Edward Erbeck wrote:
"Grumpy AuContraire" wrote:


For quie a few years, I used Kodachrome 25, (long gone now), and a fine
grain negative film. Kodak used to make a color negative film also with
an ASA of 25. More than once, I produced 30x40 prints from these
negatives. Of course, you have to be meticulous with cleanliness both in
the camera and lab.



Too bad more folks didn't realize what the slower Films had to offer. For
a while I enjoyed taking 4X5's with TechPan. I have no idea what the
Enlargement Limit was for those!? Never even considered trying an 8X10, even
with the Ansel Adams influence (my preference for Black and White). At least
with the Garflex Press Camera I had a degree of mobility ;-)


I had a Speed Graphic or two and a 2 1/4 x 3 1/4 (Crown I believe) for
better portability along with a 5/7 view, 4x5 view. The view cameral
were great in that they could compensate for distortion when shooting
square (like buildings) from a disadvantaged shooting point. Hey! I
just used the word "disadvantage" without infering that politically
correct crap!! Yeehawwww!!!


The fact remains that most Pictures today are shared electronically and
that limits the useful resolution. Except for the occasional "Coffee Table"
Book I really can't think of a Distributed Media that still requires Film
Original Images.


Oh, I agree. I hardly ever use the Leica anymore... Only for the artsy
fartsy stuff!



I haven't pulled out my Asahi Pentax Spotmatic II in many Years and
there's also a Nikon F-4 sitting next to it sharing a Dusty Shelf. Heck you
can't even get Batteries for the Pentax any more I don't think.


That's why I like the M2 Leica. No freakin' batteries required. I
could use the (very) old Leica meter as well as that didn't require a
battery either. But I simply use the F16 rule, lick my finger and stick
it in the air to check wind direction. G



As I stated above, Kodachrome 25 went the way of the Dodo boid several
years ago. I'm not even sure that there is anything as good by other
manufacturers that is as good. The great thing about Kodachrome is it's
bullet proof archival quality. I have slides that are nearly fifty
years old and they are still perfect.



Folks like Fuji and another "Whoever they were/are" Brand of Film
never seemed to get it "Just Right". Oh it worked and made images, but.....


It's the Kodachrome process which is very complex as the dyes are added
during the process rather than being incorporated into the film.
Extremely stable.



I fear that digital stuff will have gone through several generational
changes to include format etc.

Oh well...



Hopefully Digital will Catch Up. I had a Computer in the late 70's with
a Screaming 1 Mhz Processor. Today for less than it cost I can get one with
Dual or Quad Processors running at over a Gig. So who knows what Imaging
will be like given the leaps in Storage, Processing and Chip Development. I
like a half Full Glass.




Oh, it will and probably within the next ten years. But by then, I'll
probably be in bed screaming for a diaper change...

JT