Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2011/02/10

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

Subject: [Leica] When did Kodachrome really die?
From: henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff)
Date: Thu, 10 Feb 2011 12:21:51 -0800
References: <AANLkTimCZv3eJ9MstQbNfkDrD3W0u6EGJTp7CjRWOkZN@mail.gmail.com>

I shot mostly Fuji for work stuff after the early 80's, but still 
shot a lot of Kodachrome for myself until the early 90's.

In the 70's there was a local Kodak lab here in North Vancouver which 
of course had great turnaround making it entirely suitable for 
professional work. When that closed the closest lab was in Toronto, 
which was too slow, but it took a while for the local labs to do 
truly professional Ektachrome and Fuji processing, and the longevity 
of the emulsions was still very suspect. When those hurdles were 
cleared (more or less) in the 80's I gradually migrated away from 
Kodachrome even for personal stuff but kept using it until the 
processing and mailing got even sketchier. After 2000 there was no 
point whatsoever in using it here as the turnaround started being 
about 6 weeks, with more lost slides and more and more dirt and 
scratches. Also, I had been using Fuji for all my professional stuff 
in the larger formats as well, and a local lab here that had 
installed a very sophisticated line that I had some part in 
developing and that maintained much tighter tolerances than Kodak 
ever had got all of my business.
-- 

       Henning J. Wulff
  Wulff Photography & Design
mailto:henningw at archiphoto.com
   http://www.archiphoto.com


In reply to: Message from sonc.hegr at gmail.com (Sonny Carter) ([Leica] When did Kodachrome really die?)