Kodachrome is being phased out

On 22-06-09 10:20, Alan wrote:
According to www.Electronista.com , today:

"Kodak To Retire Kodachrome Film

Kodak this morning said it would soon phase out its longstanding
Kodachrome film, putting an end to a significant era of film
photography. The company says it plans to end the 74-year production
as sales of the classic film now make up less than one percent of its
film camera business, which itself is in the minority at Kodak. About
70 percent of the company's income is from digital photography.
The company also notes that Kodachrome is difficult to develop and is
limited to just one photo lab, Dwayne's Photo in Parsons, Kansas;
newer films like Professional Ektachrome or Ektar are typically much
easier to handle while still producing strong image quality.

Kodak expects to run out of Kodachrome supplies sometime in early fall
but says that Dwayne's will continue to develop rolls of film through
2010."

An era .... haven't used it since the early 90's, however.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

Alan Browne wrote:
On 22-06-09 10:20, Alan wrote:
According to www.Electronista.com , today:

"Kodak To Retire Kodachrome Film

Kodak this morning said it would soon phase out its longstanding
Kodachrome film, putting an end to a significant era of film
photography. The company says it plans to end the 74-year production


An era .... haven't used it since the early 90's, however.



I used it in 2005 in the Utah desert park country, basically
as homage to an old friend on the way out. Also,
I wanted a picture of its eponymous State Park using it.
But I did carry two cameras, the other with the old reliable
200 speed Kodak color negative film.

Scanning and printing Kodachrome is a pain.

Doug McDonald

On 22-06-09 17:08, "mcdonaldREMOVE TO ACTUALLY REACH wrote:
Alan Browne wrote:
On 22-06-09 10:20, Alan wrote:
According to www.Electronista.com , today:

"Kodak To Retire Kodachrome Film

Kodak this morning said it would soon phase out its longstanding
Kodachrome film, putting an end to a significant era of film
photography. The company says it plans to end the 74-year production


An era .... haven't used it since the early 90's, however.



I used it in 2005 in the Utah desert park country, basically
as homage to an old friend on the way out. Also,
I wanted a picture of its eponymous State Park using it.
But I did carry two cameras, the other with the old reliable
200 speed Kodak color negative film.

Scanning and printing Kodachrome is a pain.

I've had no real problems scanning Kodachrome (some nearly 50 years old)
on the Nikon 9000 ED. Did not use ICE, however.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.

"mcdonaldREMOVE TO ACTUALLY REACH wrote in message
...
Alan Browne wrote:
On 22-06-09 10:20, Alan wrote:
According to www.Electronista.com , today:

"Kodak To Retire Kodachrome Film

Kodak this morning said it would soon phase out its longstanding
Kodachrome film, putting an end to a significant era of film
photography. The company says it plans to end the 74-year production


An era .... haven't used it since the early 90's, however.



I used it in 2005 in the Utah desert park country, basically
as homage to an old friend on the way out. Also,
I wanted a picture of its eponymous State Park using it.
But I did carry two cameras, the other with the old reliable
200 speed Kodak color negative film.

Scanning and printing Kodachrome is a pain.

Doug McDonald

Why is it any harder to scan Kodachrome than other slide film? I scan it in
my Dimage 5400 all the time, and once scanned, the images are as easy to
Photoshop and print as any other images.....

Bill Graham wrote,on my timestamp of 23/06/2009 5:26 PM:


Why is it any harder to scan Kodachrome than other slide film? I scan it
in my Dimage 5400 all the time, and once scanned, the images are as easy
to Photoshop and print as any other images.....

Most scanners with D-Ice don't work well with Kodachrome.
If you want to use Ice, you need either one of the latest Nikon scanners -
9000/5000/V or a patched up 4000/IV/8000. Other than that, no problems that
can't be solved with colour balance adjust.
Not aware of any problems printing it. Worked really nice with Cibachrome.

Alan Browne wrote:

Scanning and printing Kodachrome is a pain.

I've had no real problems scanning Kodachrome (some nearly 50 years old)
on the Nikon 9000 ED. Did not use ICE, however.

I have the CoolScan IV. It scans OK (if you turn off ICE, of course)
but the results have problems. The main one is a mottled look
in skies that comes from the fact that the emulsion side is not flat, but has
ripples that correspond to the image.

It is hard to print because of the extreme contrast and the built in
powerful toe and shoulder. Photoshop's "shadow-highlight" helps.

Doug McDonald