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

[at-l] Re: at-l-digest V1 #186

> 
> Date: Wed, 12 Mar 1997 18:48:09 GMT
> From: John Foley <foley@ERA.COM>
> Subject: [at-l] Slide Film Speed
> 
> I've been planning on using slide film instead of print film for
> taking pictures on my hike.  But I'm not much of a photographer,
> so I was wondering what would be a good speed of film to take.
> 
> If I were going to be doing prints, I suppose that I'd take 200
> speed.  Would the same choice be good for slides?
> 
> Thanks in advance....
> 
> - Congradulations on making a great choice. I a big slide film fan. I
worked during college and several years after as a marine photographer
shooting sailing. When you shoot print film, the prints you receive are the
printers best representation of whay you shot (the negative). Depending on
the quality of the print job and the printers personal preferences, the
pics might look very different that what you imagined. Of course, if you
want to print your sldies at a later date, you have to deal with this
issue.
	Slide film also makes you a better photographer. Why? Because it is less
forgiving. If you underexposed the shot, the slide shows it. If you
underexpose a picture taken on print film, most of the time the printer
will try to compensate, making it much lss of a learning experience. You
mentioned that you are not an experienced photographer. I suggest if you
haven't shot slide film before, or for a while, shoot a couple of rolls
before you go, and do it on the trail, or a trail. The lighting on covered
trails can be tricky, it you are taking pics of more that just senic
overlooks.
	As for speed, 200 kodachrome is a great film. It is expensive, but it has
a lot of latitude (the broader the latetude, the bigger difference between
lights and darks the film can record. This is also helpful if you are less
than accurate with your exposure). It would be a great film for taking
pictures while on, or under the trail, around shelters, etc. If you want to
take pics of senics, where there is plenty of sun, might I suggest
Kodachrome 64 (set your asa at 50) or fujichrome 50 (set the asa at 40). In
general, the Kodachrome are more accurate in their color representations,
while the fujichrome and the new luminare and elite films by kodak have
more satuated colors, but skin tones can get a little red. 
	I just realized that I am rambling. Hope this was not to much.

Chris Witzgall
Warrenton, VA
* From the Appalachian Trail Mailing List | For info http://www.hack.net/lists *

==============================================================================