Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1997/10/22

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: Off topic - slide film reviews
From: Welch <Bill.Welch@pressroom.com>
Date: Wed, 22 Oct 1997 23:30:03 -0700

Robert, I too like Velvia, though I find its colors can be too much for some 
applications.  But what I really want to suggest is another thought for you to consider 
about Kodachrome 200.
	Yes, compared to a modern, supersaturated E-6 film of 100 or 50 ISO, K-200 looks 
much poorer on the light table or projected. But that's not what this film is all about. 
It shines in low-light situations where those films aren't the best option or aren't 
even possible. One of its main characteristics is a very pleasing grain struture. The 
grain lends a feel of increased accutance, almost in the same way a well-printed Tri-X 
neg can convey impact through its grain as well as its tones.  K-200 can transmit a 
gritty feel that is wonderful for street photography. It's also very nice at dusk or 
magic hour, giving nice life and feel to scenes. And it's great indoors in low-light 
tungsten, warm and uncorrected. What's more, Kodak offers a 1 and 1/3 stop push to 500. 
Your may see some color distortions and curve crossovers, but in some indoor scenes I 
find it works well. Actually, you may find greenies and other color weirdness with any 
Kodachrome emulsion, given the vagaries of Kodak's processing these days. That's a 
downside of any of the Kodachromes.
	That said, I don't shoot that much K-200, and none at all of the other 
Kodachromes any more. I like Provia a lot and can push it easily when I need 200 or 
something in between. And Kodak EPN when color correctness is paramount. But it's a 
great tool in the right application -- and often a perfect match for Leica shooting. 
	Thanks for posting your impressions on all the films.

Bill  

Garbutt, Robert wrote:
> 
> Kodachrome 200
>  - Don't know if I'm talking through my hat here but this film does
> nothing for me.  The contrast range and colour saturation of the K64
> seem to have gone.  I would go to the extent of saying that this film is
> lifeless if I didn't suspect that my inexperience with colour and
> chromes was a contributing factor to my relatively poor results.  K200?
> Count me out.
>