1. And... we're back. You'll notice that all of your images are back as well, as are our beloved emoticons, including the infamous :foo: We have also worked with our server folks and developers to fix the issues that were slowing down the site.

    There is still work to be done - the images in existing sigs are not yet linked, for example, and we are working on a way to get the images to load faster - which will improve the performance of the site, especially on the pages with a ton of images, and we will continue to work diligently on that and keep you updated.


    Fok on behalf of the entire Styleforum team
    Dismiss Notice


Discussion in 'Fine Living, Home, Design & Auto' started by Nantucket Red, Mar 19, 2009.

  1. Journeyman

    Journeyman Senior member

    Mar 29, 2005
    Brisbane, Australia
    That article is very misleading. Just because McCurry was given the last roll cut from the last master roll Kodak produced doesn't mean the very last roll of Kodachrome ever shot has been shot.

    Dwayne's will be processing Kodachrome until December 31st, so there's still time to shoot it. The actual last roll of Kodachrome will be the last one processed.

    I've still got several months worth in my fridge and three cameras loaded with it, one of which I have with me at this very moment. Last roll of Kodachrome my lily-white ass!

    NR - yes, the article was phrased a bit misleadingly.
    Whilst McCurry's roll of film was - supposedly - the final roll of Kodachrome ever produced, it will not be the last roll shot, of course.
  2. GQgeek

    GQgeek Senior member

    Mar 4, 2002
    I think that it's a very legitimate concern.
    I have a Nikon film camera and I've shot Kodachrome and Ektachrome in the past but - for convenience, mainly as I have two young kids - I tend to use digital cameras nowadays. It does make one think, however, about how digital images will be stored in the future - what will the preferred format be, will we still be able to read images stored in older formats, and so on? Disc degradation is a real concern, too.

    I don't think so. I would think that most serious digital photographers have something like lightroom, which actually makes it much easier to look at pictures from the past because if you're organized, not only are they tagged by date, but by content. The physical medium is irrelevant imo. Unless you just don't care about your pictures, you're a) backing them up and b) moving them to new drives every once in a while as capacity increases, they upgrade their computers, etc. It's silly to think they'll just leave them on the same drive they were originally copied to.

    As for the image format, I convert all my images to digital negatives (.dng is an open-standard raw format) as soon as I pull the raw files off my camera. The entire point of this format is so that in 40 years you don't have the issue that you can't get updated software from the manufacturer of your camera for whatever OS we're using then and therefore can't read the raw files from it. It was specifically designed to deal with long-term archival issues like that.

Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by