K40 discontinued, but when?

Forum covering all aspects of small gauge cinematography! This is the main discussion forum.

Moderator: Andreas Wideroe

Post Reply
Angus
Senior member
Posts: 3888
Joined: Fri Mar 07, 2003 11:22 am
Contact:

Post by Angus »

Sharpness vs grain. There is a difference.

If I shoot some Efka FB25 still B&W film, there is very little grain. This is a simple silver halide 25ASA emulsion of the old school, you can blow it up to vast sizes with little grain noticable....but the image is always rather soft because of the nature of the emulsion - it is unchanged in formula since the 1950's.

Now....I shoot some Ektachrome 100 and there is grain for sure, but the image is sharper than the Efka 25.

Same camera body, same lens in both but with the Efka the effect is almost like soft focus. Can be quite beautiful at times.
mattias
Posts: 8356
Joined: Wed May 15, 2002 1:31 pm
Location: Gubbängen, Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Post by mattias »

yeah, and plus-x and tri-x have about the same resolving power, i think tri-x is slightly ahead even.

/matt
User avatar
Sparky
Senior member
Posts: 1062
Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2003 2:26 am
Real name: Mark
Location: London
Contact:

Post by Sparky »

So is it that slower films require more light which diffuses and bleeds into the surrounding emulsion that causes this lower sharpness?

Mark
matt5791
Senior member
Posts: 1062
Joined: Sat Nov 22, 2003 2:46 pm
Location: Birmingham, England
Contact:

Post by matt5791 »

Angus wrote:Kodachrome film in general (I am not just referring to K40 or even motion picture film) will survive because professionals use it.

read my previous post, I am not referring to pros shooting K40 super 8 or 16mm I specifically mention Kodachrome 35mm stills. The last time Kodak actually tried to kill of Kodachrome circa 1991 the pros shooting 35mm stills were absolutely up in arms.

Kodachrome in general, and therefore K40, isn't going anywhere just yet.
Angus, November 04 wrote:You're not seriously going to attempt to show that those K40's are being bought by professionals? It is crystal clear from the figures that amateurs are the largest group of people using super 8.
So where do you stand?

I have always reckoned that the largest group of super8 users were the amateur music video / film / documentary makers - and that these people are a separate group from the home movie makers / projectionists. I also reckoned that the professional users sat between these two groups in terms of usage.
Birmingham UK.
http://www.wells-photography.co.uk
Avatar: Kenneth Moore (left) with producers (centre) discussing forthcoming film to be financed by my grandfather (right) C.1962
mattias
Posts: 8356
Joined: Wed May 15, 2002 1:31 pm
Location: Gubbängen, Stockholm, Sweden
Contact:

Post by mattias »

very interesting thought, even though a slower emulsion would also be less sensitive to this stray light, perhaps making it a zero sum game?

/matt
Mitch Perkins
Senior member
Posts: 2190
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 12:36 am
Location: Toronto Canada
Contact:

Post by Mitch Perkins »

drsanchez wrote:In other news, Kodak is also laying off about 15,000 workers and closing processing plants all over the world. It seems they're moving toward digital.

And I like the way Kodachrome looks. I do some still photography as well as Super 8 and find it hard to shoot anything but K64 slides in 35mm. Gorgeous!
Sir, how do you manage to look both evil and jolly simultaneously? That is "some" still photography!

Mitch
Mitch Perkins
Senior member
Posts: 2190
Joined: Mon Mar 07, 2005 12:36 am
Location: Toronto Canada
Contact:

Post by Mitch Perkins »

Nigel wrote:Did Ovid write for 2000 years after his death?? No.

Did Shakespere write for four hundred years after his death?? No.

The hubrice of what you say. What makes you think that people 300 years from now will give a flying shit about what you or I made--That's absurd. To think that K40 will be here and people will be able to view these little strips 300 years from now is just as absurd.

The fact is that film is only 100 years old and there is very very very little of what was shot then that is here for us to watch. And, it's a good thing. Since it is crap.

K40 is old news and makes pictures that look like old news...If by the grace of God I make something that generations feel is good enough to tell down the line then it really doesn't matter what it was made with.

K40 Be Damned.

Good Luck
First of all, it's "hubris", second, Ovid doesn't have to be *writing* anything, because dude was not hoping to be *shooting* 300 years from now. Get it?

Boy, do you ever sound like a professional!

Mitch

Omigod I have to add -

1.) Talk about hubris - you just called 100 years of filmmaking "crap"!

2.) People are fucking full-on *obsessed* with artifacts from the past!

3.) In your last paragraph you contradict yourself! First you say K40 makes "old news" images, then you assert that good work transcends the medium of it's origination!

Good luck indeed.
alan doyle
Posts: 216
Joined: Sun Apr 27, 2003 9:39 pm
Contact:

waiting for harvey

Post by alan doyle »

Santo wrote:Alan, are you the guy who shot WAITING FOR HARVEY? A funny doc...
:lol:

santo...you made me very happy..not many people saw that doc..
wonderfull..2 weeks in cannes with a vip pass to go any place i wanted..
including a room with tarrantino.. kate moss, claudia shiffer willem defoe and the all round great human being johnny depp... smoking joints telling stories..
the good old days at the bbc..you could shoot on 16mm super8 digi beta dv and have time to kind of tell a story..
look out for another old on..


Fashion Victim: The Killing of Gianni Versace (2001)

i shot a lot of 16mm and loads of super 8 on both...










.
i shoot and sometimes i score
Post Reply