Brendan wrote: >HAHAHA, I always wondered why people had such >different skin tones in the prints than in person. I >blamed the lighting, the meter's 18% grey insistance >and fiters. Now I know it's Fuji :-)
Interesting thought: I expect that those who want natural skin tones, or natural color in general, are going to be moving into digital for the most part: getting accurate color is mainly a matter of setting the white balance on a digital camera. No color correction filters or whatever and you don't have to choose between daylight and tungsten; you can have any of the almost infinite variations in between. Mixed lighting will be much easier to handle. I read an article a few years ago by a botanist who lamented the move to extra saturated films because what he wanted was not to get beautiful, sellable, artistic photos, but rather to document what the plants he was studying really looked like. As I said, this was a couple of years ago; I'll bet money that this guy has gone digital entirely now and solved his problem that way. As this tend continues, I wouldn't be surprised to see the more naturally-balanced color films going away and the super-saturated ones becoming even more dominant in the marketplace. -- Mark Roberts www.robertstech.com - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
