Jerry Nemeth wrote:
Kodak Ektachrome has been resurrected.

https://www.dpreview.com/news/950367582 … ektachrome

Great news! I so loved using Ektachrome, almost as much as Fujichrome Provia 100.

Connor Photography wrote:
I am glad I still have my slide projector......hahaaaa. 

I still have my slide projector, spare bulbs, hundreds of slides and film cameras.   

Yosh Studio wrote:
For the hipsters i suppose. I never liked that film...except for cross processing

Agreed. I suspect that about half of their target audience would buy it only because they didn't know the difference between Kodachrome and Kodak Ektachrome.

Zack Zoll wrote:
Agreed. I suspect that about half of their target audience would buy it only because they didn't know the difference between Kodachrome and Kodak Ektachrome.

Truth! As long as there was Kodachrome in the bag the back up rolls of Ektachrome never saw the light of day. It was so damn blue in the shadows and ruddy skin tones. So forget about shooting in open shade.
My studio mate back in those days was a 4x5 product shooter and like Ektachrome, he really loved the blues & grays.

Yosh Studio wrote:

Truth! As long as there was Kodachrome in the bag the back up rolls of Ektachrome never saw the light of day. It was so damn blue in the shadows and ruddy skin tones. So forget about shooting in open shade.
My studio mate back in those days was a 4x5 product shooter and like Ektachrome, he really loved the blues & grays.

There is an old Ektachrome image in my portfolio.  It has had many views.

Zack Zoll wrote:
Yeah, at 33 I think I'm too young to appreciate slide film for what it ACTUALLY was. I shot plenty, because I'm an experimenter by nature ... but colour reversal films were good for almost as long as I can remember, and b the time I knew enough to be really critical, any minute differences didn't matter, since by then I was mostly doing bw personal work anyway, and client work was all digital.

There is something absolutely magical about a LF slide on a light table ... But printed? Nope. Not since Portrait and 400H came out and they canned Cibachrome.

Most of this retro revolution lacks context. Records aren't better just because you have an $89 turntable. Depeche Mode was awesome because of what came before. And slide film was awesome because colour negs sucked.

My turntable cost a couple grand, so, you know, my Miles Davis records sound amazing!!! 

Plate burning and scanning was where chromes really shined.  In competent hands you color neg didn't suck if you were making a wet print for a traditional family portrait, but the stuff sucked to make a plate from or to later scan.  If you were going to press print, you really had to shoot chromes so that you could make a plate. 

Cibachrome prints were truly magical to behold.  Peter Lik shot chromes for Nat Geo for decades and since started a number of commercial galleries (basically a photographic version of Thomas Kincaid).  No matter what you may think of the work, his large scale Cibachrome prints are simply stunning.  There just isn't anything like it.  Digital has been great in advancing capture, however, the downside has been the shitty prints that have come as a result.

Jerry Nemeth wrote:
There is an old Ektachrome image in my portfolio.  It has had many views.

Yeah but how many likes does it have?

In all seriousness, I have 3 Ektachrome customs PS actions I use quite often.

Yosh Studio wrote:

Yeah but how many likes does it have?

In all seriousness, I have 3 Ektachrome customs PS actions I use quite often.

Mine is an original Ektachrome that I scanned.

Jerry Nemeth wrote:

Mine is an original Ektachrome that I scanned.

The original Ektachrome emulsion or Plus EPP, which wasnt so bad?

Yosh Studio wrote:

The original Ektachrome emulsion or Plus EPP, which wasnt so bad?

The original Ektachrome slide.

Peter de Groot wrote:
Great news! I hope that 4x5 or 8x10 will be in it in the future as well....one can only hope :-)

You can glue them together with Scott tape to any size you want.  Just don't put finger prints on the emulsion side.  LOL

Andy Durazo wrote:
There is also rumour that Kodachrome may also make a comeback. Like I said a rumour!

A rumour that started four years ago.

The problem isn't the film; it's the developer. It doesn't meet modern environmental standards, and there isn't anywhere near enough profit to redesign it. If you've noticed, almost all of the 'new' films introduced in the last decade are based on (very) old recipes; I think the last all-new film was Ektar.

Zack Zoll wrote:

A rumour that started four years ago.

The problem isn't the film; it's the developer. It doesn't meet modern environmental standards, and there isn't anywhere near enough profit to redesign it. If you've noticed, almost all of the 'new' films introduced in the last decade are based on (very) old recipes; I think the last all-new film was Ektar.

Actually the rumour I heard is from a distributor so I take it with a bit more credibility than the old ones. Yes K-14 is a dirty process but who knows. Like I said a rumour.

My hope is that they bring back the printing papers.

Fotopia wrote:
...
Digital has eliminated the finest materials ever produced, is that progress?

The evolution of photography since it started focused no professionals has been always about convenience first and quality afterwards.

Jerry Nemeth wrote:

The original Ektachrome slide.

Pre 1989 Ektachrome was awful stuff, very yellow and just hideous! The new Ektachrome HC was a vast improvement, and all subsequent Ektachromes were a step up too, especially E100G, VS etc. I shot on Kodak film stock pretty much from 1982 to around 1992 when I switched to Fujichrome permanently! The big yellow was given a huge kick in the ass after Velvia and Provia 100F (best slide film ever) took hold and sadly never really recovered.

Kodachrome was pretty good under the right shooting conditions (late and early outdoor light), but horrible at any other time, especially the 64 version.

I must have around 10000 slides that need to be archived.

Andy Durazo wrote:

Actually the rumour I heard is from a distributor so I take it with a bit more credibility than the old ones. Yes K-14 is a dirty process but who knows. Like I said a rumour.

My hope is that they bring back the printing papers.

You mean Cibachrome? That was as bad as K-14!

I don't doubt that a product labelled 'Kodachrome' will eventually be for sale. But it's not going to be the same thing as it was. It might actually be better, but it's not going to be The Good Old Days.

Zack Zoll wrote:

You mean Cibachrome? That was as bad as K-14!

I don't doubt that a product labelled 'Kodachrome' will eventually be for sale. But it's not going to be the same thing as it was. It might actually be better, but it's not going to be The Good Old Days.

https://www.dpreview.com/news/023179147 … kodachrome