Interesting discussion about GreenChrome (FUJI) and RedChrome (KODAK) films and how each film handles headlight flare. Perhaps the real issue here goes much deeper and really has to do with how we approach railroad photography with different agendas in mind.
While I appreciate Dave Busse's work (an excellent railroad photographer), I take exception to his statement .... "That's why we hard-core train photographers call anything that's not Kodachrome "schwartzchrome." I personally know many "hard-core" railroad photographers who use Fuji exclusively. And, I'm talking about many of the names you see month after month in the railroad magazines and shows like Winterail and Summerail. Some earn their living from photography (although not exclusively from train shots). The post by John B. Corns in response to "headlight flares" points out a very interesting thing. He's trying to obtain flares in his work while others are trying to eliminate them. From the outset, John's approach is to create an image that is striking, one that stimulates the sences and invites thought. Is this wrong? I don't think so. IMHO there's a place in railroad phorography for all types of photos. Thankfully the roster shooters of the past documented locomotives that no longer exist for us to study today. Some in our fraternity look down their noses at roster shooters as being non-creative. Well, that's just the point. They set out to be none creative. Their intention was to provide a nuts and bolts record of a particular engine. Is this wrong? I don't think so. For my purposes, video tape ads and jacket covers, I need "in your face" action shots that portray the drama of railroading. Beautiful scenic vistas with a train overwhelmed by the scenery just don't work here. These types of shots however, make excellent photos for slide shows and magazine articles. So my point is this. There are many diffrent ways to particpate in the hobby or avocation of railroad photography. Different films can be used to create different types of images. All photographers aren't setting out to reproduce trackside images exactly the way the eye see's them. Somewhere along the way many of us have become excessively anal about railroad photography. It may be one of the elements that caused us to become railroad nuts in the first place. But we really need to lighten up about all of this. So what if I like my blues and greens more saturated than another person. Maybe that's the way I see the world. Or, maybe it's my perception that they reproduce better in the printing process. And about life expectancy of slides. What's all this nonsence about archiveability? Do I really care if the shot is around for many, many years. It's purpose may have been realized once the shot was used in an ad or a show. Once I'm dead and gone the slide has no meaning to anyone else anyway. With the ability to store shots on computers and tools like Photo Shop this problem is rapidly disappearing and won't be an issue for long. I respect the work of the fine railroad photographers who continue to use Kodachrome and I don't consider them to be dinosaurs. It's their choice just as an artist may choose to use oils, acrylics or watercolors. If it's a dame good shot what does it matter? My personal choice is Fuji Velvia for it's highly saturated colors. I just like the way the shots look and the way the film reproduces when used on printed material. Can we bury the hachet on this now? Probably not, but I just wanted to get it off my chest. Thanks for reading and happy shooting out there. --> SPORRS: Serious Photographers of Railroad Related Subjects X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 1823
