Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 70,587   Posts: 1,545,823   Online: 1120
      
Page 36 of 45 FirstFirst ... 2630313233343536373839404142 ... LastLast
Results 351 to 360 of 450
  1. #351
    Richard Sintchak (rich815)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    San Francisco area
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,994
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by keithwms View Post
    I am still a big fan of reala, which available in 120 size.
    Reala in 120 and in 35mm are very different films.
    -----------------------

    "Well, my photos are actually much better than they look..."

    Richard S.
    Albany, CA (San Francisco bay area)

    My Flickr River of photographs
    http://flickriver.com/photos/rich815...r-interesting/

    My Photography Website
    http://www.lightshadowandtone.com

  2. #352
    keithwms's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    Charlottesville, Virginia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,079
    Blog Entries
    20
    Images
    129
    Quote Originally Posted by rich815 View Post
    Reala in 120 and in 35mm are very different films.
    Please say more. I have been shooting it in 120 and have been very happy, don't have experience with it in 135.
    "Only dead fish follow the stream"

    [APUG Portfolio] [APUG Blog] [Website]

  3. #353
    lxdude's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Redlands, So. Calif.
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    6,660
    Quote Originally Posted by SilverGlow View Post
    There is no better way to archive a motion picture then to digitize it. A motion picture has an exceedingly better chance of surviving the coming ages in digital form.
    Yer kiddin', right?
    Film originals are archived as color separations on B+W stock which has an ISO certified life of several hundred years, properly stored. All data will be there. There will not be the problems with archaic digital formats or bits and bytes going poof. They do not need to be re-copied to stay in good shape or keep up with hardware or format changes. They are actual images, not code, which will be reproducible by whatever methods exist at the time.
    I do use a digital device in my photographic pursuits when necessary.
    When someone rags on me for using film, I use a middle digit, upraised.

  4. #354

    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Oxfordshire, UK.
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    2,214
    Quote Originally Posted by keithwms View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by rich815 View Post
    Reala in 120 and in 35mm are very different films.
    Please say more. I have been shooting it in 120 and have been very happy, don't have experience with it in 135.
    I think they are actually very similar films so much so I'd hazard they are the same film.
    Steve.

  5. #355
    Richard Sintchak (rich815)'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    San Francisco area
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    2,994
    Images
    1
    Quote Originally Posted by keithwms View Post
    Please say more. I have been shooting it in 120 and have been very happy, don't have experience with it in 135.
    Maybe I'm wrong with the newer 120 Reala? Only a few years ago the 120 Reala was flatter and more a portrait film and the 35mm Reala was based on Superia technology with more contrast and saturation....
    -----------------------

    "Well, my photos are actually much better than they look..."

    Richard S.
    Albany, CA (San Francisco bay area)

    My Flickr River of photographs
    http://flickriver.com/photos/rich815...r-interesting/

    My Photography Website
    http://www.lightshadowandtone.com

  6. #356
    Steve Smith's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    Ryde, Isle of Wight
    Shooter
    Medium Format
    Posts
    8,599
    Images
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by lxdude View Post
    They are actual images, not code, which will be reproducible by whatever methods exist at the time.
    They rely on that new fangled technology of shining a light through them.


    Steve.
    "People who say things won't work are a dime a dozen. People who figure out how to make things work are worth a fortune" - Dave Rat.

  7. #357
    SchwinnParamount's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Tacoma, WA
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    1,017
    Images
    42
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristophanes View Post
    Used to call that a Kodak Moment.
    Oh my gosh! A one-line posting that I actually have the patience to read.

  8. #358

    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    131
    Quote Originally Posted by lxdude View Post
    Yer kiddin', right?
    Film originals are archived as color separations on B+W stock which has an ISO certified life of several hundred years, properly stored. All data will be there. There will not be the problems with archaic digital formats or bits and bytes going poof. They do not need to be re-copied to stay in good shape or keep up with hardware or format changes. They are actual images, not code, which will be reproducible by whatever methods exist at the time.
    Technicolor originals may be archived as B&W separations but I doubt that anything originated on neg colour stock like Eastmancolor would be.

    Those who argue against digital archiving of images tend to overlook that, once scanned, it is possible to periodically copy large digital archives entirely without human intervention ie there is no expensive labour cost and the cost of magnetic storage media continually reduces. Yes, some random errors will be introduced over time mostly at the pixel level but rarely to a degree that would be visible after the application of error correction algorithms.

    Does anyone believe that a spool of valuable MP film or file of B&W negatives has never been irrepairably damaged by water, fire or other misadventure? Please don't forget when arguing against it that a digital archive of anything can exist identically in any number of locations and for that reason alone it is the ultimate back-up. OzJohn

  9. #359
    Ian Grant's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    West Midlands, UK, and Turkey
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    16,276
    Images
    148
    OzJohn what matters is that films will be archived often in more than one way. What's also important is that they are archived with copies at different locations.

    Yes disasters do happen and so that's taken into account. Film is just one way movies are archived now for posterity. Too much has already been lost because no-one gave a proper thought to it many years ago.

    So the movie industry is now archiving on film, even wholely digital movies, and like digital there can be many copies.

    Ian

  10. #360
    Photo Engineer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Rochester, NY
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    23,037
    Images
    65
    George Eastman House and other Museums archive film as color separation as do many motion picture studios. As I said earlier, the costs are much lower for analog duplication. Set up a printer and let fly! Digital often requires format changes from generation to generation whereas film does not.

    As for 120 vs 35 in the above about Reala, you must remember that you may be seeing a difference in micro vs macro contrast in images at the same magnification. I have posted several times on this before.

    PE



 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin