Kodachrome vs Ultra Color 100

[kodachrome64]

Originally Posted by chris00nj

Although I'm relatively young and an amateur, I was looking to take my photography up a notch. I've never shot slide film, but the Kodachrome photos I see on the net are rich in color. (I'm off to Rome in a few months, so the project could be daftly titled Kodach-Rome).

However, the Ultra Color 100 negative film seems to be similar in quality (from viewing photos on the net) and it may be easier to not have to deal with slides. There is also Kodak Professional Elite Chrome Extra Color 100 slide film.


Does any one have experience working with the Ultra Color or Elite Chrome and how they compare in real life photos to Kodachrome?

Cheers, Chris

I was thinking about this too, but I guess it's a moot point with the UC100. Per Kodak, the new Ektar 100 color negative film will be replacing Ultra Color 100, and UC400 will be phased out because of the success of Portra 400VC.

Link: http://www.kodak.com/global/en/profe...tarIndex.jhtml

[matt8314]

Originally Posted by chris00nj

However, the Ultra Color 100 negative film seems to be similar in quality (from viewing photos on the net) and it may be easier to not have to deal with slides. There is also Kodak Professional Elite Chrome Extra Color 100 slide film.

A couple of things to keep in mind here. When it comes to scanning, slides are at an advantage compared to negatives when it comes to color fidelity. As you know, negatives do NOT have true colors. When you scan them, the software must determine what the true colors need to be. And they pretty much NEVER come out right. This means spending a good amount of time with Photoshop trying to get them right. And can you even remember what that shot REALLY looked like? Probably not. I would personally rather not waste the time trying to do this.

Secondly, comparing shots on the web tells you little about the quality of each shot (and NOTHING about how hard it was to scan/post process the file). Virtually ALL shots on the web are of low resolution and high compression - not exactly what we would call quality shots.

So once again, my thoughts here are that if you want slides, shoot some Kodachrome. If you want digital files and prints (and don't even want to mess with slides), save your money and get a good DSLR. Because, although slide film has its advantages over digital, negative film DOESN'T. And unlike digital, you can't shoot with impunity or instantly review with negative film (or slide film, for that matter).