia to me (super green and very saturated reds).

Nothing like shooting 50 ASA and setting the camera at 40 because that gave a bit more punch to the images.

Christ now I complain when my m4/3 camera is a wee bit grainy at 1600
"Blocking" You take 3 shots (Of everything) at different f stops on ether side of the spectrum. Usually ended up with a couple decent ones out of 36 for us normals... The dudes with 4 cameras around their neck and the auto feeders were the bomb.. Always wanted one...
 

Zonker

Super Anarchist
9,699
5,653
Canada
I remember when the NYT switched from (company-supplied) Nikon to Olympus, due to an amazing deal from Olympus. Not 6 months later, they had thrown out all the Olympus gear and gone back to Nikon.
During film days or were these the crappy Olympus E series digital bodies? It's REALLY hard to change systems. There is a ton of muscle memory with cameras (all their functions/buttons/dials) in particular places. I can see why pros would not want to change. Too easy to miss a shot while fumbling with a control.

My little Olympus OM-D EM5 Mkii has too much customization. (In Aperture priority mode - "Do you want the front or rear dial to control aperture? Do you want aperture to increase or decrease if you turn it clockwise?") If you change modes you can same dial do completely different things; not to mention the 5 custom buttons which be mapped to just about every other function.
 

Latest posts




Top