Hi Chris,
IMO, the latter two look much more natural and are much more pleasing to
my eye. The first two don't look like anything I've seen on this
earth--photos on speed. I think they would be very tiring to look at
for more than a few seconds. Perhaps, though, this film would be useful
used on bland subjects on overcast days. *Choosing* to use it on
already brightly colored subjects only accentuates the film's tendancies
(faults?). :>)
Regards,
John P.
Chris O'Neill wrote:
>
> > >Has anyone else ever tried Agfa Ultra 50? If so, was this just a fluke,
> > >or does that stuff *really* produce colors that rich all the time?
> >
> > Yup - it's basically Velvia in negative form.
>
> Am I to take it, then, that Velvia produces just as (or just about as)
> saturated results as the Ultra 50?
>
> > Just the ticket for those times you want saturated colors, but too
> > saturated fro general use in my book.
>
> I agree. Based on my one-roll experience, it's probably *not* a good
> choice for general use. But, as luck would have it, I shot mostly wall
> murals and gaily-decorated buildings in a tourist site. For that purpose,
> it turned out perfectly... very rich colors that made the subject standout
> beautifully.
>
> Btw, if anyone wants to see a couple of shots taken with Agfa Ultra 50
> compared to two similar shots taken with Kirkland (Agfa) 200, take a
> look at http://www.nucleus.com/~coneill/mypictures/agfa.html and let
> me know what you think.
>
> Regards,
>
> Chris
>
> -------------------------------------------------
> Chris O'Neill (coneill@xxxxxxxxxxx)
> Web: http://www.nucleus.com/~coneill
>
> < This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
> < For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
> < Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|