[photo-3d] Re: Kodachrome demise, digital rise

["John Goodman" <jgood@xxxxxxxx>]

Paul Talbot wrote:

> When I look at K25 stereo slides, I generally cannot convince
> myself that I am looking at the results of an analog process. 

Semantic quibbling, but isn't all "reality" ultimately "digital," 
when it comes to atoms, photons, and quantum states?

> and giving the impression that the picture was etched or
> chiseled onto the film. 

I've always noticed that the emulsion side of Kodachromes 
appear etched, with significantly deeper relief than other 
emulsions. Perhaps you're seeing an artifact of this extra 
"depth", due to some combination of your viewer's optics and 
illumination and your eyes?

I'm neither a Kodachrome proselytizer nor hater. I too have 
been disappointed at times. But just as often, I really enjoy 
Kodachrome's interpretation of "reality," its crispness and 
unexaggerated color rendition. So I feel sad that supplies of 
KM25 are running out, laid in a supply to buck the trend, and 
will continue exploring the love/hate emotions it often inspires.  

> so the whole experiment was a big waste of time and money 

Not entirely, imho. You know now quite positively that you 
dislike all Kodachrome after Kodachrome II. Also, the views 
you shot on Kodachrome could be digitized in the future, and 
the aspects you dislike possibly mitigated or eliminated by 
software. This aspect can be expected to improve over time.

jeg

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/