Yes, I see what you're saying. Those highlights are probably the result of my pushing the curve to eliminate muddiness. I'd love to have a Nikon Coolscan 8000. They're much less expensive than they once were, but I just don't shoot enough film to justify it. Paul -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: Jack Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > There are obvious areas where highlights could not be controlled, > you're absolutely right. I was looking more at skin tones and hair, on > the guitarist, for example. > I found the high contrast Kodak UC highlights very difficult to > control. I also, wanted to acknowledge the problem you may have been > referencing with your "scanner" comment. > > Jack > > --- Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > The shots have some blown highlights because there are some > > peripheral > > areas in direct sun, for example in the background of the pic with > > the > > pumpkins. But the main light is provided by the flash and softbox, > > so > > the exposure had to be based on those. Any film or digital would show > > > > some blown highlights here. > > Paul > > On Oct 2, 2006, at 11:36 PM, Jack Davis wrote: > > > > > Paul, > > > Thanks for the look. Generally crisp and well composed, but > > contrast > > > seems a problem. Maybe it's due to the scanner you want to replace > > or > > > the VC version of Portra. Hot emulsions has blown highlights for me > > to > > > the point where I usually increased the ISO by about a third of a > > stop. > > > > > > Jack > > > > > > --- Paul Stenquist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > >> I did as I had threatened, and shot a couple of rolls of Portra VC > > >> 160 > > >> at the local Farmer's Market. I used the 6x7 with the 165/4 Leaf > > >> Shutter lens and the AF 400T flash with a Lumiquest Softbox. I > > like > > >> the > > >> fill from the softbox, particularly in the shot of the kids > > sitting > > >> on > > >> the wall with the hard midday crosslight. Nothing special here, > > but I > > >> > > >> had a good time, and I like the performance of that lens. The negs > > >> look > > >> great under a loupe. If I were to continue with medium format, I > > >> would > > >> want a better film scanner. I'm still using the Epson Photo 3200 > > >> flatbed. It's marginal. > > >> > > >> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5027776&size=lg > > >> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5027772 > > >> http://www.photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5027701&size=lg > > >> > > >> > > >> -- > > >> PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > >> PDML@pdml.net > > >> http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > >> > > > > > > > > > __________________________________________________ > > > Do You Yahoo!? > > > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > > > http://mail.yahoo.com > > > > > > -- > > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > > PDML@pdml.net > > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > > > > > -- > > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > > PDML@pdml.net > > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > > > > > __________________________________________________ > Do You Yahoo!? > Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around > http://mail.yahoo.com > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > PDML@pdml.net > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
-- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
