Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: filmscanners: RE: filmscanners: Re: Rescans and archiving
Rob Geraghty wrote:
> Roger wrote:
> >At 11:26 PM +1000 12/12/01, Rob Geraghty wrote:
> >>The archival nature of Kodachrome is awesome. It's a shame that the
> >>technology is being displaced by ektachrome in that respect. However
> I
> >>believe the modern Ektachrome films are much more archival than earlier
> >>versions.
> > Yes, that is true, but they still don't match the Fujichromes
> >for longevity, at least according to Henry Wilhelm.
>
> Hi Roger - when I spoke of Ektachrome, I meant *all* ektachrome films, which
> includes Fuji and all other brands which use the ektachrome process. It's
> reassuring to know that Wilhelm says Fuji films have good longevity since
> almost my entire collection is fuji film. However, Fuji film simply wasn't
> around just post WWII, but I've seen Kodachromes that still look brilliant
> from QEII's coronation. I really hope that Fuji films do turn out to last
> a long time, but at the moment the only one we can be sure of is Kodachrome.
Fuji's Velvia chrome film is the most stable of the Fuji chrome films
(significantly more stable than the
rest). I think that's he only one that is more stable than Kodak
Ecktachrome...But my knowledge is a few
years old.
Harvey Ferdschneider
partner, SKID Photography, NYC
|
