[ChrisPlatt]

With the demise of Kodachrome is there a currently available E6 film with a similar look?

Chris

[Stratman]

I have never used it, but I hear the Ektar is about the closest you'll get to Kodachrome in negative film. I really want to try some....but locally the prices are rediculous I may just order a few rolls from B & H to give it a whirl. Did a quick search on flickr, and I like the results.. http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=all&q=Ektar+100&m=text

[ChrisPlatt]

Indeed, but unless prints are required I prefer to use slide film.

Chris

[Stratman]

Whoops !! That shows ya how much I know, lol.

[Swift1]

I have only shot a few rolls of Kodachrome and of all the E-6 I have shot nothing is quite like Kodachrome. I am just finishing scanning my first properly developed roll of expired Provia 100F and so far I really like it. I'm not sure if it is from the expired film but it looks closer to Kodachrome than any other E-6 I have shot. I have only shot 20+ rolls of E-6 so I am not any kind of expert.

[fotaki]

There has never ever been a reversal film quite like Kodachrome and there never ever will be.

The film was first introduced in the mid-thirties and held patents in manufacture and processing which kept it unique. It was a complex film to manufacture and even more so to process. This was generally reflected in the price of the product and the difficulty in getting it processed.

It is fairly obvious that with falling sales against an increasing digital market, it became increasingly uneconomic to manufacture. A sad but inevitable loss.

[filmamigo]

I'm not a Kodachrome fan ... what about the look do you like?

My take on Kodachrome that it seems good at skin tones, and colours that are vibrant without being reduced to primary colours (like Velvia 50 or Ektachrome 100VS).

Have you tried Fujifilm Astia 100?

[ChrisPlatt]

I tend to prefer films with a warmer color rendition. I am not a Velvia fan.
I am not familiar with the other Fuji slide films, nor Kodaks current E6 films.
I am particularly interested in the opinions of other Kodachrome fans,
as we are faced with the same dilemma.

Chris

[womble]

I was thinking the other day that when I finish my last roll of Kodachrome 64 I probably won't ever shoot 35mm slide film again, I'll stick with BW film and digital for colour. I have been using Velvia for 120 roll films but the colours are quite unlike K64. I will probably experiment a little.

My main worry about the loss of K64 is that it had the best long term archival properties. Not sure that can be replaced.

K.

[fotaki]

My main worry about the loss of K64 is that it had the best long term archival properties. Not sure that can be replaced.

If archival storage is a concern there are/were companies that offer a service to improve long term keeping. It was a lacquering treatment (AFAIR) used by many Libraries.

[Ira]

Haven't shot film in God knows how long, but to me, Kodachrome was always #1.

[Blue]

Kodak is current claiming the Ektachrome E100G is the closest thing to it. Steve McCurry claims to have shifted to Ectachrome E100 VS.

“The early part of my career was dominated by KODACHROME Film, and I reached for that film to shoot some of my most memorable images,” said McCurry. “While KODACHROME Film was very good to me, I have since moved on to other films and digital to create my images. In fact, when I returned to shoot the ‘Afghan Girl’ 17 years later, I used KODAK PROFESSIONAL EKTACHROME Film E100VS to create that image, rather than KODACHROME Film as with the original.”

End of an Era: Kodak to discontinue Kodachrome 64 - photo.net

[ChrisPlatt]

Kodak is current claiming the Ektachrome E100G is the closest thing to it.

This is one of the films I will probably try.

Chris

[tibbitts]

I'm not sure about the Kodachrome "look." When I look at Kodachrome II, it's considerably different from K64, for example. I never got a lot of color consistency out of K64, even though I usually used the pro version (but admittedly not "pro" processing), but KII was very consistent, with essentially the same processing.

Paul

[Blue]

I'm not sure about the Kodachrome "look." When I look at Kodachrome II, it's considerably different from K64, for example. I never got a lot of color consistency out of K64, even though I usually used the pro version (but admittedly not "pro" processing), but KII was very consistent, with essentially the same processing.

Paul

What do you mean by "Pro Processing?" Kodachrome has/had to be sent to special labs due to the chemistry involved. These labs were certified by Kodak and the only one operational is Dwayne's in Kansas. There are 2 points here: 1) There weren't that many certified labs; and 2) the developing chemistry is one of the reasons Kodak discontinued the film.