Boris Grigorov wrote:
WOW Moose, WOW*.
This is what I have to say. Thank you for the complete explanation.
Far from complete, but I hope a good primer. And you are quite welcome.
Writing about a subject often clarifies and refreshes my own
understanding, to my own benefit.
So you and Chris are telling me that I suddenly started to worry about nothing.
Just another bug from the list-slides, slides, your images are not worth if
they are shot on anything else.
A lot of people have opinions based on something other than an
understanding of the nature of the tools, the nature of the job at hand,
the results desired and how they all interact. In tech areas, it often
seems that many people take advice or watch what an expert does in a
particular situation and then generalize that to all situations without
thought. Or they may give advice based on their own needs without asking
about the desires of the recipient of the advice. I have also seen
opinions/advice based on the way things used to be, rather than how they
are. I switched from slides to negs based on changes in technology and
suitability to the results I want. Other folks find other approaches
suitable to their needs.
You summarized it for my by asking the question how I want to view it. Of
course as large prints on the wall
Sounds like 100 or 200 speed film and careful technique with tripod,
etc. Shots that look perfectly sharp on 4x6 prints have a distressing
tendency to turn out to be slightly out of focus when blown up.
Camera/subject movement, DOF and accuracy of focus all need to be
addressed. To assure nice sharp 8x10s and above, the right film alone is
not nearly enough. Thus, I would also carry some faster film (and
another body for it) for morning/afternoon light with its wonderful
color, in case that perfect shot includes some light wind moving the
beautiful leaves, etc. Super fin film with an out of focus shot because
the film wasn't fast enough is less useful than a nice sharp shot on
slightly less fine grained film.
, but am just curious about a little fact whose significance would not change
my mind anymore:
Do slides get scanned easier? I would assume that the print film would need some
more processing&
I find slides and negatives to scan equally easily. Scanning software
has automated removal of the orange layer and reversal of the colors.
Vuescan is particularly good, as it has built-in profiles for virtually
all negative films and the ability to make custom profiles based on a
blank frame. Others have posted about difficulty with slides on some
scanners because of their greater Dmax, but I don't think that is true
of current models.
I like the Portra too, have my Yash D loaded with it right now. My eight year old
son just lost his two front teeth and it is an interesting project&My only
gripe with it is that it gives orange cast over my greens and the grays are very
dull, excellent for shooting people, which I seldom do.
Again, essentially all off color casts in consumer prints are a result
of the printing, not the film. It is possible the place where you have
prints made is optimized for films with a different orange layer than
Portra has. The lab where I go does a wonderful job scanning NC, but
really messed up a roll of VC. Scans were way too contrasty and all
shadow detail was lost. I had to scan all the shots I liked from that
roll myself. The images on the film were fine. Next roll of VC, I'll ask
for special attention and a guarantee I don't have to pay if scans
aren't useable. the problem is I don't know until I get home to the
computer.
Supra 400, isnt this the film that targeted photojournalists and is now
discontinued?
Still some in my fridge and available from B&H. I was wrong in a recent
post when I guessed that it was now another film. It's the film in my
print vs. film scan sharpness test, Royal Gold 400, that is now named
Kodak High Definition 400. I guess I was using the right film for the
shot and the comparison, and didn't even know it ;-) .
I am curious about another thing&
Based on your experience ( and I address everyone) how does the temperature
affects the film? I work at a place where one cannot bring a camera inside, so
my gear has to stay in the car, but the current temperatures are 50F(10C) and
below. Should I be concerned now? What about the winter, when it has to stay
for at least eight hours in temperatures below the freezing point? I know I
should have a beater in the car, but these are rare instances, when I have
something in mind and there is no time to go back home get the camera and go
shoot.
50F isn't going to have a noticeable effect on regular film, and
especially not print film. If concerned about lower tempertures, check
the manufacturer's site for the film data sheet, which will include low
temp. performance.
Moose
< 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 >
|