Kodachrome: Final countdown
Time's running out. If you've got any rolls of Kodachrome lurking at the back of your fridge now is the time to load your camera as the deadline for processing is fast approaching.
For those of us in the UK you need to get your film to Kodak by then end of November, those who send direct to the US have until the end of December when Dwayne's Photo in Kansas shuts down its K-14 process line.
For fans of the film you might like to know that the Association of Photographers (AOP) in the UK is planning an exhibition of work shot on Kodachrome, you can find out how to submit your work on their website.
The final roll of Kodachrome off the production line was presented by Kodak to Magnum photographer Steve McCurry who has travelled the globe with the film loaded into his camera, returning to places where he produced many of his iconic pictures. Many of which were shot on Kodachrome.
You can read about the shoot in an article published by the Seattle Times and how the last roll came off the processor in Kansas in the Wichita Eagle.
Your final frame
For most of us though the final roll will be shot closer to home and here is where you come in as I would like to publish your final frames of Kodachrome.
So, if you have a roll left, or indeed you've already shot the last one, then do send me a scan of the final frame. It doesn't have to have been taken this year, perhaps you stopped using Kodachrome many years ago, well dig out the last frame, scan and e-mail it over. I'll publish a number of them in this blog towards the end of the year.
Send them to Viewfinder@bbc.co.uk
Please include a few words telling me what the picture is but also how long you have been shooting using the film, and any Kodachrome memories - what do those tones mean to you?
So enjoy the last month of shooting and I look forward to seeing your final frames of Kodachrome.
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~16~RS~)
I'm 
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Phil,
now that Kodak are no longer producing and developing Kodachrome, will they be releasing the process and associated IP into the public domain ?
Complain about this comment
Hi Phil,
Your readers may find this interesting. We are producing a documentary on the era of Kodachrome, full of a series of final 35mm photos, Super 8 (and 16mm) Kodachrome short films. Would be great for Kodachrome enthusiasts to get involved: Kodachrome on Kickstarter.
Happy shooting!
Complain about this comment
@1 - And what would you do with that IP? The only way to make a small fortune out of Kodachrome(R) is to start with a large one (fortune, that is). Why else would Kodak be getting out?
It was a wonderful product and I treasure the slides I have. But although almost any film manufacturer would have the capability to make a similar product, there's clearly no money in it, and they won't.
My heroine is Tricia Stone (see the Wichita Eagle gallery). Anyone who can successfully mix the color developers (at all, let alone do it consistently) is a real star.
Complain about this comment
#3 scagiola
obviously there is no incentive for Kodak to keep producing it commercially but there are probably a few people out there who are real fans of the process* and could keep it going (though not commercially). It would be sad to see Kodak fold the business and lock the process away in a vault.
Digital is replacing film, digital is great, it's consistent and predictable but it's not chemistry, with chemistry you never know what you are going to get until it has worked its magic and occasionally (although rarely) it can produce spectacular results.
*in the same way that a few people still use plates and pinholes
Complain about this comment
I have to support BobRocket here. There's equally a very limited market for cameras that are 10 x 8 and larger but there IS a market. A few years back I heard of a group of monks, in France if I remember rightly, who made very large format cameras, lenses and plates. Hugely expensive and aimed at a minute market. But they did sell.
Just because the mass market moves elsewhere it doesn't mean that a small, specialist market doesn't remain that would be willing to pay a much higher price.
Complain about this comment
Brings back memories of my first tentative steps in photography over 50 years ago. I started of with 620, then 127 Velochrome Pan film, then in 1968 35mm Kodachrome film. To start with, you had to load the film into the back of the camera, not an easy job in bright sunlight! The fun of having to manually set focus, lens aperture and shutter speed, remembering to take into account depth of field, film speed etc. Then if I was using Flash, there were Guide Numbers and speed of film to be taken into account. It was amazing to think I bothered, lol. Today's digital cameras aren't half as much fun !
Complain about this comment
Clovisguy, there are still many, many, of us that continue to use film. Loading film into a Nikon F on a bright sunny day, with the wind blowing dust around was certainly an adventure. My first swing open back camera made life much easier.
Strangely enough, I don't remember ever shooting that much Kodachrome. I used a lot of high speed Ektachrome, though.
Even now, when using a digital, I usually use the manual function, so all those hard earned lessons of exposure, depth of field, etc. still come into play. I think the one advantage of digital that I appreciate most is the ability to change ASA (ISO) numbers on the fly.
Try the Manual option on your digital. You may enjoy things more.
Jeff
Complain about this comment
This was an amazing film. I once purchased 100 rolls of ASA 64 slide film and set out around the world. It wasn't like you could just snap pictures. It was like "engraving with light". The detail and quality was outstanding.
Complain about this comment
I would like to see an experiment done by adept photographers shooting the same subjects with Kodachrome and also digital cameras, at approximately same time of day (lighting). Then blind the viewers of the photo originss and let them try to determine which was done in which manner, and also which they prefer.
The point of the "experiment" would be to determine if there is a real quality difference between the now unavailable Kodachrome and digital photographs. Or is this really a matter of nostalgia, which is not in itself bad, but should be recognized as such in this regard of Kodachrome.
Had I been aware of the imminent (now actual) loss of professional developing capability, I would have made the suggestion earlier. But hopefully someone somewhere has already thought of this test and taken some photos in the manner as I describe.
Kitty Antonik Wakfer, [Personal details removed by Moderator] AZ USA
Complain about this comment
Kitty Antonik Wakfer wrote: "I would like to see an experiment done by adept photographers shooting the same subjects with Kodachrome and also digital cameras, at approximately same time of day (lighting). Then blind the viewers of the photo originss and let them try to determine which was done in which manner, and also which they prefer."
This would only be useful if you compared photo prints -- if you scan a slide or film, it too then becomes a digital image and would lose much of its quality due to the limitations of digital imaging. You could transfer a digital image to slide but then you would have to ensure that both slides used the same film.
I hope all that makes sense??
Complain about this comment
@excitemanutd
Yes, I realize that viewing scans of both types of photos would negate such an experiment. I should have made it clear that I was suggesting that the *prints* from each method - Kodachrome and digital - would be viewed "blindly". But thanks for pointing that out for others who not realize this.
Kitty Antonik Wakfer, AZ USA (some moderator objects to me including which town in the very large diverse state of AZ)
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS