kurt budliger
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
I would agree with David that velvia was/is not great for people, flesh tones had a tendency to be too red/pink.
Steve, yeah when it comes time to replace the beastly aluminum Bogen I’ve been toting around for 10 years I’ll definitely be looking to one of the beefier Feisol models for general purpose shooting.
I would discourage you from using a 2X converter on the the 70-200, or any other lens for that matter.
Kurt, do you feel that transparency will give a look to similar to digital as far as color reproduction and contrast range?
Do you mean will transparency give a look similar to digital or a look too similar to digital?
Having shot trannys (slides) for years to me the benefits were/are as follows:
Awesome colors particularly with velvia, vibrant and punchy
Good contrast
You get a positive rather than a negative, no print required for viewing/editing, perfect for viewing on a light table under a loop
Most all editorial and commercial clients required transparencies
Nothing is left to human interpretation at the lab as opposed to print film, when the technician prints your negatives they are making subjective decisions about how things should look, adjusting color and density/exposure as they go.
Personally for color I would go the transparency route, specifically fugichrome (velvia asa 50 or provia asa 100) awesome colors and contrast plus it scans well.
I basically grew up fishing the West Branch of the Ausable in the Adirondacks and Fran was invaluable in my learning to fly fish.
John brings up a great point about depreciation, regardless of which platform you choose you’ll be affected by this unfortunate phenomenon when you upgrade.
