Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Dear Leica Film shooters, I have a little time on my hand and would love to try and emulate Kodachrome as a Preset for Lightroom. Therefore I would need as many scans as possible. Would you ladies and gentlemen share some with me?

Thanks in advance!

Sam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This last one scan with Nikon Coolscan V ED to compare to the other one "scan" with Leica M plus Focotar 50mm.

So they are as different each other as with original Kodachrome slides which is another world from them anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I forgot to mention that those images are scans from my Kodachrome slides KM25 or KR64, even some Kodachrome Pro, or 200 when available.

I don't remember which is which, as when mounted, they are alike !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Advertisement (gone after registration)

17 hours ago, a.noctilux said:

This last one scan with Nikon Coolscan V ED to compare to the other one "scan" with Leica M plus Focotar 50mm.

So they are as different each other as with original Kodachrome slides which is another world from them anyway.

You mean to say that the scans are as different from each other as the slides themselves from (the web-version of) scans in general? To my view, I must say that I could have recognized them all as Kodachrome. Post #4 is probably 25, because we know that 64 is quite ugly when scanned and the 200 is recognizable by its beautiful grain. 

Edited by otto.f

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, a.noctilux said:

I forgot to mention that those images are scans from my Kodachrome slides KM25 or KR64, even some Kodachrome Pro, or 200 when available.

I don't remember which is which, as when mounted, they are alike !

You’re hitting a quite interesting issue for OP: can you develop the same profile for 25, 64 and 200? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vor 2 Stunden schrieb otto.f:

You’re hitting a quite interesting issue for OP: can you develop the same profile for 25, 64 and 200? 

Very good question! I personally think the 64 is the most pleasing one color wise. What makes it so difficult to get those colored transfered when scanned? Honest question. I would love to learn.

@a.noctilux and @adan thank you so much for the contribution. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scanners, just like digital cameras, require a hardware device profile to convert sensor information into an image.  None of the posts above give enough detailed information on how the slide was scanned.  Scanner owners, just like digital camera owners, could produce profiles for their devices using color cards.  The unfortunate thing is that I don't know of a source for a color card slide made with Kodachrome, and one can no longer be made.  If you scan with a digital camera, you stand a much better chance than with a stand alone scanner because you can color manage your camera.  Without a totally color managed system, no single post-processing profile (preset) is going to work.  The profile may get closer, but it always need some adjustment after applying the preset.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In the day I found Kodachrome was so thick that we could see with the naked eye its layers by holding a slide at an angle. It was as if the emulsion were 3D, embossed. Later when charged with the task of digitizing a professor's old Kodachrome slides (none properly exposed) the short range of densities was a terrible challenge.

How did National Geographic reproduce its Kodachrome? I do not know!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vor 57 Minuten schrieb zeitz:

Scanners, just like digital cameras, require a hardware device profile to convert sensor information into an image.  None of the posts above give enough detailed information on how the slide was scanned.  Scanner owners, just like digital camera owners, could produce profiles for their devices using color cards.  The unfortunate thing is that I don't know of a source for a color card slide made with Kodachrome, and one can no longer be made.  If you scan with a digital camera, you stand a much better chance than with a stand alone scanner because you can color manage your camera.  Without a totally color managed system, no single post-processing profile (preset) is going to work.  The profile may get closer, but it always need some adjustment after applying the preset.

There are no one click presets in this entire world. It’s simply impossible. Camera profiles are highly overrated. You can get cameras closer, but will never get exact same results and that’s also absolutely not my goal. All I want to try is to get a few Kodachrome presets that emulate the feel and give an awesome base for a look so many people love. All presets I’ve found so far are pretty disappointing. Tweaks after applying a preset are of course necessary in a digital world. Film has often been highly post processed, too. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
vor 26 Minuten schrieb pico:

In the day I found Kodachrome was so thick that we could see with the naked eye its layers by holding a slide at an angle. It was as if the emulsion were 3D, embossed. Later when charged with the task of digitizing a professor's old Kodachrome slides (none properly exposed) the short range of densities was a terrible challenge.

How did National Geographic reproduce its Kodachrome? I do not know!

It absolutely seems like a challenge, but I’d love to try. 

 

Of which reproduction by Nat Geo are your talking about?

Edited by Cronilux

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
38 minutes ago, Cronilux said:

Of which reproduction by Nat Geo are your talking about?

Any that they published in their magazine. I have been fortunate to have known and worked with one of their photographers, now retired, so I have seen many of his images as slides. That man could nail Kodachrome 25ASA exposures. I found his ability astounding, sometimes intimidating to me. One thing to consider is that the magazine rarely printed large images - they were constrained to their magazine format. (one influence which encourages me to print small to this day)

Edited by pico

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vor 6 Minuten schrieb pico:

Any that they published in their magazine. I have been fortunate to have known and worked with one of their photographers, now retired, so I have seen many of his images as slides. That man could nail Kodachrome 25ASA exposures. I found his ability astounding, sometimes intimidating to me. One thing to consider is that the magazine rarely printed large images - they were constrained to their magazine format. (one influence which encourages me to print small to this day)

Understand! I need to grab me some old magazines. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 minutes ago, Cronilux said:

Understand! I need to grab me some old magazines. 

When you do, try tilting a magazine image at 30° in bright light. Depending upon the era it might show some of the printing layers. NG was an unappreciated pioneer in printing.

Edited by pico

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pico said:

In the day I found Kodachrome was so thick that we could see with the naked eye its layers by holding a slide at an angle. It was as if the emulsion were 3D, embossed.

Yep! That was the result of Kodachrome having no incorporated dye couplers in the emulsion before exposure.

Before processing, it was actually a thinner emulsion than other color films of the same era, thus its exceptional sharpness (less diffusion of the image by gelatin). When the dyes were formed, the emulsion swelled where there was more dye added (shadows) and thus became a bas relief of the image.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3448845

And it had a higher Dmax (max density) that the scanner has to penetrate.

The real issue with creating a "profile" for Kodachrome is that it was rather variable. Not just from version to version (Kodachrome, KII, K25), but depending on whether one went for bright "open" exposures or dark saturated exposures.

Even in a. noctilux's samples, we can see the near-blacks are sometimes purple, sometimes blue, sometimes cyan, and sometimes have a hint of red. And sky-blues also varied from purple-blue to cyan.

In creating Velvia, Fuji tried to "profile" for one Kodachrome look - cyany shadows and purplish highlights. It looked like some Kodachromes, but not all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
vor 9 Minuten schrieb adan:

Yep! That was the result of Kodachrome having no incorporated dye couplers in the emulsion before exposure.

Before processing, it was actually a thinner emulsion than other color films of the same era, thus its exceptional sharpness (less diffusion of the image by gelatin). When the dyes were formed, the emulsion swelled where there was more dye added (shadows) and thus became a bas relief of the image.

https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/3448845

And it had a higher Dmax (max density) that the scanner has to penetrate.

The real issue with creating a "profile" for Kodachrome is that it was rather variable. Not just from version to version (Kodachrome, KII, K25), but depending on whether one went for bright "open" exposures or dark saturated exposures.

Even in a. noctilux's samples, we can see the near-blacks are sometimes purple, sometimes blue, sometimes cyan, and sometimes have a hint of red. And sky-blues also varied from purple-blue to cyan.

In creating Velvia, Fuji tried to "profile" for one Kodachrome look - cyany shadows and purplish highlights. It looked like some Kodachromes, but not all.

I noticed this variance in tonality and wasn’t aware of such a behavior before. Your last two photos are that typical Kodachrome I was looking for. It’s of course not possible to emulate such a behavior, but one can do multiple presets to emulate certain common tones.

Share this post


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.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...