Olympus-OM
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [OM] First roll of Kodachrome came back... magnificent :-)

Subject: RE: [OM] First roll of Kodachrome came back... magnificent :-)
From: "John A. Lind" <jlind@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2002 22:34:48 +0000
At 01:01 1/4/02, Dan wondered:
> Now you know why some of us have all but abandoned color negative!

 I'm curious -- if you do develop mostly slides, how do you look at the
pictures and/or show them to others? Is it a matter of using one of those
little viewers every time, having slide shows, or something else?  I shot a
roll of slides, and sure, the images were lovely, but then I realised what a
pain it would be to ever demonstrate this to people..

What I use:
(a) A small 10x12 light table and 10X loupe; large enough to hold an archival page with 20 35mm slides or 12 645 slides. (b) Three different 35mm slide viewers (collected over time) which I still occasionally use for a quick sorting of "loose" slides.
(c) Old Ektagraphic II "boat anchor" projector with a Schneider lens.
(d) Even older Rollei P11 dual format projector

I have a small white panel (~18x24) mounted to the wall of my study. In its former life it was the enameled front panel of a dishwasher. Most diswashers come with several panels in various "decorator" colors. Convince the "Chief of Interior Decorating" that the dishwasher needs to be some color other than white (or the color on its reverse side) and you can abscond with that panel to use it! Its surface was very, very lightly abraded using very fine steel wool to matte the glossy finish. I use this with the projectors for assembling slide shows and going through the "short list" of slides for printing.

Yes, I do slide shows and use a 50" white matte screen for them. The ancient home projection screens are 40" and IMO they're small; 50" is much better. Many of the old screens are also glass bead; has higher reflectance but at the cost of resolution. IMO the slide show is not a "lost art;" most home slide shows were [are] done by people who never learned "the art." I'm very selective about the slides (only the best) and they *must* be relevant to the audience. The biggest error made is showing every slide (The Good, The Bad and The Ugly) of some holiday or other event the viewers couldn't care less about. A good slide show on a large screen using a good projector *lens* has a "WOW" factor. People have been dumbed down by television and computer screens. These do not have the detail level possible from good slides projected through a _good_lens_ to a white matte screen. Want a real "WOW" factor? Project good medium format slides using a decent projector lens!!

After all, image quality aside, the obvious advantage of negative film is
that you get a stack of 36/24/whatever pictures at the end that you can put
into albums/frames/give to people, and that's all you need; nothing extra
needed to make them 'work'.

Small prints have been a "bone of contention" in my household. The other half would like a piles of prints to supply her many thick volumes of "Creative Memories" albums. She still asks about each roll of film I have developed:
  Q: "Did you take pictures this time?"
  A: "No, I *made* photographs."
  Q: "Why won't you take pictures?"
  A: "I don't *take* pictures, I *make* photographs."
  [continues into "death spiral" from here, including an
  artistic difference of opinion about matte versus glossy]

Been going on like this after hundreds of rolls of film for some number of years now; it's scripted. She buys consumer color negative in bulk and shoots quite a few "pictures" herself, so there's no shortage of "pictures." We pick the best of my slides and have 4x6's printed for her, but it's not without this Q/A exchange first. I admire her tenacity. Supplying a photo album with prints from slides requires willingness to forego the one-hour lab instant gratification, wait for E-6 or K-14 processing turnaround, pick the best of the slides, and then wait another turnaround time while they're bing printed.

(oh, another thing I was wondering about -- slides have nicer colours,etc
than negative film when they're slides -- does this still hold when getting
prints made from them?

Printing quality and the print materials can make a slide come to life or it can make it dull and lifeless. Large display prints are done on super high gloss Ilfochrome or Fuji "R" which have a "sheen" to them that almost glows. Small 4x6 prints are done by several nearby sources, always directly printed on reversal paper. I've also used The Slide Printer in Denver, CO for some 4x6's. If direct printed properly on decent "reversal" materials the prints can retain much of their brilliance "WOW" factor. It is different from printing negatives. A lab that doesn't know how to print transparencies well can make crappy prints from them just as easily as it can make crappy prints from negatives.

-- John


< 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 >


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
Sponsored by Tako
Impressum | Datenschutz