======================================================= -> 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! =======================================================
Rick S. Newton wrote: (defining contrast) > > 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 can never find a black Crayola around the office when I need one anymore either... > > 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 consider Rick's Amtrak Baring shot to be a nice shot, and my old Nikon scanner considered it to be a bit contrasty. I haven't seen the original slide for a few months, and since I see so many of them, I can't recall off hand exactly what that one looks like in that regard at the moment, but I know the slide did look a little different. The newer higher optical density scanner may do it more justice as a digital file, but I think it looks good the way it is on the web site right now. Personally, I prefer a full tonal range with accurate shadow detail, good edge transfer (as opposed to harsh contrast lines) and smooth specular highlights (without blowing out to white 'holes'). This is sometimes hard to get in a scan (scanners with the highest optical range really help here - SprintScan Plus is 3.4), but high contrast images (and film) also contribute to this problem. I like some contrast, but when it is so high that it looks like I went into Photoshop and cranked up the contrast until I have what resembles a colorized line drawing, that's too much. Fuji films seem to almost always want to scan better for some reason, and another thing I have noticed now after working with so many different types of scanners is that with Kodachrome slides, you really need a high optical density scanner to preserve as much of Kodachrome's tonal range as possible. This I am sure has to do with the film base, as well as the way the different films record light contrast. I'm going to end this paragraph before we get into the end use of a particular film and its applications (probably can't avoid that though...). > 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. I think you can have a certain amount of success adopting a single type of film for a certain type of photography such as outdoor action railroad photography, night photography, foul weather photography, studio product photography, environmental portraiture, etc., but there is no single 'best all-around film for everything. As far as color transparency film goes these days, I do think I can get by with just Velvia (mostly studio), Provia (mostly trains) and Astia (just about everything including portraits). Astia is not actually a 'softer' film, it is just more neutral (noticeable in blues and flesh tones) and it has a little less contrast than Provia (noticeable on a black Norfolk Southern unit). They are all sharp and have great resolving power for their speeds. You need a soft focus filter for soft. > Once again, (in the world according to Dave) the Astia has less contrast, which > would be better for shooting portraiture, (and my train pictures), Correct, but I would use the words 'can be' in this case rather than 'would be'. Pushing film and how you expose it effects contrast too. > because the film would show facial lines and defects much less. Very little difference between Astia and Provia here, but you can see it on sheet film with a loupe. If she's got facial lines, put on a soft focus filter and/or consider her a woman with more 'character'. And if she's sitting on a locomotive at the time, we can discuss it here. Back to work, Dave Dave Cohen Photographer Action Photographic Webmaster [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.anet-stl.com/acphotog/home/ ======================================================= -> SPORRS: 'Serious Photographers Of Railroad Related Subjects' -> Web Site: http://www.anet-stl.com/acphotog/sporrs/ -> Message © 1998 SPORRS® - All Rights Reserved =======================================================
