In article
>Is there anyone else out there who still thinks that Kodachrome renders
>nicer summer scenics than Velvia?? I just got back the last of a series
>of shots taken in parks here and in Florida and the Kodachrome slides just
>seem to have that magic touch while the Velvia slides really don't. The
>greens in the Kodachrome shots have a softer and more realistic color
>while the Velvia seems to render greens a little too gaudy. The Velvia
>did a great job on skies and lake/ocean shoreline shots, but in the woods,
>its color seemed a little unnatural.
>Anyone care to comment??
How can I resist a tag line like that?! ;-) For several
years I ranted and raved about the "candy-colors" of Fuji
slide film, and how unnatural it made almost everything
look, but then I got tired of Kodachrome's wishy-washy
grey-blue-green skies, pink highlights, dead shadows,
and grey-green folliage - and having to wait for the
four really clear, sunny days we get around here a year
to shoot with it (and I noticed that other photographers
were busy selling slide uses, while I was occasionally
getting "natural"-looking slides to add to my collection
[pizzaz sells!]), so I started using some Velvia (with
some nice results, and some disasters), but quickly
switched to Fuji 50, which I liked for its nicer colors
and lower contrast, but it has been discontinued, as
has Elite 100, which I just began to like.... (One
of the hazzards these days is that just as you get
used to a film, and know its characteristics well
enough to get the best out of the film, it gets
"improved" or replaced, leaving you back at "0".
Grrrr....!) Oh, back to your original comments -
I agree with you, when conditions are just right,
Kodachrome does give a nice, and more realistic,
rendering of many subjects.
Hope This Helps