Mama took my Kodachrome away

[phongn]

Eastman Kodak Company announced on June 22, 2009 that it will discontinue sales of KODACHROME Color Film this year, concluding its 74-year run as a photography icon. Sales of KODACHROME, which became the world's first commercially successful color film in 1935, have declined dramatically in recent years as photographers turned to other films or digital capture. Today, KODACHROME represents just a fraction of one percent of Kodak's total sales of still-picture films.

After a 74-year run, every processing facility save one shuttered and a whole lot of slides shown on people's projectors, Kodak has shut down the line for Kodachrome.

[MKSheppard]

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[Glocksman]

Eastman Kodak Company announced on June 22, 2009 that it will discontinue sales of KODACHROME Color Film this year, concluding its 74-year run as a photography icon. Sales of KODACHROME, which became the world's first commercially successful color film in 1935, have declined dramatically in recent years as photographers turned to other films or digital capture. Today, KODACHROME represents just a fraction of one percent of Kodak's total sales of still-picture films.

After a 74-year run, every processing facility save one shuttered and a whole lot of slides shown on people's projectors, Kodak has shut down the line for Kodachrome.

Don't the color dyes in Kodachrome last a lot longer than the ones in C-41 process film?
I used to shoot a lot of rolls of C-41 color and B&W, but never shot Kodachrome.

That said, with apologies to Paul Simon, I owned Konica and Minolta cameras.
Nikons were too expensive.

[Solauren]

I'm actually amazed that Kodacrhome was still being made at this point.

Digital cameras and photoprinters are better anyway.

[phongn]

Don't the color dyes in Kodachrome last a lot longer than the ones in C-41 process film?
I used to shoot a lot of rolls of C-41 color and B&W, but never shot Kodachrome.

Stored in a cool, dry and dark place, K-14 lasts a hell of a lot longer than C-41 or E-6.

[TimothyC]

I got to shoot on Kodachrome once. The results were spectacular. The problem for me was that most customers didn't want to pay the extra money for the results, or the wait for the development time. I'll miss you Kodachrome!

[Glocksman]

Don't the color dyes in Kodachrome last a lot longer than the ones in C-41 process film?
I used to shoot a lot of rolls of C-41 color and B&W, but never shot Kodachrome.

Stored in a cool, dry and dark place, K-14 lasts a hell of a lot longer than C-41 or E-6.

After my mother died in 2000, we found several Kodachrome slides of her and my Dad as teenagers in my Grandma's house during the 1958 Christmas season.

I was amazed at the color fidelity when I projected (I temporarily 'borrowed' a slide projector from work) them on a screen.
Especially considering that most of the color prints I shot during the 80's and 90's had faded pretty dramatically by comparison.

Though C-41 is a model of longevity compared to the inks HP used in the Photosmart 7960 I used to own.
I guess the saving grace of digital is that it was easy to reprint them using the Canon Pixma I now use for photo printing.

[aerius]

We have a decent stockpile of Kodachrome 64 put away in the freezer after we cleaned out our local supplier last year. With my half-frame camera it's probably close to a lifetime supply unless I get really snap happy.

My parents have boxes of slides shot on Kodachrome from the 60's & 70's, the colours on them are better & more accurate than most of my colour negative films. Back then, as I'm told by my dad, making colour prints was ridiculously expensive so my parents shot slide film and then picked out the 1 or 2 pictures in a roll that they wanted to enlarge.

[phongn]

Digital cameras and photoprinters are better anyway.

Well, define "better". Resolution? Certainly. Exposure latitude ... maybe. Color? Probably not.

I got to shoot on Kodachrome once. The results were spectacular. The problem for me was that most customers didn't want to pay the extra money for the results, or the wait for the development time. I'll miss you Kodachrome!

The customers who did want to deal with slide film mostly switched to other films in the 1990s (e.g. Velvia).

I was amazed at the color fidelity when I projected (I temporarily 'borrowed' a slide projector from work) them on a screen. Especially considering that most of the color prints I shot during the 80's and 90's had faded pretty dramatically by comparison. Though C-41 is a model of longevity compared to the inks HP used in the Photosmart 7960 I used to own.

Careful about projecting - K-14 is not very fade resistant under projection (the traditional protection way is to only display copies, not the master, though that gets expensive). Modern C-41 is also pretty fade-resistant and ink manufacturers claim photo inkjets can last a good while.

We have a decent stockpile of Kodachrome 64 put away in the freezer after we cleaned out our local supplier last year. With my half-frame camera it's probably close to a lifetime supply unless I get really snap happy.

Kodachrome doesn't last forever, even in a freezer, and Dwayne's will stop processing on 31 December 2010. Better start shooting while you can.

My parents have boxes of slides shot on Kodachrome from the 60's & 70's, the colours on them are better & more accurate than most of my colour negative films. Back then, as I'm told by my dad, making colour prints was ridiculously expensive so my parents shot slide film and then picked out the 1 or 2 pictures in a roll that they wanted to enlarge.

Yeah, these days prints are mostly done by a turnkey computer that develops, scans and then prints with a laser exposing print stock. It's not as good as traditional enlarging but it's a hell of a lot cheaper and faster. Slide film also enforces significantly more exposure discipline than negative film (nevermind B&W).

[TimothyC]

Digital cameras and photoprinters are better anyway.

Well, define "better". Resolution? Certainly. Exposure latitude ... maybe. Color? Probably not.

Yep. I've never seen a digital that is as good as good negative film, much less a slide film like Kodachrome.

I got to shoot on Kodachrome once. The results were spectacular. The problem for me was that most customers didn't want to pay the extra money for the results, or the wait for the development time. I'll miss you Kodachrome!

The customers who did want to deal with slide film mostly switched to other films in the 1990s (e.g. Velvia).

Yeah, well I was a Third photographer on the job (I was in a fixed location taking some base overview shots, and described as 'technically proficiant, but sorely lacking a professional's artistic touch'), and was a subcontractor to a prior employer.

[aerius]

Kodachrome doesn't last forever, even in a freezer, and Dwayne's will stop processing on 31 December 2010. Better start shooting while you can.

One of my friends is a pro photographer and one of the guys he works with owns a Kodachrome mini-lab machine. Even if Dwayne's goes down I can ask him to sneak one of my rolls in every now & then.

[phongn]

One of my friends is a pro photographer and one of the guys he works with owns a Kodachrome mini-lab machine. Even if Dwayne's goes down I can ask him to sneak one of my rolls in every now & then.

He has a K-lab? I didn't think any of those things existed anymore! I guess as long as he can get the chemicals he can keep the thing running (and might be able to start a business processing film once Dwayne's stops processing)

[aerius]

I have no idea how he got his hands on one, but somehow he did.

And you can too if you have a big enough wad of cash lying around and a nice big room to put it in.