[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k] [s4s] [vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Home]
Board
Settings Home
/p/ - Photography



Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.



File: 1w0xq6oo1_1280.jpg (293 KB, 800x1000)
293 KB
293 KB JPG
Why was Kodachrome so good?

Any chances that it gets revived by Kodak?
>>
>>3042453
Big part of the appeal is the era when those pictures were taken.
>>
>>3042454
lol, that sounds retarded. says who, by the way?
>>
>>3042463

Says me bitch suck my dick
>>
File: 1423927746812.gif (3.52 MB, 406x339)
3.52 MB
3.52 MB GIF
>dem smooth ass browns/dark reds
>>
>>3042468

Jontron thinks that rich browns and dark reds commit a disproportionate amount of crimes tho
>>
>>3042454
yeah back when america was great. Maybe Trump will make film great again
>>
Kodachrome, for all intents and purposes, was a sub-par film that should have been long forgotten with the advent of better emulsions. The Kodachrome "look" was caused not by the film's emulsion but the fact that a lot of photos were taken on 120, 4x5, or 8x10. 35mm Kodachrome lacks that look, and just looks like shitty budget film.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 Windows
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution1491 dpi
Vertical Resolution1491 dpi
Image Created2009:05:11 10:25:23
Color Space InformationUncalibrated
Image Width725
Image Height962
>>
File: jeunefilleafghane11.jpg (216 KB, 1125x1688)
216 KB
216 KB JPG
>>3042498
The Afghan Girl (Sharbat Gula) - 1984
Nikon FM2, Kodachrome 64

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS5 Macintosh
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution72 dpi
Vertical Resolution72 dpi
Image Created2011-09-14T16:02:06-04:00
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width1125
Image Height1688
>>
>>3042498
>35mm Kodachrome lacks that look, and just looks like shitty budget film.
but thats wrong you piece of shit.

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareGoogle
Image-Specific Properties:
>>
File: saul-leiter-big.jpg (490 KB, 1150x507)
490 KB
490 KB JPG
>>3042498
so wrong
>>
>>3042505
Why can't women look this beautiful anymore fuck

America does need higher beauty standards
>>
File: 00036f47_medium.jpg (76 KB, 639x423)
76 KB
76 KB JPG
Kyaiktiyo, Burma, 1978. The Golden Rock at Shwe Pyi Daw (the Golden Country), the Buddhist holy place. Hiroji Kubota writes: “I was desperate to keep a distance from America for a while; luckily, I found Burma and its gentle and compassionate people.

In the spring of 1978, on the top of the hill where I took this photo, I had two Leica bodies: the one with Tri-X and the other with Kodachrome 64. Soon after, I realised that the colour one looked very colourful and was more powerful. That was my decisive moment, to become a colour photographer”. (Photo by Hiroji Kubota/Magnum Photos)
>>
>>3042507

...he says, cheeto crumbs in his neckbeard, pert man titties straining his mustard stained minecraft shirt
>>
>>3042513
t. not an alt right /pol/tard
>>
File: lololol.jpg (201 KB, 450x649)
201 KB
201 KB JPG
>>3042512
meanwhile, in digiland. this one was done with a 5D mkiii.
>>
>>3042507
Women do, you're just not looking in the right places. You have this perception that ALL women looked like that, when it was only the attractive ones that were worth the film.
>>
>>3042516
most women these days didnt have dumb tattoos or piercings, or retarded ear expansions. they could be attractive without trying to look ghetto or like they came from some backwards african tribe.
>>
I have a roll of Kodak elite chrome 200 that expired in 2012 that im about to use. What should i expect?
>>
>>3042526
snapshits.
>>
>>3042527
(You)
>>
>>3042527

Lmao
>>
>>3042526
I have one that was inside my uncle's F3 since the 00's should I develop it or its probably bad?
>>
>>3042515
:(........
>>
>>3042474
>that trip

subtle
>>
>>3042519
Stop hanging around the bottom 50% of society.
>>
File: 06.jpg (481 KB, 900x1103)
481 KB
481 KB JPG
pavelkosenko.wordpress.com/2012/03/28/4x5-kodachromes/

[EXIF data available. Click here to show/hide.]
Camera-Specific Properties:
Camera SoftwareAdobe Photoshop CS3 Windows
PhotographerShorpy.com
Image-Specific Properties:
Image OrientationTop, Left-Hand
Horizontal Resolution1800 dpi
Vertical Resolution1800 dpi
Image Created2011-04-17T11:56:12+04:00
Color Space InformationsRGB
Image Width900
Image Height1103
>>
Right now cinestill is a film that has nice unique colors.
>>
Kodachrome wasn't good and was easily bested by Ektachrome...which IS coming back.
>>
>>3043047
the only good ekta was e100g. and that shit aint coming back. they are making a ""e100"" generic ektachrome for dummies who dont know better.
>>
>>3042465
Edgy as fuck.
>>
>>3042454
first post best post

if I went back in time and replaced kodachrome with an 100% different emulsion and called it "boogerchrome" then in 2017 everyone would be saying "oh maaan they need to remake boogerchrome it was the most beautiful film ever ;;__;;"

i'll admit maybe 0.1% of the photographic population actually enjoy it for the tonality rather than the nostalgia factor
>>
>>3043051

suck my dick bitch i'm posting through eight layers of irony you think you can understand me?
>>
>>3043050
>they are making a ""e100"" generic ektachrome for dummies who dont know better.

Maybe they're developing an emulsion that scans better?
>>
>>3043140
>slides
>scanning
>>
>>3043148
>current year
>projecting them onto a wall
>>
>>3043148
>Boring people to death by forcing them to watch your slideshow
>>
>>3043155
>>3043345
>not projecting gorgeous slides of a cool trip while having a bbq & beer with friends
gay.
>>
>>3043140
>Maybe they're developing an emulsion that scans better?
like new portra that looks like fucking lame shit?
>>
>>3042453

>that guy in the middle pitching a tent

Can't really blame him.
>>
>>3043417
yeah kodachrome does that to you.
>>
How can you achieve this look digitally?
>>
>>3043346
Reddit leave
>>
>>3043464
>not projecting slides in your cuckshed after getting some chicken tendies while hugging your anime fuckpillow or whatever
is that enough 4chan for you?




Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.