Hacker News Reader

Comment by abritinthebay | Hacker News Reader

Does anyone with a photographic bent know what the modern equivalent of Kodachrome would be? (Stable, archival quality, rich color reproduction, and digitizes well)

View on HN

In terms of current film stock I've shot Kodak Ektar probably comes the closest to the look of Kodachrome, but it's still pretty far off. I think the processing technique for Kodachrome is what really made it unique, and since that's gone nothing else quite compares.

I was just going to reply suggesting Kodak Ektar, but you beat me to it. - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ektar

There are massive discussions with film photographers about the different kinds of films and their colour profiles, characteristics and so on.

While I do like the look of Ektar, when I shoot color film I personally lean more toward slide films like Velvia, but that's a whole different beast. I just love that punchy contrast.

Upload to both AWS and GCP and use a Canon DSLR, retaining raw sensor data?

Unless you're shooting a DSLR with ~140 megapixels of resolution... it's not the same thing at all.

I'm not sure, but I _think_ you're asserting that the information content of a 35mm Kodachrome slide taken in the 1970's is 140 Mpix. It isn't. Not remotely close. A present-day DSLR (e.g. 5Ds) with a present-day lens is going to greatly exceed that slide's information content.

I'm not asserting anything. A 35mm Kodachrome transparency, like other 35mm transparencies on films of comparable ISO rating, contains an equivalent of approximately 140 megapixels of data in its 24 mm x 36 mm image.

Citation: Langford, Michael (2000). Basic Photography (7th Ed.). Oxford: Focal Press. p. 99.

Film has vastly more resolution than even high-end DSLRs. This isn't shocking or surprising if you know anything about the space.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com