I need to have stupidity check.
This weekend is going to be the peak of the fall foliage season. I already
have the idea for the picture, went at the location already and ?shot? it. It
is wonderful as it is.
The problem is film.
I used the 400 speed Fuji Superia Xtra. Thought that I could use something
?better? and today when I went to the store I go to(I do not know how
professional they are, but are very customer service oriented) to drop my film
and also asked the question of print vs slide and did not get a definite
answer. I also explained that have read somewhere that the print film has
better tonal range and exposure latitude and how I do not like especially pix
of waterfalls shot on slides that look like milk rivers. He told me that I
should learn how to shoot for the highlights. (Actually I was talking for the
ones I have seen here and there in magazines?) Then I choose the 100 speed
Superia and the guy came back with a set of slides he shot last weekend. They
were Velveeta 100. Colors were nice, but the composition sucked? His only
argument was that the Velveeta was a better film, but he could not explain why
(we did not get to his composition skills?). I mentioned at the end that it is
probably less grainy. What would you answer if you were him?
I have never printed, scanned or developed film and do not have any base for
comparison, so I expect you to tell me how stupid my purchase was. Except for
grain, what makes the Velveeta or any slide film for that matter better? I do
not really care for the rendition of the colors, as really need faithful
reproduction (actually I like it and if I want it later, I could achieve it in
PS?). Now, when it comes to grainess, I went to Moose?s website and looked at
his comparison of the two pix. If this is the grain you get when you enlarge
it that much, it is not bad at all. If this small area is really what he
enlarged to that size, it is not bad at all, but still, how much grainier the
print films are, can anyone comment? I also wander if he used tripod.
Then comes the question of how effective is the ?remove film grain? feature in
PS.
I still have about two days until the peak, when everything would be yellow and
pretty to change my mind, so let me know what you think. Now, from experience
I really think that Kodak is for shooting people and Fuji is for shooting
landscapes, which is what I do.
I really tried to make my mind looking at some magazines. They compared films
and I did not see much of a difference at the 20X detail between print and
slide film. Then there was the other one that had 96 films compared and they
were all good?
Now you probably understand my frustration and I promise that soon would buy a
scanner (I have the printer already..) and would be able to figure some of this
stuff on my own, but in a mean time, I need your help, because, this picture is
good, even the one without many yellow leaves is so good, that I think I could
proudly display it.
Which film (and be specific, please)would you recommend?
Write, write now, write a lot, I can?t wait.
Boris
P.S. If you need additional info, cc me, coz I am in digest mode, hell, feel
free to cc me even if you do not have to aks me anything?
_______________________________________________
Join Excite! - http://www.excite.com
The most personalized portal on the Web!
< This message was delivered via the Olympus Mailing List >
< For questions, mailto:owner-olympus@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx >
< Web Page: http://Zuiko.sls.bc.ca/swright/olympuslist.html >
|