In article , Russell D.
wrote:


This is more typical:

https://flic.kr/p/SiATq9

I have yet to even see a digital "Kodachrome" photo that looked likeh
Kodachrome.

Then the question should be: which specific Kodachrome vintage, 1936,
1954, 1963, et seq?
They each have a very different tone.

Exactly.

it doesn't matter which specific kodachrome it is. they all can be
matched with digital, as well as exceeded for those interested in
higher quality rather than be stuck in the past.

it's not 1963 anymore.

if abraham zapruder had a digital camera in 1963 rather than being
stuck using a super-8 camera and kodachrome film, we'd know who shot
jfk.

But, that is not what this is about, is it?

true, it's not about jfk.

however, it *is* about kodachrome, which is what zapruder used.

had he used a digital camera, the quality would have been *much*
better, as would all of the other photos taken that day.

unfortunately, they were all stuck with film.