Author Topic: Kodachrome  (Read 7265 times)

Offline benhutcherson

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 706
Re: Kodachrome
« Reply #15 on: December 30, 2010, 10:38:25 PM »
The holder isn't strictly necessary, although it's very difficult to get everything lined up correctly with slides without it. Doug's comment about it serving as a mask is also very true. One other issue is that with the design of most scanner, the lid won't exactly sit parallel to the glass without some sort of insider in place-something which can cause uneven lighting.

Typically, when in transparency mode-whether shooting a mounted slide or film strip-the focus is typically set just a little bit above the glass. I have a third party scanning program that allows me to fine tune the focus.

You don't want the film strips directly against the glass of the scanner as you can get Newton's rings across the image(google that for pictures of what they look like).

Offline baldopeacock

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 507
Re: Kodachrome
« Reply #16 on: January 04, 2011, 05:53:01 PM »
I sent my 3 rolls of Kodachrome off to the processor and I hope they got there on time. I have scanned Kodachromes taken as early as 1937. The earlier  years from the late 30s did not seem to hold up as well as the ones from 1939.Some of the Ektrachromes from the 50s faded badly ,Anscochrome was bad also
i will miss it but will the digital stuff be here 50 years from now?
Robby


That photo is awesome.   The color's held incredibly well.    Do you know what camera shot this?   Also curious about that location.   

Offline cchaven

  • ***
  • Posts: 142
Re: Kodachrome
« Reply #17 on: January 06, 2011, 09:36:52 AM »
I sent my 3 rolls of Kodachrome off to the processor and I hope they got there on time. I have scanned Kodachromes taken as early as 1937. The earlier  years from the late 30s did not seem to hold up as well as the ones from 1939.Some of the Ektrachromes from the 50s faded badly ,Anscochrome was bad also
i will miss it but will the digital stuff be here 50 years from now?
Robby
Wonderful photo Robby..I love the subject and the colors.  It'd be interesting to know what camera that came off of.  I've shot 120 film thru a Contessa-Nettle folder from about 1919 and I was impressed with the quality, especially since I had to zone focus wtih it.

I still shoot various types of film..and have a freezer full of various types and sizes going up to 4x5.  For scanning negatives, I use a Canon CanoScan 8600 and I have holders for 35mm, 120 6x9 and 6x6, and 127.  I think with some scanners if you place the negative directly on the glass it will be outside the scanner's narrow range of sharp focus.  Since getting the 127 holder my scans of 127 film are in better focus, vice laying the negative on the bed with a thin piece of glass over it to keep it flat.  Overall I think the 8600 does a nice job, the limitation in my scans coming down more to the lack of post-scanning color correction and such, which I rarely do.

Jeff

Offline rdelius

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1847
Re: Kodachrome
« Reply #18 on: January 06, 2011, 11:24:25 PM »
That photo was taken in Fredonia NY by a local professional photographer. I cannot remember his name right now. Bought a large box of Kodachrome slides at the flea market mostly Dunkirk-Fredonia NY, from about 1939-1950.
Robby

Offline rdelius

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1847
Re: Kodachrome
« Reply #19 on: January 19, 2011, 10:10:01 PM »
Got the Kodachrome back from the processor. Happy with the results. Film was 6 years out of date but I kept it frozen most of that time. Other is one of the oldest I have scanned
Robby

Offline tjmack99

  • *
  • Posts: 99
Re: Kodachrome
« Reply #20 on: January 25, 2011, 03:23:07 PM »
Just got the shipping notification from Dwayne's, so I know my last roll made it there in time. Whew! I've got some unused rolls of Kodachrome double 8 film, that I planned to shoot on my B&H "zapruder" camera, but won't get to now, that's a shame.

Offline Dennis Markham

  • VintageRotaryPhones.com
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5614
    • VintageRotaryPhones.com
Re: Kodachrome
« Reply #21 on: January 25, 2011, 03:53:47 PM »
I've got some unused rolls of Kodachrome double 8 film, that I planned to shoot on my B&H "zapruder" camera, but won't get to now, that's a shame.

Just hang on to those rolls of film.  Maybe someone will come up with a cheap way of processing them in the future.  Even if you get some sort of image quality it would be worth it.  I have a few of those old wind-up cameras too.  I thought they were old in the 80's when I ran some film through them.  It was fun using them. though.

Offline tjmack99

  • *
  • Posts: 99
Re: Kodachrome
« Reply #22 on: January 25, 2011, 04:50:49 PM »
Dwayne's did refer me to another lab, who can process the film in B&W. No "nice bright colors", but at least there'd be an image.  I wish there was some easy way to synch sound with it, that would be cool.

Offline DavePEI

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4005
  • Telephone Museum of Prince Edward Island
    • The Telephone Museum of Prince Edward Island
Re: Kodachrome
« Reply #23 on: April 28, 2013, 09:33:00 AM »
Kodachrome was the first commercially-available color film, being introduced in 1935.

Today marks the last day of processing, after production was discontinued
Paul Simon: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZpaNJqF4po

CBC News: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mPvF1MOU2kE

Dave
The Telephone Museum of Prince Edward Island:
http://www.islandregister.com/phones/museum.html
Free Admission - Call (902) 651-2762 to arrange a visit!
C*NET 1-651-0001

Offline 19and41

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1903
Re: Kodachrome
« Reply #24 on: September 05, 2017, 02:11:22 PM »
Some product of the process.  Farm Security Administration photos.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YaDSCsY8eag
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."
Arthur C. Clarke