Good afternoon people,
Agree with most of you, and will follow Chuck's challenging work.
Main problem with #1 is that the chrome is badly scratched. Something
happened with my usually careful archiving of slides, perhaps due to the
fact that I had (for reasons I somehow seem to have forgotten) to unload
and reload that only E100SW roll I shot in my life. Half of it remained
unexposed, and didn't frame the slides, putting the entire roll in its
own plastic can - why did such a thing happen, I don't remember. Also,
cannot realize how did the first exposure in the roll (#1 pine tree)
suffered so much, but loading and unloading has its consequences.
I had obviously planned this shot, then forgot I had indeed done it, and
a semiconscious idea to make such a shot persisted. I pursued it without
luck since that tree and the neighboring ones were removed to broaden
route 10, the one I cross to go to the beach since I was a child. A poor
version was done when had the Stylus 720SW, uploaded to Picassa and
posted the link to it some two years ago. Same place, perhaps six years
later.
I am waiting for the chromes to get flat too. The roll is firmly curved;
already cut the exposed frames in stripes of four but they are very
stubborn and keep wanting to curl. This makes very difficult to put them
into the film adapter of the 4000ED. Finally managed to do it but it
remains difficult for the scanner to keep the same figure of focus
every time I ask Nikon Scan 4.0.2 to perform autofocus. It is not that
bad, as it finally remains in the same figure.
Worse is that scratches and small cracks don't disappear with ICE on
'normal', smaller ones do with ICE on 'fine' but contrast decreases a
little. Restoration using the healing brush promises to be long work,
and #2 pine tree is much less damaged: ICE on 'normal' is enough.
Agree on that the sun looks more interesting in #1, and the contrast and
detail on the water surface shows up more distinct due to the higher
position of the sun, making a stronger reflection. Agree with Michael
Collins, in part, that the tree is "cleaner" in #1, and the mat of
needles at the top of #2 could be distracting. This is a question which
I'm not always certain about, to the point that not long ago uploaded an
uncropped frame of a hummingbird silhouette searching for opinions about
distracting elements in a composition. I always stress composition when
shooting, I do take my time and think and doubt quickly, and try not to
spare too much film [ I became more generous on film spending after
joining this list :) - and Provia became more accessible, but forget
about finding anything else on reversal film, aside of Sensia ].
In the case of these photographs on the disappeared pine trees, I
obviously doubted about how much tree top to include, and had not only
little time but also a narrow angle to frame it. Always prefer to crop
before pressing the shutter, *if possible*.
Do these chromes have any chance to become flat ? - how could I
accelerate the process ?.
Sorry for the long post, and thanks for looking.
Fernando.
Chuck Norcutt wrote:
> I have what I think is a better solution... combine them with pano
> software to make a larger image. Here's one done with PTGui
> <http://www.chucknorcutt.com/temp/Fernando/fernando_pano32&33.jpg>
> But you will have to either crop out or fill the box at lower left where
> there is no image data.
>
> Chuck Norcutt
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|
