Hi, it's not just noticeable to art directors etc. I've posted on this matter several times over the last couple of years. When I was shooting exclusively Pentax gear my lenses were all Pentax, but from different series: K, M, A and A*, and looking at my slides on the lightbox, as well as projected, it was very clear on side-by-side comparisons that they had different colour balances and characteristics. It became even more evident when I got all the Carl Zeiss MM lenses - the consistent look and characteristics across the range was very noticeable indeed.
This may not matter very much from day to day or in the grand scheme of things, but if you are shooting a photo essay it is very discordant to be looking at pictures with a common theme, but a different look - particularly if it's just slightly different. One the other hand, having a consistent look is one way of tying the whole thing together and making your presentations look professional. Similar considerations apply to differences in film stock. --- Bob mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Saturday, June 15, 2002, 6:10:32 AM, you wrote: > Guys: Face the facts. How many of us shoot for top notch magazines that use > art directors that would notice the difference. Maybe there's a little bit of > splitting hairs here. I know the art directors where I work would never > notice such a minute difference in the look of pictures, and by the time it > came out in print, any minute difference would not be noticed anyway.. > Vic - 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 .
