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.
But note I'm shooting Fuji because I like the colour and other aspects of
the films. :) If I was really paranoid about longevity, I'd probably shoot
kodachrome.
As was mentioned before, all this depends on how well they're stored etc.
Rob
Rob Geraghty harper@wordweb.com
