ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ-> This is The 'SPORRS' Mailing List
-> Info File: http://www.anet-stl.com/acphotog/sporrs/infosporrs.htm
-> Note: Remember to include your name in each list post or reply.
-> Please delete all unnecessary quoted text from the original message!
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ

>You wrote that there's a difference in contrast in the film, and
>that is sound familar.   I guess  have personal preference for highly
>contrasty images.  I date this preference back to my crayon days when I
>use to use up my black crayons while outlining each delinated section of
>my coloring projects.

I have always liked contrasty images for some reason as well, probably
because at least with color slide film, the more contrast, the better color
saturation, and I am big on colorful pictures, but until Dave pointed out
that his slides had more detail in the shadow areas, and mine were
sometimes difficult to scan, I didn't realize how contrasty they were.

> But anyways here's my next question: Does Dave
>consider your Baring Amtrak shot to be too contrasty.<

I don't know.  He seems to like that one (out of a thousand :) ).

I used to try and pick films for given situations, but found myself
wondering what would the result have been if I had used the other film. So
I have been in search of the best all-around film, and although the Kodak
Elite II 100 was pretty good, the Provia and Sensia are better for me
because of their more neutral color cast.  Once again, (in the world
according to Dave) the Astia has less contrast, which would be better for
shooting portraiture, (and my train pictures),  because the film would show
facial lines and defects much less.  How much less contrast, I do not know.

Rick
St. Charles, MO

ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ-> SPORRS: 'Serious Photographers Of Railroad Related 
Subjects'
-> Web Site: http://www.anet-stl.com/acphotog/sporrs/
-> Message © 1998 SPORRS® - All Rights Reserved
ÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿÿ


Reply via email to