Prev: Sony crushes the price/build-quality barrier
Next: Camera store in Toronto blowing out inventory
From: Bruce on 12 May 2010 13:03
On Wed, 12 May 2010 08:29:32 -0700, John McWilliams
<jpmcw(a)comcast.net> wrote:

>Bruce wrote:
>> On Wed, 12 May 2010 01:29:55 -0400, nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> what are you going to do when the single remaining kodachrome lab
>>> ceases to process it?
>>
>>
>> Thanks for the reminder.
>>
>> I must shoot my remaining Kodachrome and have it processed this year.
>> I must shoot my remaining Kodachrome and have it processed this year.
>> I must shoot my remaining Kodachrome and have it processed this year.
>> I must ...
>
>
>Mama don't take my Kodachrome,
>
>Mama don't take my Kodachrome,
>
>Mama don't take my Kodachrome awaaa ayyyaaay.....


I never thought I would say this, but I'm not going to miss
Kodachrome. I only use black and white film now, and only for a very
limited part of my work - black and white portraits and fine art
prints.

All my wedding work is now digital unless the client specifically
requests black and white, and that hasn't happened yet in 2010.

From: Peter Irwin on 12 May 2010 15:09
nospam <nospam(a)nospam.invalid> said:

>
> if the scanner resolution can resolve individual film grains (which
> high end scanners can)

Unless you are using "high end scanners" to mean "scanning electron microsopes"
then no, they can't. The average grain size in ISO 400 B&W film is around
2 microns, and with some fine grained films and fine grain developers you get
sub-micron grain sizes which produce brownish images. What you are seeing as
grain patterns is the result of random distribution producing apparent clumps.

Now, this does not mean that film can resolve to anything like this level, but
the size of individual grains of silver on film is actually very small indeed.

Peter.
--
pirwin(a)ktb.net




From: Rich on 12 May 2010 16:55
3D is the same cheezy gimmick it was in the 1950's. Viewing movies in
3D is a terrible experience. Dull, dim and low resolution, all to get
a phony extra dimension that NEVER looks real anyway.

From: Robert Coe on 12 May 2010 18:59
On Wed, 12 May 2010 18:03:33 +0100, Bruce <docnews2011(a)gmail.com> wrote:
: I never thought I would say this, but I'm not going to miss
: Kodachrome. I only use black and white film now, and only for a very
: limited part of my work - black and white portraits and fine art
: prints.
:
: All my wedding work is now digital unless the client specifically
: requests black and white, and that hasn't happened yet in 2010.

Out of nothing more than idle curiosity, why don't you do your B&W wedding and
portrait work in digital as well? Wedding photography is already so hard that
I'd think that the extra work of converting the results of a given shoot to
B&W would be pretty much at the noise level. Do you really get noticeably
better results with film?

Bob
From: Michael on 12 May 2010 19:20
On 2010-05-12 01:29:55 -0400, nospam said:

> In article <2010051201090774831-adunc79617(a)mypacksnet>, Michael
> <adunc79617(a)mypacks.net> wrote:
>
>> ..... snip


> what are you going to do when the single remaining kodachrome lab
> ceases to process it?
>
>> ..... snip

Actually, I will take my three remaining rolls of Kodachrome 64 this
summer on vacation and send them off to Dwaynes long before the
December 31 cutoff. And then I will use Ektachrome and Velvia for
slides, and Tri X for b&w, and my D5000 for everything else.

I was not implying that we are all lost without Kodachrome, only using
Kodachrome as a metaphor for stereo photography being an old technique.
And the "special viewer" that is needed for stereo realist type slides
is far less intrusive than the awful glasses needed for the "new"
Panasonic 3D plasma screen, whose 3-D looks like a series of cardboard
cutouts receding into the distance.

Again, my only point is that 3D is old and although the technology and
the means of viewing may differ, the result is the same. A 3-D image.
--
Michael

First  |  Prev  |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: Sony crushes the price/build-quality barrier
Next: Camera store in Toronto blowing out inventory