[ChrisPlatt]

FWIW when I used Kodachrome 64 film many were dismissive;
to them only Kodachrome 25 was acceptable.

Chris

[Paul the Sunman]

FWIW when I used Kodachrome 64 film many were dismissive;
to them only Kodachrome 25 was acceptable.

Chris

A different age.

[emalvick]

With respect to the OP and time for PP. If you can find one setting or create a setting that gets the colors close to what you are looking for, then the PP issue wouldn't really be there if you just generically apply the preset to every image as you ingest the RAW files. PP only gets time consuming if you try to make adjustments off of a base-line.

The danger, I suppose, is potentially being distracted and trying to make adjustments. But, if you are happy enough with a preset, you could batch export jpgs after using the preset to get what you are looking for with the advantage of the software you are starting from behind you for the odd-ball shot that needs more work. This would work in any software that can get you to a Kodachrome 64 look you are happy with.

[Wasp]

I have come across a site with lots of Kodachrome images. They do it every Friday and all the images feature cars. Here is a sample:



Some links (there seems to be a lot more):

Four Fun Friday Kodachrome Car Photographs No. 237 | The Old Motor

Five Kodachrome Images of Roadside Eateries and Gas Stations | The Old Motor

Looking Back: The Best of Fun Friday Kodachrome Images | The Old Motor

Looking Back: The Best of Fun Friday Kodachrome Images | The Old Motor

[pres589]

I wonder how close a person could get to Kodachrome looking images by shooting with Ultramax 400, copying the negatives with a digital camera, and applying one of the Kodachrome presets to the resulting RAW after doing normal negative to positive processing.

Clearly this is much more work than what was requested in the original post. Ultramax 400 has color and saturation that seems a bit similar to Kodachrome from the tiny bit of the stuff that I have seen.