Looking to shoot slides again after a long hiatus. Slides make sorting and storing so much easier. I used to use lots of Kodachrome, but now with the avalability, costs, and processing it just dosen't seem worth the hassle.

So what are you Kodachrome guys/gals shooting now (the ones who've switched)? I've used velvia before, but it's not my first choice for an all around film. I also apprecaite the cost savings of consumer films.

Finally, how are you printing your slides? I can proof at home with an Acer scanprisa flatbed and epson C80 (nice, not great 5x7's if the contrast isn't to high), but what's the best option for larger prints? How do Kodak master CD's handle slide film (can I get 8x12 full frames on my C80)?

thanks all

-- Mark (acerview76eus@yahoo.com), February 07, 2002

Answers

Provia 100 F makes me real happy, but it does not replace K25...

Then again, try to get Kodachrome developed in Europe, and you'll switch to an E6 film too!

-- Kevin Baker (kevin@thebakers.org), February 07, 2002.

So far my favorite non-Kodachrome film is Provia 100F. It's not as sharp as K64 but is quite good and easier to scan.

Kodak PhotoCD scans (is that what you're asking about?) from slides can produce decent 8x12 prints. I'm getting better scans (~ 3,000 dpi, good d-max) for larger prints from my local Fuji Frontier lab. The lab owner is very consciencious about the quality of the scans. For prints I either use my home printer or for photographic emulsions the files either go back to the lab w/ the Frontier or to West Coast imaging's LightJet 430.

-- Douglas Herr (telyt@earthlink.net), February 07, 2002.

I like Provia 100F very much too, but I find E100S (not VS) to be very similar in color palette to K25.

:-),

-- Jack Flesher (jbflesher@msn.com), February 07, 2002.

I like Sensia/Astia 100, and possibly Provia F. I still shoot K64 too.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), February 07, 2002.

It might be worth the hassle to do with K64 due to K's longevity, by the way. It all depends on you. I have not made up my mind yet. It is not so terribly expensive. K64 is the about the same price as Provia F at B & H I think.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), February 07, 2002.

E-6 slide film most like K-25? That's easy: Velvia, rated at E.I. 40. Don't tell the lab you re-rated the film, i.e. you *don't* want them to pull-process it, just process it normally. Velvia achieves its hyper-saturation from slight underexposure, which is what you get at the box speed of ISO 50. At 40 it looks "normal" (less like day- glo paint!), very similar to K-25. You can rate it down to 32 if it still looks too punchy for you at 40.

How I'm printing? I use a good local pro-lab. I've got an Epson 1280, Polaroid Sprintscan 45 (for medium format, it's a little low- res and inconvenient for 35mm), and Canoscan 4000US for 35. Most of my activity with them consists of wiping the dust off.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), February 07, 2002.

Uh, I've been shooting a lot of E200 in the last several months. Of course, its not K25, but over time, I'm coming to like the color palette. Provia 100F is very very nice, but a touch blueish, somehow.

Oh well, I switch every year now that I use mostly E-6. No big deal, they'll all shift color within 10 years, I expect ;-)

-- Mani Sitaraman (bindumani@pacific.net.sg), February 07, 2002.

I mainly shoot daylight/natural light portraits. I use K25 in 35mm; and E100SW in medium format. While E100SW has a palette that is not quite like K25's, I find that it to be very pleasing indeed. I somehow feel that all of Fuji's films have some 'artificiality', if you know what I mean. I also like Agfa's RSX 100 which matches K25 better, but is not always as pleasing as E100SW.

I have always thought that the Kodachromes were bad for landscape because of their (poor) rendition of blues. OTOH for macro/flowers etc, there is a subtlety in KM that I have not seen in any E6 film.

Regards,

-- Vijay A. Nebhrajani (vijay_nebhrajani@hotmail.com), February 07, 2002.

Anyone heard of Velvia cheese? :D :D :D

-- Alfie Wang (leica_phile@hotmail.com), February 07, 2002.

Hello Mark. In my opinion,and it's only my opinion, NOTHING matched the richness and luminosity of a projected Kodachrome 25 Professional image.. However, times have changed. Being a Kodak color person I prefer Ektachrome 100 Plus Proessional film promptly processed following exposure. Whether the images will hold as long as K25 I don't know.

To date I haven't purchased a scanner and experienced experts will guide you here.In relation to possible high grade scanning of your Kodachrome slides I have been informed that the Nikon top of the line 4000 scanner is not optimised for scanning Kodachromes. Regards.

-- Sheridan Zantis (albada60@hotmail.com), February 08, 2002.

Sheridan

I am a Kodak person too, but you really should look at Astia/Sensia it seems to me to be splendidly neutral. My jury is out on Provia 100F so far, but I am using it to see whether I like it and can live with it. It does have better grain than Astia, but it is rather low contrast. I much prefer Astia and Provia to the Ektachrome 100S and VS, which produce the classic E6 "side of beef" with faces in shadow. Still all these films are really pretty useable. I agree with Jay above that Velvia is not usually objectionable when exposed "correctly" - customers always like its warmth. Actually I rate Velvia at 50 (the same as I rate K64).

Another advantage of K25 and K64 - they rarely really need balancing filters (they do not go blue in shadows). Even under tungsten the amount of red in the image is a lot less than seen in E6 films.

Ks are a bit weak with blue I agree.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), February 08, 2002.

Hello Robin. Thanks for your experienced tip on Astia/Sensia...soon I'll give it a go. Regards.

-- Sheridan Zantis (albada60@hotmail.com), February 08, 2002.

Where does Agfa RSX II fit into the picture? What Kodak & Fuji films do you think it is most like? I recently took a trip where Kodak E100VS and the Agfa RSX II were mingled; to tell the truth, I could not see much difference and was pleased with both results. Shots were mainly of mountain scenery. Where I have noticed a difference (for the better) with Agfa products, is the paper on which color negatives were printed. Agfa paper was *primo*. (BTW-- the film was run through my M4-P, for those who insist we be "on topic.")(Also, I realize that RSX is ISO 50)

-- Frank Horn (owlhoot45@hotmail.com), February 08, 2002.

Scenery: Elite 100 Extra Color has extra colour indeed, faces go red.

Portraits: Agfa RSX is the most neutral.

General purpose: Elitechrome 100, or E100S which is a superb film.

Closest to K25? Definitely not Velvia at 50, I'm not sure about 40. Provia 100 is very sharp. But I really don't think there's anything quite the same as K25. However, the range and quality, not to mention ease of processing, of E6 films today is the best it has ever been. It's really a case of experimenting and finding what you like best.

Printing: PhotoCD is cheap and saves buying a scanner (you need a film, not flatbed scanner). You can then email your pix or print them yourself, but the best quality for display will still be a professional lab.

-- David Killick (dalex@inet.net.nz), February 09, 2002.

Just a quick response from a (former) k-chrome shooter... For people shots I like Fuji Astia/Sensia (look at National Geographic magazine's web site for some examples). For landscapes I use Provia, although I too find it too blue and colory at times. I've not tried the Ektachrome family enough to comment.

-- Wayne C. Lee (wlee@s.psych.uiuc.edu), February 09, 2002.

Ks are a bit weak with blue I agree.

I never seem to see this.

Blue, Kodachrome 25, Copyright 2001 Jeff Spirer

'course it's kind of hard to tell what people mean about "blue" without seeing pics.

-- Jeff Spirer (jeff@spirer.com), February 10, 2002.

I knew someone would bring this up (and rightly). I referred to the rather common occurence that blue sky/water goes purple in the shadows; if you open up a little, the blue that is not in the shadows washes out badly. Probably a case of very small latitude to blue, and a somewhat non-linear response in the blue sensitive layer(s). I don't know. I do see color shifts when blue is not exposed exactly right, and for landscapes you can't always expose for blue. OTOH, if you expose right, you do see the kind of result that Jeff posted - vivid, and saturated. Stunning blues, Jeff.

-- Vijay A. Nebhrajani (vijay_nebhrajani@hotmail.com), February 11, 2002.

I didn't think you would Jeff, but I suspect everyone else knows what very well what we mean.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), February 12, 2002.