Re: 70 YEAR OLD KODACHROME TRANSPARENCIES from 1940-1943

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Nothing shoots Kodachrome anymore.   Film has its place.  Its much lower contrast then digital.  Most films are at at a DELTA E of .7 for chrome and neg hovers around a DELTA E of .55.   Digital is captured with a DELTA E of around 1.0   So the Image ton balance is different.  

Randy S. Little
http://www.rslittle.com/
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2325729/




On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 7:51 PM, Jan Faul <jan@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

None of those cameras you ask about shoot Kodachromes. I know I have my detractors here, but digital still can’t do what film does.

On Dec 31, 2013, at 6:05 PM, Klaus Knuth wrote:

Amazing images - especially considering the age!

On this occasion - I am an old/new member of this list.  Got sidetracked - mostly by my job - in the early 21st, but trying to get back into shape now.

Two questions if I may:

1.  Does anyone use Tilt-Shift Lenses on a regular basis these days and for what reason?

2.  Are mirror less cameras in the process of taking a big chunk out of the DSLR world and maybe even replace them in the future?

Thanks and hi!

Klaus





On Dec 31, 2013, at 5:31 PM, Bob <w8imo@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

Speaking of Kodachrome, I just got his from a friend.


http://pavel-kosenko.livejournal.com/303194.html?thread=22669914


Bob
--
Money can't buy happiness--- But somehow it's more comfortable to cry in a Porsche than a Kia.



Art Faul

The Artist Formerly Known as Prints
------
Art for Cars: art4carz.com
Stills That Move: http://www.artfaul.com
Camera Works - The Washington Post

.







[Index of Archives] [Share Photos] [Epson Inkjet] [Scanner List] [Gimp Users] [Gimp for Windows]

  Powered by Linux