 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| PhotoKB HomeDiscussion Groups Digital Photography Digital PhotoDSLR CamerasZLR CamerasPoint & Shoot CamerasFilm Photography 35 mmLarge FormatMedium formatDarkroomFilm and LabsOther EquipmentPhoto Technique Nature PhotographyPeople PhotographyTechnique GeneralGeneral Photo Topics General TopicsAustralian PhotographyUK PhotographyDirectoryPhoto Clubs |
Photo Forum / General Photo Topics / Australian Photography / November 2007KODACHROMES LOVE THE SE 5400!
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 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." [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > 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 > 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 1970 http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1035/1390789072_ba0ac97116.jpg and this is after a bit of tweaking in the scanning software http://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 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 [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > I was given to scan. I found the private slides had survived better > than the commercial ones. were they all Kodachrome? It allegedly has much better archival quality than other emulsions, especially the old 25 ASA stuff.  SignatureVanity is so secure in the heart of man that everyone wants to be admired: even I who write this, and you who read this. >>> 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 [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > were they all Kodachrome? It allegedly has much better archival quality > than other emulsions, especially the old 25 ASA stuff. All 200 slides (except for the bought ones) I was given to scan are in cardboard Kodachrome mounts. I have a large number of slides of my own, some of which are in Kodachrome mounts, some in Agfa mounts and some in unbranded mounts. "N" <N@onyx.com> & "D.Quatsch" <presquevu@cox.net> > ... > This is a slide purchased in about 1970 > ... > http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1035/1390789072_ba0ac97116.jpg > ... > and this is after a bit of tweaking in the scanning software > ... > http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1403/1389366562_750b433e02.jpg > .. > were they all Kodachrome? It allegedly has much better archival > quality .. > than other emulsions, especially the old 25 ASA stuff. > . > All 200 slides (except for the bought ones) I was given to scan are in > . >cardboard Kodachrome mounts. 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. Kodachrome is a "Schrödinger's cat" of a film: it can still be good only if nobody looks at it. SignatureNicholas O. Lindan, Cleveland, Ohio Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Meters http://www.darkroomautomation.com/index.htm n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com > "N" <N...@onyx.com> & "D.Quatsch" <presqu...@cox.net> > [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > Darkroom Automation: F-Stop Timers, Enlarging Metershttp://www.darkroomautomation.com/index.htm > n o lindan at ix dot netcom dot com Some great info there Nicholas. I've never researched Kodachrome; I had no idea it was that old. Helen > 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 "Schr?dinger'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... >> Kodachrome fades quickly if projected. Storage conditions >> need to be reasonable for Kodachrome to do well. Very [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > 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. SignatureMichael > >> Kodachrome fades quickly if projected. Storage conditions > >> need to be reasonable for Kodachrome to do well. Very [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > -- > 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!). >>>> Kodachrome fades quickly if projected. Storage conditions >>>> need to be reasonable for Kodachrome to do well. Very [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > > 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. SignatureMichael 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 [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > before you hit an hour of projection time. Most of us did not/do not watch > old home movies quite that much. 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. > <helensilverb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > 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 >> <helensilverb...@hotmail.com> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > 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/1109/1422598806_f60d55c891_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. >> 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." [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > 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. SignatureMichael > >> 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." [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > -- > Michael I agree! > >>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. >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." [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > 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 > 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. > 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. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.