DTP


 
Lively discussions on the graphic arts and publishing — in print or on the web


Go Back   Desktop Publishing Forum > General Discussions > Photography

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-30-2010, 01:26 PM   #1
terrie
Staff
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,944
Default Nice bright colors...

It's a sad day...no more Kodachrome ...

"An unlikely pilgrimage is under way to Dwayne’s Photo [Parsons, Kansas], a small family business that has through luck and persistence become the last processor in the world of Kodachrome, the first successful color film and still the most beloved." [New York Times 12/29/10]

Terrie
terrie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2010, 01:43 PM   #2
Steve Rindsberg
Staff
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,742
Default

Mama don't ... mama don't .... awwwww, mama, PLEASE don't ....

Aw nuts.

   
__________________
Steve Rindsberg
====================
www.pptfaq.com
www.pptools.com
and stuff
Steve Rindsberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2010, 04:58 PM   #3
terrie
Staff
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,944
Default

Quote:
steve: Aw nuts.
My sentiments exactly...

Terrie
terrie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-30-2010, 07:40 PM   #4
Steve Rindsberg
Staff
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,742
Default

Hmm. I wonder ... if I got back all the money I spent on K-64 and processing the last, say, four years I used it regularly, would I have enough to buy a digital camera capable of anything approaching equal image quality? Is there even such a thing? Somehow that feels like a silly question.

   
__________________
Steve Rindsberg
====================
www.pptfaq.com
www.pptools.com
and stuff
Steve Rindsberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2010, 01:31 PM   #5
terrie
Staff
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,944
Default

Quote:
steve: Somehow that feels like a silly question.
LOL!!! I don't think it's all that silly...'-}}

Terrie
terrie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-31-2010, 10:14 PM   #6
Steve Rindsberg
Staff
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,742
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by terrie View Post
LOL!!! I don't think it's all that silly...'-}}

Terrie
Silly or not, it sent me off on a quest to find some sort of reasonable comparison between digital and the effective equivalent number of pixels for, say, Kodachrome. I found a few sources quoting "around 12,000,000 pixels" as the approximate film equivalent. This is bull exhaust of a particularly low grade. When I used to be a film recorder jockey, we ran most of our images out at 4096x2732, 11.2 million pixels or so, and the result was nowhere *near* what Kodachrome would resolve. Nor was it close when we doubled the resolution in each direction (44 million pix or so).

Really, the amount of utter nonsense out there is amazing.

   
__________________
Steve Rindsberg
====================
www.pptfaq.com
www.pptools.com
and stuff
Steve Rindsberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2011, 02:02 PM   #7
terrie
Staff
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,944
Default

Quote:
steve: Really, the amount of utter nonsense out there is amazing.
LOL!!! And...you are just discovering this? '-}}

Terrie
terrie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2011, 07:13 PM   #8
Steve Rindsberg
Staff
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 6,742
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by terrie View Post
LOL!!! And...you are just discovering this? '-}}

Terrie
<g> I suppose so. I never really went looking for specifics because it was so obvious that nothing digital even came close to what Kodachrome could deliver.

So many opinions. So few brains.

   
__________________
Steve Rindsberg
====================
www.pptfaq.com
www.pptools.com
and stuff
Steve Rindsberg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-01-2011, 10:53 PM   #9
John Spragens
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 437
Default

I'm quite fond of my own Kodachrome slides.

And when I was scanning several hundred old family slides last year, it was obvious how much better Kodachrome was at holding its color, compared to various other chromes.

But there's an unkind problem when you move the film images into the digital world.

With Ektachromes and Agfachromes and Fujichromes and others, you can minimize the need to clean up the inevitable dust by using Digital ICE when you scan.

Not with Kodachrome.

You know how if you turn a Kodachrome slide over and look carefully at the emulsion side, it looks rather like an etching? The darker parts of the emulsion are physically thicker, dramatically so. And Digital ICE reacts badly to that, creating nasty edge artifacts. So you have a choice: Use Digital ICE and live with the artifacts (sometimes not terrible if you're just turning out low-rez images for email or Web). Or turn it off and put in the extra time for dust spotting by hand.

Fortunately, Photoshop's spot healing brush gets better with each new version.

   
__________________

www.enigmaterial.com
John Spragens is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-02-2011, 01:42 PM   #10
terrie
Staff
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 8,944
Default

Quote:
john: And Digital ICE reacts badly to that, creating nasty edge artifacts.
I've never used the Digital ICE function--I think I did try it once but I don't remember which slide type and I can't remember now why I didn't like it so I just spend a lot of time with the healing brush...'-}}

Which slide scanner do you have? I have the Minolta Elite II...

Terrie
terrie is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Very nice wine, but . . . ktinkel The Corner Pub 28 05-03-2010 02:10 PM
Colors out of gamut? marlene Images 3 03-04-2006 03:34 PM
Link colors with CSS dthomsen8 Web Site Building & Maintenance 10 02-13-2006 08:57 PM
Need something nice but not naughty annc The Corner Pub 117 01-25-2006 12:58 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Contents copyright 2004–2014 Desktop Publishing Forum and its members.