« Flare 'n' Glare Test | Main | Carl Weese in Scranton, Penn. »

Sunday, 08 August 2010


I recall that, here in the UK, one of the main disincentives to buying Kodachrome (25 or 64) was its high price compared to Fujichrome - something like a £1.50 - £2 difference, which wasn't small beer in the '80s. Counting up the green versus yellow plastic boxes in 'storage' (2 old suitcases), I seem to have favoured Fujichrome by a factor of c.6:1, purely on cost grounds.

I for one have been enjoying the last few days on TOP, not because I'm a Kodachrome fan, but because I've recently been giving a work out to my old Canon EF with FD 35 & 135mm f/2 lenses using slide film. I love the simplicity and directness of it.

For the last few years I've mostly used Eos 1Ds and a bunch of zoom lenses, studio lights etc. Admittedly this can give results not possible with this simple set up. However, there really is something fantastic about a medium where the end result is such a direct consequence of the interaction of film, light, shutter and aperture which I'm having a lot of fun with, right now.

@Barry: but slide is so expensive these days in UK. I asked in chicester and it quotes 10 + 11 quid for 1 roll of velvia 50 and if pre-pay it is 15 quid. How can any Brits can afford it these day fo those cheaper fuji slide?

I guess film era is really a goner

I spit out coffee. ***Should include a 'Only photographers will find this funny' warning.

Talking of cost. There was a rumour back in the early eighties that the big yellow giant decided to buy up most of the silver market, be "forced" to put up the prices of its films then re-sold the silver and "forgot" to bring the price down. In Europe at least, a roll of Kodachrome almost doubled in price around that time.

[Ed. Note: that wasn't Kodak, that was the Hunt Brothers. And it wasn't a rumor. Google "The Hunt Brothers and the Silver Bubble" to find out more. Kodak was one of the collateral victims, not the perpetrator. --Mike]

What i'am I going to do with these 15 PREPAID mailers I have for Kodachrome processing?

Somewhere I have a couple rolls of Kodachrome 120 film I got stuck with when New York Colorworks shut down their 120 Kodachrome line, but a 9" x 1000' roll of aerial Kodachrome , not that I remember Kodak making such an item, but still ...

@Dennis. 7dayshop. Sensia is under £9 per roll, process paid. They don't do process paid Velvia, but the film starts at under £4 per roll.

It's always been a bit of a mugs game buying film on the high street. The problem now is finding E6 processing...

If you shoot Fuji, especially in Europe, you can get all their films pretty cheaply directly from fuji, through http://www.fujilab.co.uk/

Dennis Ng, Velvia is between 6 and 7 pounds there.

I have no affiliation, but am a satisfied repeat customer.


Your threads on the recently deceased Kodak color film take me back to the first day of an intro to photography class I taught in the early 70s. It was my practice to go around the room and have each student give his/her name and mention what brought them to this class. Typically the explanation would be – ‘I always wanted to be an artist but I can’t draw’ or ‘I inherited uncle Fred’s old camera’ or ‘I want to take pictures of my baby growing up.’ But when it came to one young lad, he paused for a moment in silence. Then a smile came over his face and he said: “I was sittin’ around one day with nothin’ to do when Paul Simon’s song Kodachrome came up on the radio. Decided right then I’d take a class.” In all my years of teaching I never heard a better reason.

Check here for lyrics: http://www.paulsimon.com/node/98

Joe Cameron

Kodachrome away... I don't think any of us readers are bored with the topic.

Ah well, now Sensia is no more...


It's the sheer transparency of the reflection and glass here that digital imagery just can't seem to match. For most of my shooting I use a Lumix GH1, which overall I've been delighted with. But it's never shot anything containing this kind of subtlety, this kind of, well, magic...

I'm sure this will have been said better and with more nuance before, but I actually suspect digital captures the colours we see with more accuracy, it just doesn't provoke beauty the way Kodachrome does (did). And let's be honest we all want to be seduced. Film seems to have the ability to tease out some kind of inner lurking beauty in even the most inane of objects.

The comments to this entry are closed.