The end of an era!

[Rhodes]

The best slide and movie film in history is now officially retired. Kodachrome: 1935-2010 RIP :wah::wah::wah:

Today is the last day that Dwayne’s Photo will develop this film!
The best epitaph: Hello darkness, my old friend. by semilog in
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1503957&postcount=11

[Gerald]

Yes, I saw it, the digital world has taken over, so we toast to Kodachrome: 1935-2010!

[Skybird]

Wowh, that was really a benchmark in its field.

[Gerald]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wZpaNJqF4po

[Penguin]

Rest in peace, old buddy Kodachrome!
A toast to the charm and look your pictures had! :salute:

[TLAM Strike]

Really sad, Kodak got it started in my home town and is still headquartered here.

[Penguin]

Really sad, Kodak got it started in my home town and is still headquartered here.

hey, if you see the Kodak guys throwing away some processing equipment, call me! For this I would do some dumpster diving! :yep:

[Growler]

You give us those nice bright colors
You give us the greens of summers
Makes you think all the world's a sunny day, oh yeah!

It seems somehow momentous and insignificant at the same time; awkward, really... I liked shooting with k-chrome when developing it was easier. Now, though, digital has too many advantages to traditional film that it's hard to imagine ever being a film photog.

Still, there was something remarkably - and maybe disproportionately - rewarding about getting that "perfect shot" with film.

Sorry, Mssrs. Simon and Garfunkel, but they're taking your Kodachrome away after all.

[Sailor Steve]

Sorry, Mssrs. Simon and Garfunkel, but they're taking your Kodachrome away after all.
Sorry to pick nits, but Simon wrote and recorded that song long after he and Garfunkel broke up. :sunny:

[Platapus]

Like losing an old friend. Kodachrome and I were old friends.

I have to confess going over to the dark (digital) side a few years ago. Still miss my dark room experiences. But digital seems to be the way to go these days.

I guess my Canon AE1 and A2E will soon join my slide rule on my shelf. Maybe I will be old enough, one day, for some kid to ask me what they are.

Then I will be able to tell them about film and developing your own pictures chemically. He or she will be incredulous and I will cry a little on the inside. :nope: .

While photoshop and the other computer programs can do things I could only dream about, somehow with digital manipulation I don't get the same feeling of creating art that I did with B/W film.

My record in the dark room is just under 8 hours for one print. It was a very complicated stretch/burn/dodge. But I did it and that feeling of accomplishment I don't think can be reproduced with a mouse.

Crap I am depressing myself again. :wah:

[Rhodes]

Like losing an old friend. Kodachrome and I were old friends.

I have to confess going over to the dark (digital) side a few years ago. Still miss my dark room experiences. But digital seems to be the way to go these days.

I guess my Canon AE1 and A2E will soon join my slide rule on my shelf. Maybe I will be old enough, one day, for some kid to ask me what they are.

Then I will be able to tell them about film and developing your own pictures chemically. He or she will be incredulous and I will cry a little on the inside. :nope: .

While photoshop and the other computer programs can do things I could only dream about, somehow with digital manipulation I don't get the same feeling of creating art that I did with B/W film.

My record in the dark room is just under 8 hours for one print. It was a very complicated stretch/burn/dodge. But I did it and that feeling of accomplishment I don't think can be reproduced with a mouse.

Crap I am depressing myself again. :wah:

Do not be. Buy some film, load in your evil slr and shoot. Return to the lighside and develop some.
I develop b&w and c-41 b&w film (with b&w developer) and the scann the negatives. Do some corrections and voila.
I do not have space and money for a elarger and wet print, but some day I want to have a proper darkroom and have fun developing and priting, etc. It's like a hobby. Some many people that went digital and still shoot and develop film just for fun!

[Jimbuna]

Could never develop my own shots but used it for years in the old Olympus OM-10

[Platapus]

When I finished my basement, I had a small room already designated for my very own dark room. Something I always wanted. I still might from strictly a hobby standpoint....once I have time for a hobby that is.

It has been about 35 years since I first started developing my own film and doing my own prints. I still get that "omg it is magic" feeling when I see the image first appear on the paper in the soup.

Anyone else get that rush?

[bookworm_020]

I'll be helping my folks scan all their slides over the next couple of weeks, and, except for a few, they have that big K on the cardboard!:cry:

[Capt. Morgan]

Sad news indeed.

There was a good piece in the N.Y.Times ... For Kodachrome Fans, Road Ends at Photo Lab in Kansas (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/30/us/30film.html?_r=3&hp)

...It has been about 35 years since I first started developing my own film and doing my own prints. I still get that "omg it is magic" feeling when I see the image first appear on the paper in the soup.

Anyone else get that rush?

Every time - All my B&W shots are still silver based. If the worst happens, I may buy an old field camera and coat my own plates (5X7 contacts look really nice).

Think I'll go browse through the Sibsim photography thread now.

[Growler]

Sorry to pick nits, but Simon wrote and recorded that song long after he and Garfunkel broke up. :sunny:

No worries. For some reason, I remembered both of them performing it - the 1981 concert in Central Park album is where I remember hearing it, which threw me off. Appreciate the correction. :yeah:

[Sailor Steve]

No worries. For some reason, I remembered both of them performing it - the 1981 concert in Central Park album is where I remember hearing it, which threw me off. Appreciate the correction. :yeah:
Actually that's a good point. Since Paul Simon wrote everything they did anyway (except for some early covers) the fact that they did perform it together at least once makes it valid. It looks like I'm the one who was wrong.

[Growler]

Actually that's a good point. Since Paul Simon wrote everything they did anyway (except for some early covers) the fact that they did perform it together at least once makes it valid. It looks like I'm the one who was wrong.

Bah. Think of it as, "We're both right" and drink to that.

[Sailor Steve]

Bah. Think of it as, "We're both right" and drink to that.
NO! WE'RE BOTH WRONG! SO THERE!
:rotfl2:

I'd rather be wrong myself than admit someone else is right? What's with that?

[Jimbuna]

Call it a draw then you can both send me a cheque by means of a penance :smug:

[bookworm_020]

Call it a draw then you can both send me a cheque by means of a penance :smug:

Would you accept a roll of Kodachrome as payment instead????

[Rhodes]

Would you accept a roll of Kodachrome as payment instead????

It depends if Jim want's to try to develop kodachrome in is bath tube or not.

Well, at least he can dev as a B&W film!

[Jimbuna]

Would you accept a roll of Kodachrome as payment instead????

'Kodachrome' Beer will do nicely :DL

[Sailor Steve]

'Kodachrome' Beer will do nicely :DL
How about I send you a Czech instead. :O:

[Growler]

A Czech? Can't speak for anyone else, but Iran as far away from that as I could.

[August]

The only thing I lament about the death of film is the lack of permanence inherent to digital imagery. I read somewhere that it is estimated that in 50 years there will be more pictures surviving from the Civil War than there will be from those taken today. I don't know how true that is but a hard drive crash or even a single errant mouse click and the digital image is gone whereas film prints and negatives are much more durable.

[bookworm_020]

The only thing I lament about the death of film is the lack of permanence inherent to digital imagery.

Too true! but the upshot is that more photos are been taken, but less are developed.

[Platapus]

The only thing I lament about the death of film is the lack of permanence inherent to digital imagery.

Properly maintained, a chemical picture can last hundreds of years. The lifespan of a CD or DVD is considerably less.

Film still remains the most efficient way to store that type of data for a long time and in little space. :yeah:

[Tessa]

Properly maintained, a chemical picture can last hundreds of years. The lifespan of a CD or DVD is considerably less.

Film still remains the most efficient way to store that type of data for a long time and in little space. :yeah:


In a way one could say that the internet is partially responsible for this. As e-commerce evolved and people started doing and getting used to 1-click shopping they began to expect things to happen faster - they developed a need/dependence on instant gratification.

Film takes time to properly develop (even if you're not doing anything special) where the digital camera's you have within seconds. Its to the point now that people are willing to wait even a hour to get their film developed.

[August]

So what would be the most efficient and long lasting digital image storage method?

Hard disk or Flash drive?

I've heard 50 years for a HDD but the only thing i can find about flash drives is number of write/erase rounds. Nothing about using it as a long term storage device.

[Capt. Morgan]

So what would be the most efficient and long lasting digital image storage method?...

How long lasting would you want them to be?

Frequent backups to an external HD (or two -with one stored off-site) seems the best compromise to me. Flash-drive, HD, optical disk, tape; they're all going to fail at some point, it's just a matter of staying on top of the backups and having redundant copies - and hoping that all the copies don't go south at the same time.

[August]

How long lasting would you want them to be?

As long as possible. What is possible?

Frequent backups to an external HD (or two -with one stored off-site) seems the best compromise to me. Flash-drive, HD, optical disk, tape; they're all going to fail at some point, it's just a matter of staying on top of the backups and having redundant copies - and hoping that all the copies don't go south at the same time.

Sounds like a lot of work. With good environmental controls what would be the best if left undisturbed?

[Capt. Morgan]

At this time, digital media can be stored for as long as there is someone willing to actively maintain it - transfer the data to new media as the old media degrades or becomes obsolete - recode the files to newer formats as the old ones become unreadable. Active maintenance is the key, more so than the particular media used.

It sounds like a lot of work, but it really isn't. Plug HD/Flash-drive into computer, start backup program, go to bed, next day take backup drive to work/friends/moms for storage. Repeat annually, or as needed.

Things may/should be much better in 10 years.

As to what will last the longest - no one really knows.

[DarkFish]

Sounds like a lot of work. With good environmental controls what would be the best if left undisturbed?Really depends on the type of memory. There are types of memory that need to be refreshed every few minutes/seconds/whatever(look for DRAM), and there are types of memory that can theoretically keep their information indefinitely. Some of those need a constant power supply (SRAM) whereas others such as a hard disk or flash memory should keep their stored information pretty much forever. (Flash memory deteriorates with every time it's rewritten, which means that after a certain amount of writes (in the order of tens of thousands) it becomes unusable. Which is why flash is only used in applications where only few write operations are needed, like mp3-players)