p.6 #1 · New Cobalt Kodachrome 25 and 64 film profiles
Guys, it looks like some people are getting a bit worked up over the Cobalt Kodachrome profile. I was just curious, tried it, and honestly really liked it, which is why I shared it here. At the end of the day, it's just a film profile, not something to argue over. Nobody has to use it. If you like the look, great, it's there for you. If you don't think it resembles Kodachrome, prefer your own profiles or just don't like it, that is perfectly fine too. Just ignore it and move on.
It's not real film and never was meant to be. For me, it's the most accurate Kodachrome profile I have tried, and I really like what it does to my images. I love shooting film but missed the boat on Kodachrome. This gives me a chance to get a similar vibe with my digital Ms.
p.6 #2 · New Cobalt Kodachrome 25 and 64 film profiles
KLaban wrote:
I'm curious, have you any experience using drumscans or the Hasselblad Flextight X1/X5 for scanning Kodachrome? If so, how would your Z7 scans compare?
I had a dark Kodachrome that is a nighttime aerial of Times Square that I had drum scanned with a high end Howtek back in 2012. A number of years later I did a Z7 scan and it had a fair bit more shadow detail in the raw file. I don't think the Flex X series were as good as the Howtek at the time so I truly believe digital camera scans have made most drum scanning obsolete, especially if I were to use my Hasselblad X2DII.
p.6 #3 · New Cobalt Kodachrome 25 and 64 film profiles
There's an interesting conversation to be had here if we can get past the back and forth barbs.
Cobalt is an extremely expensive product based on the way the profiles are licensed and there's no realistic way to "test" it as far as I know, but correct me if I'm wrong. We're talking $200 for someone that has no other Cobalt products for a single emulation.
Of course, we can't see A/B shots of this particular emulation against film, but like Felix said, there were multiple steps in achieving a "final" actual Kodachrome product, all of which could be adjusted to taste. It just so happens that a particular way of developing and printing Kodachrome rose as the cream that lives on as the "standard" that is attributed by the masses as what Kodachrome "was".
All that said, the Cobalt claim that their emulation is "perfect" is laughable because what does that even mean, given the above?
p.6 #4 · New Cobalt Kodachrome 25 and 64 film profiles
RoamingScott wrote:
There's an interesting conversation to be had here if we can get past the back and forth barbs.
Cobalt is an extremely expensive product based on the way the profiles are licensed and there's no realistic way to "test" it as far as I know, but correct me if I'm wrong. We're talking $200 for someone that has no other Cobalt products for a single emulation.
Of course, we can't see A/B shots of this particular emulation against film, but like Felix said, there were multiple steps in achieving a "final" actual Kodachrome product, all of which could be adjusted to taste. It just so happens that a particular way of developing and printing Kodachrome rose as the cream that lives on as the "standard" that is attributed by the masses as what Kodachrome "was".
All that said, the Cobalt claim that their emulation is "perfect" is laughable because what does that even mean, given the above?...Show more →
If you are not convinced, don't buy it. There are plenty of free Kodachrome presets that might suit you just fine. Let's keep the discussion constructive and avoid tearing down a product simply because you don't agree with how it's marketed. I wish there were a free trial for their profiles, but I don't think that's the case, so we just have to rely on the samples and honest comparisons posted here.
p.6 #6 · New Cobalt Kodachrome 25 and 64 film profiles
Fred Miranda wrote:
Guys, it looks like some people are getting a bit worked up over the Cobalt Kodachrome profile. I was just curious, tried it, and honestly really liked it, which is why I shared it here. At the end of the day, it's just a film profile, not something to argue over. Nobody has to use it. If you like the look, great, it's there for you. If you don't think it resembles Kodachrome, prefer your own profiles or just don't like it, that is perfectly fine too. Just ignore it and move on.
It's not real film and never was meant to be. For me, it's the most accurate Kodachrome profile I have tried, and I really like what it does to my images. I love shooting film but missed the boat on Kodachrome. This gives me a chance to get a similar vibe with my digital Ms....Show more →
Yup, agree with Fred, I like the color profile, just put "kodachrome" images of snow Iditarod start on people forum, I like the look on a snowy day all done with the 25/64 preset. I think some are getting into the "Dire Wolf" thing, about a year ago a group claimed to bring back the extinct dire wolf by cross breeding, and it is a big powerful wolf that looks sort of like dire wolf but it isn't a dire wolf, similarly Cobalt brought a nice profile that has some color tone/balance aspects of Kodachrome to dig, it isn't really film, it can never be film as film is physical and film just looks different even in a dig scan from a dig origin file. Kodachrome is probably permanently extinct, I'd shoot it if they made it, but I cannot, but I do find the Kodachrome profiles pleasing to a dig file.
p.6 #7 · New Cobalt Kodachrome 25 and 64 film profiles
It would be silly for people to get worked up over any film emulation, profile or plug-in. I don't use them but it does not mean I won't and I think they are cool, I also think they may help film sales of the stuff that is still around. And no, we will never-ever see Kodachrome again, for many reasons, it lived an honorable life that was as long as a human being.
Kodachrome is very personal to me, among other film stocks, I learned photography on it as a kid in the early 80's which lead to my career in my late teens. I even met my wife while I was shooting it in 2010, photographed our own elopement with it using a pocket wizard remote (we were cracking up). I did shoot some in 120 format in the late 80's, wished I would have did more of that. But I did manage to use it in an Xpan which was fantastic, photo attached...
In 2011, I was using my eBay search for anything Kodachrome and found that an estate sale offered up about a dozen Kodachrome originals in 8x10" format that were portraits of movie stars from the 50's. I was floored and was hell bent on getting one. Some were a bit faded, a few were famous, some were not. The one I went for was in the best condition as it would appear and was of actress Ruth Hussey who ironically played a photographer in the movie The Philadelphia Story. The original is absolutely stunning. I keep it in cool dark storage but do take it out once and awhile to marvel at it, photo attached...
To close, among other films, I still see in Kodachrome and once and awhile, feel like offering it up even if created using digital means. One can do that with a profile or by feel or anything in-between so maybe look at the Cobalt offering as a good starting point?
California Redwoods, Hasselblad Xpan, 30mm 5.6, Kodachrome 25
Original 8x10 Kodachrome
My current interpretation of Kodachrome, Leica M10-P, 35mm FLE
p.6 #8 · New Cobalt Kodachrome 25 and 64 film profiles
Ai_Print wrote:
I had a dark Kodachrome that is a nighttime aerial of Times Square that I had drum scanned with a high end Howtek back in 2012. A number of years later I did a Z7 scan and it had a fair bit more shadow detail in the raw file. I don't think the Flex X series were as good as the Howtek at the time so I truly believe digital camera scans have made most drum scanning obsolete, especially if I were to use my Hasselblad X2DII.
Thanks for your feedback, much appreciated.
I shot Kodachrome virtually exclusively for many years only changing when publishers were seduced by the wonders ( NOT! ) of Velvia and started demanding its use. My experience with drumscans was they varied depending on the scanner and the experience and skills of the operator. I seldom if ever need to scan film these days but I'll certainly give it a try at some point using my Z7.
p.6 #9 · New Cobalt Kodachrome 25 and 64 film profiles
Hello everyone, I’m one of the creators of the Elite Kodachrome package.
First of all, I want to thank Fred for the trust. It’s a real pleasure to read his feedback, especially when it’s positive, and it’s also great to see he’s clearly not the only one enjoying it.
As for the credibility of the emulation profiles, I can only say that what we did was, as faithfully as we could, turn into digital form what was actually shot on Kodachrome and developed in K-14, using proprietary software. There really was nothing on the market that could do what we needed, so we had to build those tools ourselves.
I don’t think there’s much point in repeating what is already written on the website. For me, first and foremost as a photographer, having had the chance to shoot and directly see real, authentic K-14 at work was a privilege. Especially after years spent looking at attempts to emulate Kodachrome more “by taste” than by process, often based on slides developed in all sorts of creative ways, which is what most of us usually see online, and sometimes in person too if we happen to know people who actually shot it.
I also have a few side-by-side test shots I can share, taken on real Kodachrome 64 with a Contax RTS and compared against an A1 II with the profile applied, just to show how close we actually got to the real film.
The biggest differences come from the acquisition stage. If I had shot with a target, I would have had a much more reliable way to align the images, with fixed grey reference points to line up the colour axes properly. Since I didn’t include one in those shots, I can only approximate that alignment image by image. So if you notice some distance between them, that is the reason: not the profile itself, but the lack of a target to use as a fixed reference during the slide acquisition.
p.6 #10 · New Cobalt Kodachrome 25 and 64 film profiles
Ulysseita wrote:
Hello everyone, I’m one of the creators of the Elite Kodachrome package.
First of all, I want to thank Fred for the trust. It’s a real pleasure to read his feedback, especially when it’s positive, and it’s also great to see he’s clearly not the only one enjoying it.
As for the credibility of the emulation profiles, I can only say that what we did was, as faithfully as we could, turn into digital form what was actually shot on Kodachrome and developed in K-14, using proprietary software. There really was nothing on the market that could do what we needed, so we had to build those tools ourselves.
I don’t think there’s much point in repeating what is already written on the website. For me, first and foremost as a photographer, having had the chance to shoot and directly see real, authentic K-14 at work was a privilege. Especially after years spent looking at attempts to emulate Kodachrome more “by taste” than by process, often based on slides developed in all sorts of creative ways, which is what most of us usually see online, and sometimes in person too if we happen to know people who actually shot it.
I also have a few side-by-side test shots I can share, taken on real Kodachrome 64 with a Contax RTS and compared against an A1 II with the profile applied, just to show how close we actually got to the real film.
The biggest differences come from the acquisition stage. If I had shot with a target, I would have had a much more reliable way to align the images, with fixed grey reference points to line up the colour axes properly. Since I didn’t include one in those shots, I can only approximate that alignment image by image. So if you notice some distance between them, that is the reason: not the profile itself, but the lack of a target to use as a fixed reference during the slide acquisition....Show more →
p.6 #11 · New Cobalt Kodachrome 25 and 64 film profiles
Unless of course one has Kodachrome transparencies and digital files of the same location on two different dates in time.
RoamingScott wrote:
There's an interesting conversation to be had here if we can get past the back and forth barbs.
Cobalt is an extremely expensive product based on the way the profiles are licensed and there's no realistic way to "test" it as far as I know, but correct me if I'm wrong. We're talking $200 for someone that has no other Cobalt products for a single emulation.
Of course, we can't see A/B shots of this particular emulation against film, but like Felix said, there were multiple steps in achieving a "final" actual Kodachrome product, all of which could be adjusted to taste. It just so happens that a particular way of developing and printing Kodachrome rose as the cream that lives on as the "standard" that is attributed by the masses as what Kodachrome "was".
All that said, the Cobalt claim that their emulation is "perfect" is laughable because what does that even mean, given the above?...Show more →
p.6 #12 · New Cobalt Kodachrome 25 and 64 film profiles
There are things that could never be done with film Kodachrome, at iso 25 or 64 the colors of the night, it was not the right media, but the thought occurred to me how would the colors of night look in a Kodachrome color emulation- this is an aurora from by deck in Anchorage last September, ported the file in to see what it would it do.
p.6 #13 · New Cobalt Kodachrome 25 and 64 film profiles
EMH2025 wrote:
There are things that could never be done with film Kodachrome, at iso 25 or 64 the colors of the night, it was not the right media, but the thought occurred to me how would the colors of night look in a Kodachrome color emulation- this is an aurora from by deck in Anchorage last September, ported the file in to see what it would it do.
p.6 #14 · New Cobalt Kodachrome 25 and 64 film profiles
chiron wrote:
In your judgment, how does this image relate to what the naked eye sees looking at the same scene?
Your eye sees in real time, so you see the aurora and it is beautiful, it is dynamic in motion, but your eye never sees what the camera does accumulating photons for seconds, plus we lack sliders to change things. The photographs are always much better than seen. The same is true for the recent lunar eclipse- it was a great site, but put look through a telescope, or put a camera on the telescope it is so much more intensely beautiful and immersive. So while photography does yield a "better" view, there is always something about being there, in the midst of an eclipse or an aurora, that three dimension sense of place and time that is just different- no need to choose, I do both at the same time !
p.6 #15 · New Cobalt Kodachrome 25 and 64 film profiles
EMH2025 wrote:
Your eye sees in real time, so you see the aurora and it is beautiful, it is dynamic in motion, but your eye never sees what the camera does accumulating photons for seconds, plus we lack sliders to change things. The photographs are always much better than seen. The same is true for the recent lunar eclipse- it was a great site, but put look through a telescope, or put a camera on the telescope it is so much more intensely beautiful and immersive. So while photography does yield a "better" view, there is always something about being there, in the midst of an eclipse or an aurora, that three dimension sense of place and time that is just different- no need to choose, I do both at the same time !
p.6 #16 · New Cobalt Kodachrome 25 and 64 film profiles
Thank you for sharing these, Ulysseita.
It is quite helpful in understanding what you have achieved.
-Kk
Ulysseita wrote:
Hello everyone, I’m one of the creators of the Elite Kodachrome package.
First of all, I want to thank Fred for the trust. It’s a real pleasure to read his feedback, especially when it’s positive, and it’s also great to see he’s clearly not the only one enjoying it.
As for the credibility of the emulation profiles, I can only say that what we did was, as faithfully as we could, turn into digital form what was actually shot on Kodachrome and developed in K-14, using proprietary software. There really was nothing on the market that could do what we needed, so we had to build those tools ourselves.
I don’t think there’s much point in repeating what is already written on the website. For me, first and foremost as a photographer, having had the chance to shoot and directly see real, authentic K-14 at work was a privilege. Especially after years spent looking at attempts to emulate Kodachrome more “by taste” than by process, often based on slides developed in all sorts of creative ways, which is what most of us usually see online, and sometimes in person too if we happen to know people who actually shot it.
I also have a few side-by-side test shots I can share, taken on real Kodachrome 64 with a Contax RTS and compared against an A1 II with the profile applied, just to show how close we actually got to the real film.
The biggest differences come from the acquisition stage. If I had shot with a target, I would have had a much more reliable way to align the images, with fixed grey reference points to line up the colour axes properly. Since I didn’t include one in those shots, I can only approximate that alignment image by image. So if you notice some distance between them, that is the reason: not the profile itself, but the lack of a target to use as a fixed reference during the slide acquisition....Show more →
p.6 #17 · New Cobalt Kodachrome 25 and 64 film profiles
EMH2025 wrote:
Your eye sees in real time, so you see the aurora and it is beautiful, it is dynamic in motion, but your eye never sees what the camera does accumulating photons for seconds, plus we lack sliders to change things. The photographs are always much better than seen. The same is true for the recent lunar eclipse- it was a great site, but put look through a telescope, or put a camera on the telescope it is so much more intensely beautiful and immersive. So while photography does yield a "better" view, there is always something about being there, in the midst of an eclipse or an aurora, that three dimension sense of place and time that is just different- no need to choose, I do both at the same time !
Yes, well said. In several weeks in Iceland, we often saw auroras, some stronger than others. But none ever matched what a photo usually displays. It gives the odd sense of taking a photograph of something you haven't seen. With the eclipse, one's eye can see the striking version, albeit through a telescope. Not so with an aurora. The photo is of something that is otherwise not there.
I was also wondering about the particular green color in your Kodachrome emulation photo. I never saw that tone of green in an aurora. An artifact of the emulation? Or slider induced?
p.6 #18 · New Cobalt Kodachrome 25 and 64 film profiles
I was excited by Cobalt's release of the new profiles and went ahead and ordered them for Capture One. Unfortunately, what Cobalt sent this morning was the old profiles, disappointing. Working on resolving the issue, but in the meantime tried some processing of existing images. Here are a couple comparisons for reference.
For what it's worth, the original images were color calibrated with a Calibrate grey card. There are readjustments in the Kodachrome images including some reduction in the dark blue channel. I am looking forward to getting the new Kodachrome profile and will share when I have a chance to go through the same images.
p.6 #19 · New Cobalt Kodachrome 25 and 64 film profiles
Thanks for sharing. Hope you don’t mind reposting once you get the newer updated profiles.
Kevner wrote:
I was excited by Cobalt's release of the new profiles and went ahead and ordered them for Capture One. Unfortunately, what Cobalt sent this morning was the old profiles, disappointing. Working on resolving the issue, but in the meantime tried some processing of existing images. Here are a couple comparisons for reference.
For what it's worth, the original images were color calibrated with a Calibrate grey card. There are readjustments in the Kodachrome images including some reduction in the dark blue channel. I am looking forward to getting the new Kodachrome profile and will share when I have a chance to go through the same images....Show more →
p.6 #20 · New Cobalt Kodachrome 25 and 64 film profiles
Mark and All,
I did receive the correct profile pack late yesterday and just ran a quick series of tests. All of the images are using the B-Balanced profile which Cobalt states has been grey balanced. Of the three profiles NB, B, and PR it is the most neutral. On the images I shared earlier, there was some correction to the dark blue channels. There are no color channel corrections in the images. The first image is the one shot and processed using a calibrite gray card and using C1's A7RM5 Prostandard profile.
Overall, I feel the K64 profiles are truest color wise, although I do like the added punch the K25 profile adds. I'm looking forward to testing these on a number of images in the next couple of weeks.
I also wanted to give kudos to Cobalt for quickly resolving the error in providing the wrong profiles. - Kk
