Jump to content

Ektachrome ......... and?


sblitz

Recommended Posts

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 2 months later...

Why Ektachrome and not Kodachrome?

 

Indeed what is (was?)  the difference between the two? I have some incredible slides that were shot on Kodachrome 25 and even remember Kodachrome 12!

 

In the late 80s and 90s i defected to Velvia, liking the increased saturation but the aesthetic of Kodakchrome slides with their ever-so slightly pastel palette really appeals again now.

 

For me it is a push-back against the digital trap of over-processing, over-structuring, over-saturating and over hardening images that you see all over the internet. When one sees the odd film image now it immediately stands out for its beauty and subtlety of palette and rendering.

Edited by Adrian Lord
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Why Ektachrome and not Kodachrome?

 

Indeed what is (was?)  the difference between the two? I have some incredible slides that were shot on Kodachrome 25 and even remember Kodachrome 12!

 

 

The standard argument is that Kodachrome is no longer possible due to environmental considerations and a lack of appropriate substitute chemicals. That may be true but the more fundamental barrier to reintroduction is likely to be the loss of the expertise behind the film. Kodachrome is quite different to Extachrome. The latter is an E6 film and can be processed in standard E6 chemistry in any lab worthy of the name or at home. Kodachrome is far more complicated and requires very specialised attention. There's a lot of goodwill around towards Kodachrome (often expressed by people, like me, who lament its loss but stopped shooting the film even when it was still available) but I doubt there is any real appetite to remanufacture the film and set-up appropriate processing facilities or, when push comes to shove, for users to pay the kind of prices that may be necessary for it to have an economical future.

Edited by wattsy
  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 5 months later...

To expand on Ian's post: The key problem with a "monopack" color film - all three color dye layers coated on the film and dveloped at once, was dye diffusion. Colors ended up in the "wrong layers" so you'd get yellow dye forming where cyan dye should, or vice-versa, and corrupted colors.

 

Kodachrome came first (1935), and simply dodged the problem of dye diffusion by developing/re-exposing each color layer separately. Three separate developments, with three different developers, each developer containing its own dye-couplers (colorless chemicals that would combine with reaction byproducts of developing the silver, to form colored dyes). And three separate reversal steps (exposure to red light through the base, exposure to blue light from the front, and a chemical reversal for green/magenta). Kodachrome also had a REMJET black backing, like motion-picture negative film, that had to be removed (messily) at the start of the process.

 

In other words, not something even an otherwise-good pro lab could handle.

 

Ektachrome came along later ("Kodacolor Aero Reversal film," 1940, "Aero Ektachrome" name, ~1946) once the dye-diffusion problem was solved. One color developer created all three dye colors at once (cyan, magenta, yellow). One white-light reversal re-exposure (later chemical). As such, the dye couplers were built into the film layers, rather than into multiple developers.

 

Kodachrome upsides:

 - sharper: no dye-coupler molecules bouncing light around inside the film at the moment of exposure, thinner layers overall (molecules take up space), REMJET backing

 - more accurate color: the dye couplers could be chosen based soley on color quality, not their ability to survive in the film for weeks/months at a time before processing.

 - more archival color (if stored in the dark) - no unstable dye-coupler molecules left in the film once the developer(s) were washed out.

 

Ektachrome upsides:

- simpler processing that required less equipment, less perfect timing, fewer steps, and less time overall ("bathroom" processing possible).

- better dye life in bright light (e.g. when projected often or for a long time).

 

Ektachrome downsides:

- thicker layers to hold the dye couplers, more diffusion of fine details, "fuzzier" - Until 1955, Ektachrome came only in larger "Pro" formats, not 35mm.

- color accuracy sacrificed in favor of dye couplers that could survive months on the shelf and in the camera.

- archival contamination from left-over dye couplers in the film after development.

 

Kodachrome downsides:

- long, complex, ultra-precision processing that required a special lab and was only economical in mass amounts.

 

Not sure how many dedicated Kodachrome labs Kodak ran at their peak, but probably less than two dozen world-wide. 10 in the whole US. Thus the mailers.

 

Of course, both film types were improved a lot over their 60/70-year lifetimes, so some of those differences eventually became negligible. Fuji's "Ektachrome-process" Velvia got very close to Kodachrome 64 resolution, if not color quality (a matter of taste, of course). Longevity of the "in the film" dye couplers after development improved. Etc.

  • Like 10
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
  • 1 month later...
  • 3 weeks later...

I have a roll in a camera now, but likely won’t have it finished and processed for a month. Regardless of what folk on the Internet say, the only test is to try yourself. I usually disagree with other judgments on color and saturation, etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...