David R. Busse wrote: > That's why we hard-core train photographers call anything that's not > Kodachrome "schwartzchrome."
Except me... > Let's see, here's what I've learned about Fujuchrome: I don't mean to correct you, but you mean here's what you have learned about shooting trains on Fujichrome... > 1. It doesn't render headlights worth a darn. Work around that problem? Most photographic subjects don't have hot light sources on them like a headlight aimed straight at you. It seems that headlight photographers should use Kodachrome if they require a visible filament in their bulbs. > 2. What Fujichrome does to blues and greens ought to be a federal > offense. Have you tried any of the recent films (at the right EI - Velvia at 40... ISO is an industry rating, your Exposure Index is YOUR rating)? Before you tell me that this shouldn't be so, I shot my K64 at EI 80 and some of our friends shoot k25 at EI 20. When I look at my current Fujichrome RR slides and my older Kodachrome slides side by side on my light table, the best way to describe the way that some of the Kodachromes look next to new generation Fuji would be to say that they look flat and either greenish or magenta cast. We must pick the right film or the "job". Most people that keep using one film for everything discover this in time. To limit ourselves to one particular film in this day of technology is to handicap ourselves as image makers. > 3. Any yahoo can process it. And when the new smaller K-14 machines come out, yesterday's Schnucks grocery bagger with "knowledge of a Windows environment" will be running them. > 4. There's absolutely no guarantee that your UP yellow won't turn to MRL > blue in 10 years! But I can guarantee that my Kodachrome will still be flat and color biased in ten years. > I'm sorry, but my Kodachromes I shot last week WOWED my client and still > look better than anything E-6 has to offer. An interesting opinion, and a happy client! (Beauty is in the eye of the beholder and in perspective, some things look damn good until you put something else next to them). If your client is having an ad printed, then your image will be scanned, run through prepress services where it will be manipulated for optimal printing, separated into four color channels and the files output for printing the plates. That was a greatly simplified description, but the point is, the film makes no difference at this point, as long as it provided the best image to scan; something E-6 does very well and very fast. > And A&I gives me three-hour > Kodachrome turnaround. So I ain't switchin! Great service, but I don't live in L.A. If I sent mine off to the nearest or quickest turnaround K-14 lab, I would still lose the client here in St. Louis because of the ad deadlines. And I see no advantage in trying to convince my customers that their current ad that will be outdated next week will still look good on film ten years from now when all indications are that the new generation of E-6 has a longer dark storage life in addition to retaining a higher scan and projection life without fading of the image. For trains today and after we all pass on, Kodachrome in the past has given us a stable preservation of images, regardless of what our opinion of those images is at the time they return from the processor. However, you must realize that professional film is meant for professional commercial use where the absolute best image NOW (and yesterday!) is paramount. I would hope that we don't confuse the issue here and cloud it for others who use less film than we do and for different purposes. Kodachrome may indeed be the "best" archival storage railfan film over time, but it is old technology and many people are letting the early Ektachromes haunt you (and some of what you are basing this on was old E-4!). My personal opinion is that the newest E-6 professional films have the color balance and resolving power to capture more "true to life" renditions of what we see if we use them correctly. You don't have to be a professional to use professional film, but you may need to know more about what you are putting into your camera these days than "set DX and point and shoot"! While there is no substitute for experience, modern technology helps to bridge that gap more easily each year. Just remember that your camera is a dumb object (or a programmed computer!) that doesn't know what you are thinking, so don't get mad at its results if you had little more to do with them than aim, focus and fire. Technology moves forward. I would hope that we can too. Film is just like people, you can find something good about each one if you look at the whole picture! :) Regards, Dave Cohen Photographer [EMAIL PROTECTED] --> SPORRS: Serious Photographers of Railroad Related Subjects X-Mozilla-Status: 0011 Content-Length: 1470
