Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/06/19

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Film is Archival
From: "A. Lal" <>
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 03:06:18 -0400
References: <> <141c01c336f4$0c1c7ea0$31e47d80@KRIEGERLPT>

Well, not all film is archival- far from it, in fact.

Back iin the 50's my father took many, many, pictures on colour slide film, He used Agfacolour, Ektachrome, Kodachrome, Orwocolor,
and a couple of other makes that not longer exist. These were carefully stored in metal slide boxes and projected only occasionally.
The camera was a Contax IIIa (its metal shutter was better suited to tropical conditions that the Leica's), not that it matters.

I am sure that members of this list will not be surprised to learn that virtuallly alll have faded, except for the  Kodachromes. It
is for this reason that I have never used any E-6 emulsions; the short-term advantages are simply not worth the loss of images in
the long term. List members singing the praises of Fuji or Kodak E-6 emulsions need to be aware of this fact.

> Whatever else, at least at the present, film is the archival medium. You
> cannot put your CD or DVD away for 75 years, not tend to it much, and expect
> that it will be easy to use at that time. Standards will change, get much
> much better, and legacy equipment is likely to become scarcer. Film and
> prints sit there in the cool, dry, dark and don't do much. For my purposes,
> which is developing an archive of images, film (Kodachrome) is still the
> preferred way.
> I realize this may be a small minority concern.

- --
To unsubscribe, see

Replies: Reply from Brian Reid <> (Re: [Leica] Film is Archival)
In reply to: Message from Martin Krieger <> ([Leica] Film is Archival)