PN Stenquist wrote:
Some nice classic early Kodachromes here:
http://www.openmyeyeslord.net/ALookBackInHistory.htm
Coming late to this. Very entertaining collection. Especially loved the
Beer...Drugs...Cafe...Beer, and the lock up your Kentucky teen shot
D
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
From: Derby Chang [EMAIL PROTECTED]
PN Stenquist wrote:
Some nice classic early Kodachromes here:
http://www.openmyeyeslord.net/ALookBackInHistory.htm
Coming late to this. Very entertaining collection. Especially loved the
Beer...Drugs...Cafe...Beer, and the lock up your Kentucky teen
From: Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2008/10/28 Tue PM 01:50:30 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: chromes from the thirties and forties
On 10/28/08, mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was more amused at my own lack of perception. I am trying
From: Bob Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2008/10/28 Tue PM 02:29:44 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: chromes from the thirties and forties
Mike,
I had some of the same feelings about timing.
Some of those pre-war shots had a number of guys in khaki
PROTECTED]
Date: 2008/10/28 Tue PM 02:29:44 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: chromes from the thirties and forties
Mike,
I had some of the same feelings about timing.
Some of those pre-war shots had a number of guys in khaki uniforms.
On a side note, I did some
From: Bob Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2008/10/29 Wed PM 03:03:38 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: chromes from the thirties and forties
Mike,
I think the scans of the Cushman stuff don't have the reds of autumn
in much vibrancy.
The maple trees
From: Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 10/27/08, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 26/10/08, PN Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed:
Some nice classic early Kodachromes here:
http://www.openmyeyeslord.net/ALookBackInHistory.htm
Fascinating, thanks for posting Paul.
Arboretum shots.
It will takes some work to find the exact locations and camera angles
he used, if possible.
I was out shooting this morning and digital can be more colorful than
his chromes.
Regards, Bob S.
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 4:19 AM, mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Scott Loveless
From: Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2008/10/27 Mon PM 12:31:52 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: chromes from the thirties and forties
On 10/27/08, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 26/10/08, PN Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed:
Some nice
We yanks tend to see everything in terms of our own experience. A bad
habit to be sure.
Paul
On Oct 28, 2008, at 5:19 AM, mike wilson wrote:
From: Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2008/10/27 Mon PM 12:31:52 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: chromes from
From: PN Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2008/10/28 Tue PM 12:11:04 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Subject: Re: chromes from the thirties and forties
We yanks tend to see everything in terms of our own experience. A bad
habit to be sure.
Paul
I was more amused
On 10/28/08, mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I was more amused at my own lack of perception. I am trying to find some of
the other pictures, where the clothing seems to be more 1950s than 1930s.
Although I realise that, once again, I may be making judgements that are
based on false
was out shooting this morning and digital can be more colorful than
his chromes.
Regards, Bob S.
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 4:19 AM, mike wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: 2008/10/27 Mon PM 12:31:52 GMT
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net
Only for the Americans Mike: we started on September 3rd. 1939!
John Coyle
Brisbane, Australia
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of mike
wilson
Sent: Tuesday, 28 October 2008 7:20 PM
To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Subject: Re: chromes from
On 26/10/08, PN Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed:
Some nice classic early Kodachromes here:
http://www.openmyeyeslord.net/ALookBackInHistory.htm
Fascinating, thanks for posting Paul.
--
Cheers,
Cotty
___/\__
|| (O) | People, Places, Pastiche
||=|
On 10/27/08, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 26/10/08, PN Stenquist, discombobulated, unleashed:
Some nice classic early Kodachromes here:
http://www.openmyeyeslord.net/ALookBackInHistory.htm
Fascinating, thanks for posting Paul.
Agreed. That article mentions Charles Cushman. He
Those were great to look at.
I can understand the Grannies hiding the young girls in Kentucky.
You know who lives there.:-)
Dave
On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 7:49 PM, PN Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Some nice classic early Kodachromes here:
From: David J Brooks [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Those were great to look at.
I can understand the Grannies hiding the young girls in Kentucky.
You know who lives there.:-)
Col. Sanders?
Dave
On Sun, Oct 26, 2008 at 7:49 PM, PN Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Some nice classic early
Some nice classic early Kodachromes here:
http://www.openmyeyeslord.net/ALookBackInHistory.htm
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow
the directions.
Howdy! I got my first three rolls of 645 slides back recently. Wow!
What a difference. With 35mm slides I usually view them on a small
slide viewer or with the projector. Of course, neither of these will
work for unmounted 645 slides. So I improvised a bit. Some of you have
probably
On 10/8/07, Scott Loveless [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
http://picasaweb.google.com/sdloveless/PDMLPESO/photo#5119021044598128946
I see you're still using the Windows lightbox. I highly recommend an
upgrade to the Mac lightbox. :-)
-Mat
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
- Original Message -
From: Scott Loveless
Subject: 645 Chromes and an improvised light box
Some of you have
probably tried this.
http://picasaweb.google.com/sdloveless/PDMLPESO/photo#5119021044598128946
Pick yourself up an undercounter florescent light.
William Robb
--
PDML
You should download fCalc http://www.tangentsoft.net/ it's free for
windows users and the stupid programmers trick in the about box turns
you monitor into a nifty uniformly colored light box.
Scott Loveless wrote:
Howdy! I got my first three rolls of 645 slides back recently. Wow!
What a
I've better idea. Create white image file and view it full-screen.
You'll get monitor-wide light box..
--
new photos once and again... roman.blakout.net http://roman.blakout.net
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
PDML@pdml.net
http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
to UNSUBSCRIBE from
On Feb 7, 2006, at 1:41 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Only an hour?!?
Yeah, I read fast.
-Aaron
On 2/7/06, Aaron Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah, I read fast.
Either that or delete liberally. g
-frank
--
Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
On Feb 7, 2006, at 8:59 AM, frank theriault wrote:
Yeah, I read fast.
Either that or delete liberally. g
Yes, that too.
-Aaron
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In a message dated 2/6/2006 2:10:13 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I unsubscribed when I went on my honeymoon in June '02 and when I came back
I found that I had this extra hour every day that I didn't have before...
What's yer point?
On Feb 5, 2006, at 10:47 PM, Ann Sanfedele wrote:
I recently sold an 80 slide carousel to an artist who was
submitting work to schools togo back for a masters. They
wanted not only slides, but for her to send or bringthem IN
a carousel. Quite specifically, those that fit on the Kodak
On Feb 5, 2006, at 11:13 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
Yes, don't even think about using flash. You'll have a white spot
in the middle of a painting.
Paul
You can use flash in a pinch if the room has a white ceiling. Bounce
the flash off the ceiling and it will resemble diffuse sunlight.
In a message dated 2/5/2006 10:15:43 PM Pacific Standard Time, [EMAIL
PROTECTED]
writes:
Yup - I agree - and I put the smiley in but fully intended
to ask them.
Duggal is a major custom processing place in NYC and Spectra
is a later
comer - I'll be speaking to both of them.
ann
===
They
I have shot hundreds of paintings using two flashes at 45 degrees with
daylight slide film. Oils, acrylics, and glazed prints and water colours.
It works very well thank you.
Working hand held is much faster than using a tripod. The flash exposure is
less than 1/1000 sec. and the images are
Bob Shell wrote:
On Feb 5, 2006, at 11:13 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
Yes, don't even think about using flash. You'll have a white spot
in the middle of a painting.
Paul
You can use flash in a pinch if the room has a white ceiling. Bounce
the flash off the ceiling and it will
On Feb 6, 2006, at 12:16 PM, Ann Sanfedele wrote:
I belong to the society for prevention of flash photography
- only to
be used in extreme circumstances
I've been known to spend a lot of time faking available light. Frank
Theriault and Dave too bald Chang-Sang saw it firsthand at Christmas.
Any light that you have is available ... you must mean natural light.
Shel
[Original Message]
From: Aaron Reynolds
I've been known to spend a lot of time faking available light. Frank
Theriault and Dave too bald Chang-Sang saw it firsthand at Christmas.
Shel Belinkoff wrote:
Any light that you have is available ... you must mean natural light.
Shel
Um, no, Shel- I do mean available light as opposed to
flash.
Forgot who wrote it, but I picked up the term from a book
called
Shooting with Avaiable light
It was used pretty much to mean no
Den 6. feb. 2006 kl. 18.16 skrev Ann Sanfedele:
Bob Shell wrote:
On Feb 5, 2006, at 11:13 PM, Paul Stenquist wrote:
Yes, don't even think about using flash. You'll have a white spot
in the middle of a painting.
Paul
You can use flash in a pinch if the room has a white ceiling. Bounce
the
Natural light, as opposed to unnatural light, supernatural light,
invisible light, coke light, light beer, light weight etc.
DagT
PS: Sorry .-)
Den 6. feb. 2006 kl. 18.33 skrev Shel Belinkoff:
Any light that you have is available ... you must mean natural light.
Shel
[Original
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff
Subject: Re: misc lighting - no longer question about chromes
Any light that you have is available ... you must mean natural light.
How natural are four foot florescent tubes?
Available light is that which is available without bringing
I agree. There are plenty of ways to make flash lighting diffuse, but it's not
needed for a job like this where perfectly flat lighting is ideal and shutter
speed isn't a factor.
Paul
-- Original message --
From: Ann Sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bob Shell wrote:
I admit to similar misrepresentations. I shot some tools on a workbench for
stock. I used flash units in my studio but simulated the shadows that would
have resulted from light through a paned window.
Paul
-- Original message --
From: Aaron Reynolds [EMAIL
on the camera.
It gave me new respect for people who do that stuff for a
living - the purely
technical aspect of shooting. It was hard work and an
interesting tactical
exercise.
As to the original question about chromes - the lab I plan
to use felt
Provia was the best choice.
as long as the guy
On 2/5/06, Aaron Reynolds [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I unsubscribed when I went on my honeymoon in June '02 and when I came back I
found that I had this extra hour every day that I didn't have before...
What's yer point?
-frank
g
--
Sharpness is a bourgeois concept. -Henri Cartier-Bresson
Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My father was an artist who worked in oils. He frequently had to send
in slides for show entries. Generally, the galleries didn't seem to be
too fussy about the quality of the chromes.
My experience has been the same. In fact, since a surprising number
Mark Roberts wrote:
Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My father was an artist who worked in oils. He frequently had to send
in slides for show entries. Generally, the galleries didn't seem to be
too fussy about the quality of the chromes.
My experience has been the same. In fact
PROTECTED]
Subj: Re: misc lighting - no longer question about chromes
Date: Mon Feb 6, 2006 1:05 pm
Size: 385 bytes
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
- Original Message -
From: Shel Belinkoff
Subject: Re: misc lighting - no longer question about chromes
Any light that you have is available
Heh, that for three years I had an extra hour every day.
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subj: Re: Hi, Aaron! WAS Re: question about chromes
Date: Mon Feb 6, 2006 5:08 pm
Size: 306 bytes
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
On 2/5/06, Aaron Reynolds [EMAIL
In a message dated 2/6/2006 2:10:13 PM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I unsubscribed when I went on my honeymoon in June '02 and when I came back
I found that I had this extra hour every day that I didn't have before...
What's yer point?
-frank
g
===
Only an hour?!?
,
I've hardly been here - though didn't actually unsub -
but it looks like I might have a job where I will need to
shoot chromes
instead of digital - dragging out the ole LX --
But it has been a few years since I shot slides and I'd like
some opinions
on Elitechrome for photoing artwork
Ann Sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
HI gang,
I've hardly been here - though didn't actually unsub -
but it looks like I might have a job where I will need to
shoot chromes instead of digital - dragging out the ole LX --
But it has been a few years since I shot slides and I'd like
some
Ann Sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
HI gang,
I've hardly been here - though didn't actually unsub -
but it looks like I might have a job where I will need to
shoot chromes instead of digital - dragging out the ole LX --
But it has been a few years since I shot slides and I'd like
some
In a message dated 2/5/2006 5:28:29 AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
anyone have a favorite that is still being made for this
kind of stuff?
I go with Provia 100F
--
Mark Roberts
==
Yeah.
Marnie aka Doe
In a message dated 2/5/2006 5:28:29
AM Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
anyone have a favorite that is still being made for this
kind of stuff?
I go with Provia 100F
--
Mark Roberts
==
Yeah.
Marnie aka Doe
Ann Sanfedele wrote:
HI gang,
I've hardly been here - though didn't actually unsub -
but it looks like I might have a job where I will need to
shoot chromes
instead of digital - dragging out the ole LX --
But it has been a few years since I shot slides and I'd like
some opinions
on Elitechrome
:
HI gang,
I've hardly been here - though didn't actually unsub -
but it looks like I might have a job where I will need to
shoot chromes
instead of digital - dragging out the ole LX --
But it has been a few years since I shot slides and I'd like
some opinions
on Elitechrome
mike wilson wrote:
Ann Sanfedele wrote:
HI gang,
I've hardly been here - though didn't actually unsub -
but it looks like I might have a job where I will need to
shoot chromes
instead of digital - dragging out the ole LX --
But it has been a few years since I shot slides and I'd
Bob Shell wrote:
You want the most neutral and accurate rendering. None of the
Ektachromes will give you that.
In my testing the most neutral and accurate E-6 film was the recently
discontinued Agfachrome RSX 100. There may still be dealers with
stock, though.
I think I'll pass on
As recently as May, Fuji was still producing Astia 100f, which I preferred to
Provia because it was a little snappier and also much less sensitive to the ph
of the water used for developing it, which made Provia a real pain in the butt
to develop. If your local lab has blue/magenta issues with
a job where I will need to
shoot chromes
instead of digital - dragging out the ole LX --
But it has been a few years since I shot slides and I'd like
some opinions
on Elitechrome for photoing artwork...
I'm not sure where i'll be shooting - inside or out, I have
filters a bunch
As recently as May, Fuji was still
producing Astia 100f, which I preferred
to Provia
because it was a little snappier and also much less sensitive to the ph of the
water used
for developing it, which made Provia a real pain in the butt to develop. If
On Feb 5, 2006, at 1:02 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh Oh Ann. You've woken the Brother hood up.:-)
Hey Aaron.
No one had said anything about not being able to hand-hold a Pentax 67
lately, so I figured I wasn't needed.
-Aaron
On Feb 5, 2006, at 12:07 PM, Ann Sanfedele wrote:
I don't know that one at all -- Marnie suggested PRovia and
someone else did...
These aren't being shot for reproduction as far as I know,
just for galleries
to review his work. It may be that absolutely precise color
is not going to swing
the
Ann Sanfedele wrote:
mike wilson wrote:
Ann Sanfedele wrote:
HI gang,
I've hardly been here - though didn't actually unsub -
but it looks like I might have a job where I will need to
shoot chromes
instead of digital - dragging out the ole LX --
But it has been a few years since I shot
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
On Feb 5, 2006, at 1:02 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh Oh Ann. You've woken the Brother hood up.:-)
Hey Aaron.
No one had said anything about not being able to hand-hold a Pentax 67
lately, so I figured I wasn't needed.
-Aaron
Good to see you again. I
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As recently as May, Fuji was still
producing Astia 100f, which I preferred
to Provia
because it was a little snappier and also much less sensitive to the ph of
the water used
for developing it, which made Provia a real
Bob Shell wrote:
On Feb 5, 2006, at 12:07 PM, Ann Sanfedele wrote:
I don't know that one at all -- Marnie suggested PRovia and
someone else did...
These aren't being shot for reproduction as far as I know,
just for galleries
to review his work. It may be that absolutely precise
mike wilson wrote:
Ann Sanfedele wrote:
mike wilson wrote:
Ann Sanfedele wrote:
HI gang,
I've hardly been here - though didn't actually unsub -
but it looks like I might have a job where I will need to
shoot chromes
instead of digital - dragging out the ole LX --
But it has
My father was an artist who worked in oils. He frequently had to send
in slides for show entries. Generally, the galleries didn't seem to be
too fussy about the quality of the chromes. I shot some for him once in
a while. I generally used outdoor light diffused through a window. A
room
Ann Sanfedele wrote:
Close, but not quite as neutral, is Fuji Astia 100. All of the other
Fuji chrome films exaggerate color.
Bob
I don't know that one at all -- Marnie suggested PRovia and
someone else did...
These aren't being shot for reproduction as far as I know,
just for galleries
These aren't being shot for reproduction as far as I know,
just for galleries
to review his work. It may be that absolutely precise color
is not going to swing
the viewers one way or the other - but I'd certainly like to
get as close as possible to
reality.
ann
I'm always amazed how bad many
Not that hasn't been considered, but be certain to do a three exposure
'braket' of each.
Jack
--- Carlos Royo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ann Sanfedele wrote:
Close, but not quite as neutral, is Fuji Astia 100. All of the
other
Fuji chrome films exaggerate color.
Bob
I
Ann, it's relatively inexpensive to rent an old Hasselblad to do
larger images but I think your impression is correct. It probably
involves people at the gallery gathering around a 35mm projector to
review the slides. In which case, color accuracy might not matter
that much either,
Aaron Reynolds wrote:
On Feb 5, 2006, at 1:02 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh Oh Ann. You've woken the Brother hood up.:-)
Hey Aaron.
No one had said anything about not being able to hand-hold a Pentax 67
lately, so I figured I
Paul Stenquist wrote:
My father was an artist who worked in oils. He frequently had to send
in slides for show entries. Generally, the galleries didn't seem to be
too fussy about the quality of the chromes. I shot some for him once in
a while. I generally used outdoor light diffused through
I unsubscribed when I went on my honeymoon in June '02 and when I came back I
found that I had this extra hour every day that I didn't have before...
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: E.R.N. Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subj: Hi, Aaron! WAS Re: question about chromes
Date: Sun Feb 5, 2006
Powell Hargrave wrote:
These aren't being shot for reproduction as far as I know,
just for galleries
to review his work. It may be that absolutely precise color
is not going to swing
the viewers one way or the other - but I'd certainly like to
get as close as possible to
reality.
ann
Jack Davis wrote:
Not that hasn't been considered, but be certain to do a three exposure
'braket' of each.
Jack
I wouldn't think of doing it any other way, Jack.
ann
--- Carlos Royo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ann Sanfedele wrote:
Close, but not quite as neutral, is Fuji
Juey Chong Ong wrote:
Ann, it's relatively inexpensive to rent an old Hasselblad to do
larger images but I think your impression is correct. It probably
involves people at the gallery gathering around a 35mm projector to
review the slides. In which case, color accuracy might not matter
that
While you say that jokingly, it's always a great idea to ask what your lab is
most comfortable handling. It's the best way to ensure strong results.
-Aaron
-Original Message-
From: Ann Sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subj: Re: question about chromes
Date: Sun Feb 5, 2006 4:02 pm
Size
Cant have Theraultian blur for artwork :)
I cana' hold on any longer cap'n. She''ll blow.:-0
Dave
ann
Powell Hargrave [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Digital Imaging http://members.shaw.ca/hargravep
Nanaimo Art Gallery
I have a portable level to use on the camera and the arwork
itself. once ive set up for the
first painting, nothing will change for all that are the
same size.
If they are different sizes it can be quite fiddley getting tripod and
easel aligned properly for each slide. With digital a bit of
Yes, don't even think about using flash. You'll have a white spot in
the middle of a painting.
Paul
On Feb 5, 2006, at 10:41 PM, Ann Sanfedele wrote:
Powell Hargrave wrote:
These aren't being shot for reproduction as far as I know,
just for galleries
to review his work. It may be that
place in NYC and Spectra
is a later
comer - I'll be speaking to both of them.
ann
-Original Message-
From: Ann Sanfedele [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subj: Re: question about chromes
Date: Sun Feb 5, 2006 4:02 pm
Size: 761 bytes
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net
Now I'm really confused
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Cant have Theraultian blur for artwork :)
I cana' hold on any longer cap'n. She''ll blow.:-0
Dave
God, your irrepressable, you wag! :)
but it's true - why do you think none of you saw that shot
of
Mark on the mountain in my GFM nostalgia gallery??? :)
and I
Paul Stenquist wrote:
Yes, don't even think about using flash. You'll have a white spot in
the middle of a painting.
Paul
I wouldn't dream of it. I never even owned a flash (except
a macro ring light)
until a few years ago.
ann available light are us san
On Feb 5, 2006, at 10:41 PM,
HI gang,
I've hardly been here - though didn't actually unsub -
but it looks like I might have a job where I will need to
shoot chromes
instead of digital - dragging out the ole LX --
But it has been a few years since I shot slides and I'd like
some opinions
on Elitechrome for photoing artwork
to
shoot chromes
instead of digital - dragging out the ole LX --
But it has been a few years since I shot slides and I'd like
some opinions
on Elitechrome for photoing artwork...
I'm not sure where i'll be shooting - inside or out, I have
filters a bunch
for adjusting to sundry inside lighting
Are there any scanners that work well with Kodachrome? I posed this
question to Kodak and they sent me this lame list of old Kodak scanners
that are no longer made.
rg
Alan Chan wrote:
My Minolta Scan Elite F-2900 does a terrible job on scanning Kodachrome,
and it uses cold-cathode
Robert Gonzalez asked: I've heard that because of the type of light source
this uses that Kodachromes don't scan well. Do you do anything special to
get them to
come out right?
I don't have a film scanner but I think the major issue is that digital ice
(or other similar dust spec software)
Yes I did. No luck. :-( Luckily I use E-6 most.
Regards,
Alan Chan
http://www.pbase.com/wlachan
Are you sure that Digital Ice is turned off on the F-2900? I scanned
Kodachrome on my Minolta without problem, and have had no problem with it
and my Canon FS4000. But it does not work well with
It is not so much about ICE, but everything came out very very dark with
Kodachrome. And yes, I did turned off ICE.
Regards,
Alan Chan
http://www.pbase.com/wlachan
I don't have a film scanner but I think the major issue is that digital ice
(or other similar dust spec software) doesn't work with
Thanks very much. I think I lean towards
Kodak, and the more information I
get on it, the more I like it. Meet? I heard there is a national meet
somewhere, sometime, but I don't know anything about it. Maybe you could
tell me about it, please?
: Chromes,was: Hi there
McDonald's fries = intense ... ROTFLMAO
Gotta love the analogy ;-))
Pentax wrote:
Provia instead as it's more neutral. I think it's sorta like food,
when you're a kid you like things really intense like McDonalds fries
and as you get older your tastes change and you
Hi,
Kodachrome 64 is lovely film, I think. I use it for most of my colour
photography other than family friends snaps.
Here's one I don't think I've shown here before. One of my recurrent
themes is people reading; this is a nun in a monastery garden in
Northern Romania:
That's a really beautiful picture.
Rebekah
- Original Message -
From: Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 12:00 PM
Subject: Re: Chromes,was: Hi there
Hi,
Kodachrome 64 is lovely film, I think. I use it for most of my colour
photography other
some scanners, particularly the ones that use LEDs for their illumination,
do a terrible job of scanning Kodachrome.
Herb
- Original Message -
From: Rebekah Gonzalez [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, January 13, 2004 12:34 PM
Subject: Re: Chromes,was: Hi
Cool, that sure is a lot of different kinds.
So, are these just what you will buy according to what's on hand, or do you
have a specific purpose for each of these, for instance, fuji for landscape
photos because of its blue and green saturation, stuff
, night.
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, January 12, 2004 6:30 AM
Subject: Re: Chromes,was: Hi there
Hi
For Chrome film,some of us TOPDMLers like Kodak 100vs.I also like the
Fuji
Provia 100.
Dave
Are those slide
A highly subjective, quick and dirty run down of the major Echtacrome slide
films (ISO 100 and less):
Velvia: (ISO 50, many people shoot it at ISO 40): Delicious saturated
colors, saturated but accurate, fine grained, high contrast (especially at
ISO 50), narrow latitude, the standard for
: Monday, January 12, 2004 10:28 PM
Subject: Re: Chromes,was: Hi there
A highly subjective, quick and dirty run down of the major Echtacrome
slide
films (ISO 100 and less):
Velvia: (ISO 50, many people shoot it at ISO 40): Delicious saturated
colors, saturated but accurate, fine grained, high
1 - 100 of 103 matches
Mail list logo
