A Photography forum. PhotoBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » PhotoBanter.com forum » Photo Equipment » 35mm Photo Equipment
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

KODACHROMES LOVE THE SE 5400!



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old November 3rd 07, 06:39 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,aus.photo
Michael[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 313
Default KODACHROMES LOVE THE SE 5400!

On 2007-11-03 02:15:25 -0400, said:

On Nov 3, 1:28 am, Annika1980 wrote:
I was scanning a few old slides for a friend tonight and thought this
one was particularly cool. Mr. C calls it simply, "The Drug Store."

http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/88326548/original

That Kodachrome slide was taken 60 years ago.
Let's hope our digital images hold up as well.
I'll wager not.


I love these old pics. They bring you back in time, although this is
WAY before my time! It's amazing how the color and condition of the
slide has held up for so many years. Tell Mr. C. nice pic!
Helen


What's so good about this picture is that even without the interest of
its age and being brought back in time, it's just a good picture and
would have been thought so they day the photographer got it back in the
box from Kodak.
--
Michael

  #12  
Old November 3rd 07, 07:16 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,aus.photo
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,758
Default KODACHROMES LOVE THE SE 5400!

On Nov 3, 1:39 pm, Michael wrote:
On 2007-11-03 02:15:25 -0400, said:

On Nov 3, 1:28 am, Annika1980 wrote:
I was scanning a few old slides for a friend tonight and thought this
one was particularly cool. Mr. C calls it simply, "The Drug Store."


http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/88326548/original


That Kodachrome slide was taken 60 years ago.
Let's hope our digital images hold up as well.
I'll wager not.


I love these old pics. They bring you back in time, although this is
WAY before my time! It's amazing how the color and condition of the
slide has held up for so many years. Tell Mr. C. nice pic!
Helen


What's so good about this picture is that even without the interest of
its age and being brought back in time, it's just a good picture and
would have been thought so they day the photographer got it back in the
box from Kodak.
--
Michael


I agree!

  #13  
Old November 3rd 07, 08:51 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,aus.photo
Annika1980
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,898
Default KODACHROMES LOVE THE SE 5400!

On Nov 3, 1:39 pm, Michael wrote:

http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/88326548/original


What's so good about this picture is that even without the interest of
its age and being brought back in time, it's just a good picture and
would have been thought so they day the photographer got it back in the
box from Kodak.
--


I agree, although I think it is enhanced with the passage of time.
A similar pic taken today of a guy walking in front of a Walgreen's
wouldn't hold the same meaning today, but might in another 60 years.

Perhaps I should have displayed the pic a bit larger so you could more
easily see the kid coming out the door with an ice cream cone in his
hand.


  #14  
Old November 3rd 07, 11:05 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,aus.photo
[email protected]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,311
Default KODACHROMES LOVE THE SE 5400!

On Nov 4, 3:37 am, Michael wrote:
On 2007-11-03 09:48:31 -0400, said:



On Nov 4, 12:27 am, "Nicholas O. Lindan" wrote:
Kodachrome fades quickly if projected. Storage conditions
need to be reasonable for Kodachrome to do well. Very
early Kodachromes (30's - 40's) do fade to a brown-magenta.


Yes, but correct me with references, but you have to do a fair amount
of projecting - either in a single session or in many projections -
before you cause a problem. Most slides were/are projected very
infrequently, and then only for very short periods. So Kodachrome was
not recommended for commercial or educational-type use, where the
images might be projected for lengthy periods, or very frequently.


Kodachrome is a "Schrödinger's cat" of a film: it can
still be good only if nobody looks at it.


I like your analogy, but.. there are other ways to view slides that do
not involve the 'stress' of projection. Most lightboxes/viewers/
scanners have quite gentle light/heat/UV/IR output.


I have multitudes of old K25s (well, 10-30 years) and I don't hesitate
to get them out and look/project. No noticeable fading, although I do
have a few *very* old K25's handed down by my parents and there are a
few faded ones amongst those - but they are more like 40-50 years old
and would have been very rarely projected...


The old 16mm Kodachrome movies handed down to me are still as richly
colorful as they were at the beginning. Of course they are projected
only about once every ten years.

--
Michael


I have seen the wilhelm testing that says the Fujichromes can stand
about 5 hours and the Kodachromes about 1 hour before they drop below
whatever benchmark they set.

Neither figure is particularly good, but when you think about it, how
often/long do you project a slide for (not counting slides
specifically for presentation)? An hour is a very long time, even
spread over many years, for very best work and taking into account
inflated egos... (O:

Anyone doing presentations should be using duplicates (or digital!).

  #15  
Old November 4th 07, 12:12 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,aus.photo
N[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 362
Default KODACHROMES LOVE THE SE 5400!

wrote in message
ps.com...
On Nov 3, 5:30 am, "N" wrote:
wrote in message

ups.com...



I love these old pics. They bring you back in time, although this is
WAY before my time! It's amazing how the color and condition of the
slide has held up for so many years. Tell Mr. C. nice pic!
Helen


Helen, they don't all survive well, but scanning software can do good
things:
This is a slide purchased in about
1970http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1035/1390789072_ba0ac97116.jpg
and this is after a bit of tweaking in the scanning
softwarehttp://farm2.static.flickr.com/1403/1389366562_750b433e02.jpg

This slide was one of about a dozen commercial slides in a batch of 200 I
was given to scan. I found the private slides had survived better than
the
commercial ones.


I'm guessing the private slides survived better because they weren't
viewed on a projector as much as the commercial ones were.
Scanning software is amazing. Thanks for the illustration.
Helen


There would have been no difference between the viewing and storage
frequencies and methods of both types. I was given them in a nice carrying
case, which I had to clean as it had a thin layer of foam in its base which
had disintegrated.

My slides from my trip to New Zealand in 1973 are also a mix of personal and
bought slides, but in my case the bought slides have survived quite well.

This is three 1973 slides of Lake Matheson joined:
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1109/...0d55c891_b.jpg
Of course they taken hand held, hence the angle, with a Kodak Instamatic
something or other at a time when creating a pano of shots was completely
unknown to me.

If you search Flickr for Lake Matheson
http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=lake+matheson
you'll see the place has barely changed.



  #16  
Old November 4th 07, 04:18 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,aus.photo
Martin Riddle
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 69
Default KODACHROMES LOVE THE SE 5400!


"Annika1980" wrote in message s.com...
I was scanning a few old slides for a friend tonight and thought this
one was particularly cool. Mr. C calls it simply, "The Drug Store."

http://www.pbase.com/bret/image/88326548/original

That Kodachrome slide was taken 60 years ago.
Let's hope our digital images hold up as well.
I'll wager not.


Is that a Minolta Scan Dual?

I'm wondering about the Plustek 7200, if its any good. Seems a little slow with IR enabled, but cheap.

Cheers


  #17  
Old November 4th 07, 12:49 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,aus.photo
N[_5_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 362
Default KODACHROMES LOVE THE SE 5400!


"Martin Riddle" wrote in message
newsSaXi.426$It.242@trndny06...

Is that a Minolta Scan Dual?

I'm wondering about the Plustek 7200, if its any good. Seems a little slow
with IR enabled, but cheap.

Cheers



Mine is a Plustek 7200i. My slides weren't worth spending big bucks on a
scanner.

  #18  
Old November 4th 07, 01:46 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,aus.photo
Annika1980
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,898
Default KODACHROMES LOVE THE SE 5400!

On Nov 3, 10:18 pm, "Martin Riddle" wrote:

Is that a Minolta Scan Dual?


Yes. It produces excellent quality 5400 dpi slides, but is noisy,
clunky, and terribly slow, expecially when used with the Silverfast
software.

  #19  
Old November 4th 07, 05:33 PM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,aus.photo
Michael[_6_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 313
Default KODACHROMES LOVE THE SE 5400!

On 2007-11-03 18:05:50 -0400, said:

On Nov 4, 3:37 am, Michael wrote:
On 2007-11-03 09:48:31 -0400, said:



On Nov 4, 12:27 am, "Nicholas O. Lindan" wrote:
Kodachrome fades quickly if projected. Storage conditions
need to be reasonable for Kodachrome to do well. Very
early Kodachromes (30's - 40's) do fade to a brown-magenta.


Yes, but correct me with references, but you have to do a fair amount
of projecting - either in a single session or in many projections -
before you cause a problem. Most slides were/are projected very
infrequently, and then only for very short periods. So Kodachrome was
not recommended for commercial or educational-type use, where the
images might be projected for lengthy periods, or very frequently.


Kodachrome is a "Schrödinger's cat" of a film: it can
still be good only if nobody looks at it.


I like your analogy, but.. there are other ways to view slides that do
not involve the 'stress' of projection. Most lightboxes/viewers/
scanners have quite gentle light/heat/UV/IR output.


I have multitudes of old K25s (well, 10-30 years) and I don't hesitate
to get them out and look/project. No noticeable fading, although I do
have a few *very* old K25's handed down by my parents and there are a
few faded ones amongst those - but they are more like 40-50 years old
and would have been very rarely projected...


The old 16mm Kodachrome movies handed down to me are still as richly
colorful as they were at the beginning. Of course they are projected
only about once every ten years.

--
Michael


I have seen the wilhelm testing that says the Fujichromes can stand
about 5 hours and the Kodachromes about 1 hour before they drop below
whatever benchmark they set.

Neither figure is particularly good, but when you think about it, how
often/long do you project a slide for (not counting slides
specifically for presentation)? An hour is a very long time, even
spread over many years, for very best work and taking into account
inflated egos... (O:

Anyone doing presentations should be using duplicates (or digital!).


And movies went at 16 frames per second (18 for super 8) which,
accounting for times the shutter was closed, means you could project a
movie more than 16 times before you'd accrue one second of projection
time for any given frame. Multiply that out and you'd be at nearly
sicty thousand showings for 16mm and 8mm and sixty-five thousand
showings for super 8 before you hit an hour of projection time. Most of
us did not/do not watch old home movies quite that much.
--
Michael

  #20  
Old November 5th 07, 01:09 AM posted to rec.photo.equipment.35mm,aus.photo
Ken Hart
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 154
Default KODACHROMES LOVE THE SE 5400!


"Michael" wrote in message
news:2007110411330575249-adunc79617@mypacksnet...
On 2007-11-03 18:05:50 -0400, said:

snip
I have seen the wilhelm testing that says the Fujichromes can stand
about 5 hours and the Kodachromes about 1 hour before they drop below
whatever benchmark they set.

Neither figure is particularly good, but when you think about it, how
often/long do you project a slide for (not counting slides
specifically for presentation)? An hour is a very long time, even
spread over many years, for very best work and taking into account
inflated egos... (O:

Anyone doing presentations should be using duplicates (or digital!).


And movies went at 16 frames per second (18 for super 8) which, accounting
for times the shutter was closed, means you could project a movie more
than 16 times before you'd accrue one second of projection time for any
given frame. Multiply that out and you'd be at nearly sicty thousand
showings for 16mm and 8mm and sixty-five thousand showings for super 8
before you hit an hour of projection time. Most of us did not/do not watch
old home movies quite that much.
--
Michael


I won't debate your math-- mainly because I'm too lazy!. But the issue with
movie film is the physical stress the film is subjected to in projection.
Each frame is 'yanked' into position to the projection stage, the shutter
opens to project it, the shutter closes, the next frame is yanked into
position. I would submit that the sprocket holes would be worn out long
before the film shows signs of fading.
With slides, any physical abuse would be on the slide mounts rather than the
film itself.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
I'am single and want a true love for life, hope to meet someone serious about love rena Digital SLR Cameras 2 June 8th 06 10:08 AM
I'am single and want a true love for life, hope to meet someone serious about love [email protected] Digital Photography 1 June 8th 06 03:26 AM
Coolpix 5400. Leigh Bowden Digital Photography 1 February 10th 05 02:52 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:23 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 PhotoBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.