What is Digg?Sponsored by HowLifeWorks
How Smart Guys Keep Their Faces Looking Young view!
howlifeworks.com - Why men have finally started to use certain anti-aging skin care products...
116 Comments
- 3rdDay, on 06/22/2009, -3/+93Great slideshow with article.
♫ Kodachrome
They give us those nice bright colors
They give us the greens of summers
Makes you think all the world's a sunny day, Oh yeah
I got a Nikon camera
I love to take a photograph
So mama don't take my Kodachrome away ♪ - esus4, on 06/24/2009, -1/+89I briefly worked in a camera store many years ago and was told that Kodachrome slide film was the only way to keep color photos for archival purposes. I did not understand what that meant until many years later when I came across a beautiful amateur slide taken of the Golden Gate Bridge. The colors were perfect and the image was sharp. I assumed it was a recent image. The information on the matting around the slide: Kodachrome 1944.
- ColinTobin, on 06/22/2009, -1/+60And Paul Simon wept.
- mogebier, on 06/22/2009, -2/+43I have been in the Photo industry for many years. Kodachrome, starting in the 80's, was the best slide film ever. The film from before the 80's wasn't as good in the formulation, so the slides tended to wash out after many years. E6 quality depends 100% on the finisher and how they treat their chemicals and machines. It is so easy for an E6 slide machine to get out of spec. All it takes is 1 day of loading in a dirty roll of film, and the whole machine worth of chemicals is shot out of balance.
I am surprised that Kodak still even made Kodachrome until now. But then, when you look back at the track record of Kodak as a company, they are always late to the game, but somehow manage to stay in business. - coheedcollapse, on 06/24/2009, -4/+35It depresses me that Kodachrome is dying while ***** Lomo cameras live on.
Why the can't hipsters just adopt good film and learn to take photos like the rest of us? At least go digital so this Lo-Fi "Cheap toy camers are so awesome that I can take a blurry photo of my hand and everyone thinks I'm an artist" phase can pass. - thebeginning, on 06/24/2009, -2/+32So now Kodachrome is no more, Kodak Black & White paper is no longer being made, and Polaroid film is even out of production.
Even though photography has embraced some phenomenal technology in its place, this is really kinda sad. - edstate, on 06/24/2009, -1/+30Did anyone ever notice how the colors on Kodak's film boxes paralleled the colors the particular film excelled at capturing?
Kodachrome took amazing yellows, reds and oranges. And Ektachrome took richer blues and greens.
RIP, Kodachrome! - inactive, on 06/24/2009, -2/+27Time has not been so kind to her:
http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2002/04/afghan-g ... - inactive, on 06/22/2009, -7/+30dugg, but only because of Sharbat Gula's photo.
- RobotCitizen, on 06/24/2009, -3/+23Not to state the obvious, but you can see the hard life she's lived in her eyes.
- dtele, on 06/22/2009, -8/+27You can still use Ektachrome (an E6 film). The Kodachrome exposure latitude was too narrow for the average photographer anyway.
- mediaphile, on 06/24/2009, -0/+16It's a hard knock life. Especially in Afghanistan, apparently.
- quirkopatra, on 06/24/2009, -2/+15I came here for that.
- Spinducky08, on 06/24/2009, -1/+14Dugg for back in the day you could sing about a product and NOT have the company sue you.
Although, in the late 90's, the album the song was on was required to include a note about Kodachrome being a trademark of Kodak.
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kodachrome_(song)
non wiki fans: http://torrentdownloads.net/torrent/244335/Simon+& ... - ELWOOD_BLUES, on 06/24/2009, -0/+10Paul Simon is weeping all the way to the bank! I wonder how many iTunes or Amazon downloads of Kodachrome have been purchased this week!
- ilmickeyli, on 06/24/2009, -0/+10college kids *do* focus on rolling their own
- ELWOOD_BLUES, on 06/24/2009, -0/+8Dude, do you know how to develop Kodachrome? Yes, you may have been able to do it from home at one time, but the chemicals are quite nasty. It ain't like developing T-Max in the bathroom sink...
- DemDude, on 06/24/2009, -0/+8Oh come on, Holgas are fun =)
- dafragsta, on 06/24/2009, -0/+8Most processed photos, digital or analog, have unrealistic colors, especially if they are intended for professional use. I've always appreciated a process that added a slight purple hue to the skies instead of having them be perfect blue. Warm pictures have a certain artistic style to them, as do black and white pictures.
- sindex, on 06/24/2009, -0/+8I wonder if they even teach college kids how to roll their own film, develop their own film or use anything other than digital SLRs in media arts programs now? When I was in school we did all that, and I used to cut and splice reel-to-reel tape for audio classes. I know they've done away with the reel-to-reel stuff.
It's not even like I'm that old; I'm 32 but it seems like a LOT has changed very quickly. Hmm.. maybe I am old. - darkstar949, on 06/24/2009, -1/+8The Lo-Fi cameras have a time and place, but I tend to agree that they get over used by a lot of people.
- GlenWRATH, on 06/24/2009, -0/+7This depresses me. Without a doubt, this was my favorite film. Time to stock up I suppose.
- Bodminzer, on 06/24/2009, -0/+5Ilford make better black and white paper anyway. Don't mourn it's death just yet :)
- ml4rocky, on 06/24/2009, -1/+6I grew up with it everywhere. I'll miss it..
- georgetds, on 06/24/2009, -0/+5I hope that just like pencils and oil paints are still available to artists today, film will remain for the same reasons.
- airencracken, on 06/24/2009, -1/+6The end of an era. Sad to see it go, it really was a unique film.
- dafragsta, on 06/24/2009, -0/+5I think as years go by, the vinyl vs CD argument is losing validity. It's been proven that few people can tell the difference between digitally sampled vinyl and the real vinyl and the thing that most people equate to vinyl warmth, is the analog noise from dust on the records and tiny imperfections. The same is true of tape as well. You can record your orignal on tape to get the saturation and hysteresis, but once you sample the tape recording with high-end ADCs, it becomes nearly impossible to tell them apart.
When CDs first came out, ADC converters were no where near as good as they are now. Since then, there have also been major advances in psychoacoustic reproduction of the audible range comfortably in a 16-bit 44.1kHz space. If I record something at 24-bit 88.2kHz, and downsample it to 16-bit 44.1khz, the oversampling helps correct aliasing errors that would've persisted because of harmonics above the magical 22kHz Nyquist range of human hearing. Had I recorded at 44.1kHz directly, these errors would've manifested themselves more noticeably. Also, converting the bit-rate to 16-bit these days is done in such a way as to maintain the rich perception of dynamic range that 24-bit and above offers, but is unnecessary in the final mixdown.
There are ways to make 16-bit 44.1kHz sound DAMN good these days and it cracks me up when audiophiles buy vinyl copies of albums recorded on Pro Tools. I wonder if Trent Reznor wasn't chucking to himself over this one when he put Ghosts out on Vinyl at a premium price. - yogurtslinger, on 06/24/2009, -0/+5I'm not cleaning it up.
- SmokenJoe, on 06/24/2009, -2/+7Digital has not matched Kodachromes ability to capture different shades of light but digital is so much easer to use with immediate feedback. The better new cameras are far more sharp but they are getting better with the lighting shades. Hats off to the people that successfully developed that film anything but an easy task. That and the anti trust legislation against just sending the film back. That is one time it served no ones interest it is not something for a local lab it required real understanding of the chemistry far beyond normal.
- soogy, on 06/24/2009, -1/+6Yeah, but Kodachrome was still the superior film (in most cases, at least). If you can find some, Kodak Ultra Color (100UC in particular) is an excellent replacement.
- Spamcan, on 06/24/2009, -0/+4Yeah, most of us have left it behind but there's still a lot of people who resist new technology. Kids in 10 years won't even know what film is.
- supermanly, on 06/24/2009, -0/+4Kodak took my Kodachrome away!
*****. - mydigglogin, on 06/24/2009, -2/+6Dang, that slideshow makes me miss slide film. I think I'll go and shoot a few rolls of provia and velvia.
- Bodminzer, on 06/24/2009, -0/+4'You can stil use Ektachrome' is like saying you can use Provia as a replacement for Velvia; things have a following for a reason.
- ELWOOD_BLUES, on 06/24/2009, -0/+4Wrong. Its Dwayne's.
- cathpah, on 06/24/2009, -0/+4Velvia for life!
(ok...in reality, I mostly shoot digital...but you get the point) - inactive, on 06/24/2009, -0/+4http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujhdf9_IO4w
- plague, on 06/24/2009, -1/+4You were supposed to only post the first line so we could all join in.
- dafragsta, on 06/24/2009, -1/+4Just because the technology in the song is now deprecated, it doesn't mean the song is. That song is pretty damn popular and will always be dragged out of the closet for 60s montages in films. There is no correlation between the death of one type film or even the death of film all together and the song. The song is just marked by it's time as most songs that cover what's going on when they were written.
- Babazoz, on 06/24/2009, -1/+4It's not the tools you use, but the skill and talent behind it.
That being said, if I see one more blurry, light leaked picture of crap taken by some greasy haired, unshaven dork wearing vintage clothing (read: GOODWILL), I'll lobby to Congress to launch a nuke at Holga's factory. - bobdole369, on 06/24/2009, -4/+7Kodachrome is dead and gone. E-6 killed it, some say C-41 1 hour labs made us want pictures NOW, and Kodachrome always had to be sent out. Nowadays there is only 1 lab in the world still developing it (Dale's). Digital was likely the nail in the coffin.
- georgetds, on 06/24/2009, -0/+3How many 10 year old digital pictures are still worth much? I don't know about your photos, but the pictures I took with my first digital camera are just junk now. On the other hand, 100 year old film can be scanned in at the current best megapixels a scanner can pump out and be compared to the best of current digital shots.
- BossKey, on 06/24/2009, -0/+3As long as you keep track of how long you can still find somebody willing to develop it.
- yacks, on 06/24/2009, -1/+4They Might Be Giants have a song "Nyquil Driver" but on the album the track is listed as "AKA Driver"
- Bodminzer, on 06/24/2009, -0/+3You do realise slide film will continue to exist indefinately? Provia and Velvia use the E-6 process, which any good lab can do. Kodachrome used the much more complicated (and patented) K-14 process, hence its decline in comparison to those two films.
- CrayonNo9, on 06/24/2009, -0/+3Dwayne's Photo (the only remaining Kodak certified Kodachrome processor) says they plan on continuing to process Kodachrome through the end of December 2010.
http://www.dwaynesphoto.com/ - cheule, on 06/24/2009, -0/+3While I'm not that worried about this (Digital will one day surpass all these stocks.. I'm not saying any time soon, but it will), I must say that E6 is not a superior stock at all. You didn't say it was, but your comment about exposure latitude seemed to imply it was.
- fartbarker, on 06/24/2009, -0/+2lmfao
- fartbarker, on 06/24/2009, -1/+3not now...
-
Show 51 - 100 of 125 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is