Re: The return of Kodachrome Super8?

From: Adam Hyman (email suppressed)
Date: Mon May 12 2008 - 18:54:12 PDT

But your comment about it being overrated is the most sanctimonious comment
thus far. Itıs not over rated or underrated ­ it had specific qualities
that people found appropriate to their art. It also has a look that is
different from the more current and ³flexible² stocks. Thatıs all.

On 5/12/08 6:31 PM, "Jim Carlile" <email suppressed> wrote:

> What I'm always struck by is the emotional responses, the sanctimoniousness
> even, when people try to talk some sense into things like the fact that an old
> film stock has been discontinued and that it was pretty overrated in the first
> place.
> Who cares if people loved Kodachrome? A lot of people didn't. They're welcome
> to use it, magenta shift and all. But it was never all that to begin with.
> There were a lot of problems with this 40-year old color reversal film-- you
> couldn't get decent prints, for one.
> This thread started with the ridiculous tale that Wittner was going to be
> making Kodachrome again. They're not. That's not cynical, that's the truth.
> Then the gushing began.
> This same thing happens on both the APUG site and photo-net. Whenever the
> topic comes up, and people who know more than I do about Kodachrome try to
> play down the loss of the stock, all hell breaks loose.
> Move on guys-- it's not coming back. There are more flexible stocks out there.
> What I always see when Kodachrome gets discussed is not positive, it's
> muddleheaded.
> In a message dated 5/12/2008 6:11:11 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
> email suppressed writes:
>> I don't know if this is what Fred meant or not but I
>> am always kind of amazed at the vehemence with which
>> arguments like this advance, the amazing rate at which
>> some extremely cynical arguments and negative
>> attitudes are introduced into these discussions which
>> use rationalist arguments to shout down some perfectly
>> innocent, even positive discussions. I mean,
>> Kodachrome film never really hurt anyone, and it had
>> some properties that some people liked a lot. Some
>> (arguably) great films have been created in
>> celebration its qualities. The derisive comparison of
>> Kodachrome to stocks which are objectively and
>> inarguably less grainy, lower contrast, easily
>> replicable, etc. does nothing to change the fact that
>> some have considered Kodachrome beautiful, a joy to
>> look at and work with, and that (arguably) some great
>> films have been made in celebration of its qualities.
>> And it's not the quality of the arguments (the
>> citation of resolution or contrast specs for example),
>> but the cynicism and negativity involved, the eager
>> diminishment of Kodachrome lovers (for example) with
>> facts and rationality that is always surprising.
>> (but it's not really all that surprising)
>> Steve Polta
>> --- Jim Carlile <email suppressed> wrote:
>>> In a message dated 5/12/2008 11:11:41 A.M. Pacific
>>> Daylight Time,
>>> email suppressed writes:
>>> Carlile's statements oppose the whole history and
>>> "ideology" of what it
>>> means to make experimental/avant-garde films
>>> I take that as kind of a compliment, actually.
>>> And it's completely false, too. The film world is
>>> full of lots of extreme
>>> orthodoxy-- like how about the folks who completely
>>> scorned color film to begin
>>> with? Or who condemned sound?
>>> Face it guys-- it's time to move on. Kodachrome is
>>> not coming back. No one's
>>> going to be manufacturing it again. It was a decent
>>> little slide film that
>>> Kodak kept porting over to amateur movie making and
>>> it served its purpose. It's
>>> cumbersome to make and even more cumbersome to
>>> process.
>>> The results people are getting nowadays with 64T and
>>> even Ektachrome 100D or
>>> the Velvia reversal is fantastic. And negative
>>> stocks have to be seen to be
>>> believed in the small gauges. There's so much you
>>> can do with it -- and yes--
>>> you can emulate a Kodachrome look if you want,
>>> whatever it is ( magenta, in
>>> my view.)
>>> No one's trying to force people away from
>>> Kodachrome, but it was highly
>>> overrated anyway and there are so many myths
>>> surrounding it that it's getting
>>> annoying hearing them all the time.
>>> That many people surround this film with excess
>>> emotion makes me wonder just
>>> what's going on. The hatred that Kodak had to deal
>>> with when they finally
>>> discontinued this film was pretty incredible to
>>> witness. It's not church, folks.
>>> **************Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight?
>>> Get new twists on family
>>> favorites at AOL Food.
>> (
>> __________________________________________________________________
>>> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at
>>> <email suppressed>.
>> _____________________________________________________________________________
>> _______
>> Be a better friend, newshound, and
>> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now.
>> __________________________________________________________________
>> For info on FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.
> Wondering what's for Dinner Tonight? Get new twists on family favorites at AOL
> Food <> .
> __________________________________________________________________ For info on
> FrameWorks, contact Pip Chodorov at <email suppressed>.

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