Kodachrome Dynamic Range
May 17, 2017 04:47:36 #
Although it was comparable to the DR of a JPEG, it could still be used under extreme conditions with careful exposure.
These images were scanned directly from slides with no post processing.
These images were scanned directly from slides with no post processing.
May 17, 2017 05:05:18 #
May 17, 2017 05:26:00 #
May 17, 2017 05:30:58 #
May 17, 2017 05:57:50 #
romanticf16 wrote:
Back when people knew how to expose properly!
May 17, 2017 06:23:02 #
Thank you all.
For those that are too young to have worked with Kodachrome, it was intended to be projected onto a screen in a dark room. That made up for the narrow DR.
The only way I was able to come close to printing successfully it was on Cibachrome which had a nice glossy surface and archival properties comparable to the film itself.
For those that are too young to have worked with Kodachrome, it was intended to be projected onto a screen in a dark room. That made up for the narrow DR.
The only way I was able to come close to printing successfully it was on Cibachrome which had a nice glossy surface and archival properties comparable to the film itself.
May 17, 2017 12:16:35 #
selmslie wrote:
Thank you all.
For those that are too young to have worked with Kodachrome, it was intended to be projected onto a screen in a dark room. That made up for the narrow DR.
The only way I was able to come close to printing successfully it was on Cibachrome which had a nice glossy surface and archival properties comparable to the film itself.
For those that are too young to have worked with Kodachrome, it was intended to be projected onto a screen in a dark room. That made up for the narrow DR.
The only way I was able to come close to printing successfully it was on Cibachrome which had a nice glossy surface and archival properties comparable to the film itself.
A sadness that Cibachrome materials are no longer being manufactured. About 3x the cost of a Kodacolor print, but worth every penny, both in terms of longevity and appearance. If you've ever viewed a Cibachrome print, you know what I mean.
May 18, 2017 07:53:26 #
May 18, 2017 16:48:39 #
I still have hundreds of Kodachrome slides. Need to scan to my computer soon as a few that I did scan were degraded. Of course those were from slides that had been projected several times, so maybe the others are not as washed out.
May 18, 2017 17:13:38 #
hassighedgehog wrote:
I still have hundreds of Kodachrome slides. Need to scan to my computer soon as a few that I did scan were degraded. Of course those were from slides that had been projected several times, so maybe the others are not as washed out.
I have a couple of Kodachrome slides from the early 50's that have held up well even under South Florida conditions of no A/C but they were hardly ever projected.
Slides that I kept since the 70's in carousels or archival boxes have survived nicely.
May 19, 2017 00:31:07 #
selmslie wrote:
I saw a magazine article once saying Kodak was claiming that Kodachrome should last 100 years under dark storage, while Ektachrome was rated for only 50 years. On the other hand, Ektachrome was said to fade less each time projected. I did use a few rolls of color negative film, and my experience has been that it hasn't been as stable as the color slide film was - often I have to boost the "blue" channel on my scanner to get the colors looking right.I have a couple of Kodachrome slides from the early 50's that have held up well even under South Florida conditions of no A/C but they were hardly ever projected.
Slides that I kept since the 70's in carousels or archival boxes have survived nicely.
Slides that I kept since the 70's in carousels or archival boxes have survived nicely.
I don't know how long my media actually will last, but I also don't know how long I will last, so I am busily trying to scan & edit everything while I can.
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.