Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: Notesfiles $Revision: 1.7.0.10 $; site sysvis
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!inuxc!pur-ee!uiucdcs!convex!sysvis!notes
From: notes@sysvis
Newsgroups: net.rec.photo
Subject: Re: Orphaned Response
Message-ID: <-121429373@sysvis>
Date: Fri, 3-Jan-86 11:44:00 EST
Article-I.D.: sysvis.-121429373
Posted: Fri Jan  3 11:44:00 1986
Date-Received: Tue, 7-Jan-86 03:49:23 EST
References: <565@ittvax.ATC.ITT.UUCP>
Lines: 19
Nf-ID: #R:ittvax.ATC.ITT.UUCP:565:sysvis:-121429373:000:983
Nf-From: sysvis!notes    Jan  3 10:44:00 1986


In article <816@sfmag.UUCP> howard@sfmag.UUCP (H.M.Moskovitz) writes:
>>> Which is better:  Fujichrome, Ektachrome, or Agfachrome slide film?
>>> Assume ASA of 200 or 400.

>> favor in color balance. In that area, Kodak still tends to favor
>> blues, Fuji likes greens and yellows, Agfa tends toward warm reds

> Please be more specific in such statements. "Ektachrome" ( which
> I admit is what the original poster asked about ) favors blue.
> "Kodak" on the other hand makes many films and, I, for one, would
> be lost but for the warm reds of Kodachrome. [Mike]

I am very interested in buying some ASA 200-400 Kodachrome, Mike.  
Where do you normally find it?  (-:  By the way, (red != magenta).
More important than color balance, in some cases, is image life of the
film.  I seem to remember that Fuji/Ekta process chromes are mostly 10 yr
films (before SEVERE image fading occurs), Agfachrome ~= 4 years, and
Kodachrome ~= 100 years (all archived properly).  Comments anyone?