Re: The return of Kodachrome Super8?

From: Stephen Kent Jusick (email suppressed)
Date: Sat May 10 2008 - 14:36:46 PDT


I dont' understand why you are feeling compelled to be a Kodachrome naysayer
in an obviously pro-Kodachrome thread.

I was giving welcome info for people who actually like the emulsion.
You don't have to like Kodachrome, or care about its possible reintroduction.
But why the negativity?

I'm not sure that people who shoot Kodachrome care that the
manufacturing and processing is
'idiosyncratic" or not. We're talking about film, and Super8--it's
all idiosyncratic at this point in the
digital world.

As for negative stocks being "better" -- that's not really true if
you're looking for a
reversal film. I've been shooting the Vision2 stocks recently, but
they are their own experience.
And while I can print to S8 positive at Andec in Berlin, that's
costly. Are you assuming that
S8 shooters should transfer to video or optically print to 16mm or
35mm for a positive?

Regardless, K40 remains my preference for extremely bright outdoor scenes.

There's also the issue of stability. I don't know how the negative
stocks (or the S8 prints) last over
time, but Kodachrome tends to retain its color, for the very reasons
of its idiosyncratic production that
you cite.

So, I'll take it, thanks very much.


Stephen Kent Jusick

For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.