On Mon, 22 Apr 2013 10:05:48 -0400, "Steve W."
wrote:

Gunner Asch wrote:
On Sun, 21 Apr 2013 22:29:41 -0700, Erik wrote:

Tripods I have. Probably 5-6 of them. I used to shoot a lot of 4x5
film...and good tripods are pretty important.

I guess one of my big problems..is both the after effects of the
stroke..and most of my creative stuff was done on film. When I was
reading the posts about using Florescent lights..my hackles started
rising up and I was thinking.."these guys are ****ing nuts!!"...then
it dawned on me...digital..aint film. Green photos/florescent
light... with film...aint necessarily green with digital.

And for that..I want to thank all of you for knocking me on my ass and
making me think. Truely.

Ive never done more than taken "snapshots" with digital...so its
something Im going to have to remember....digital..isnt film.

I have a degree in photography..shrug..but it was 25 yrs ago. Hell..I
taught classes at the local JC.

I spent most of my time doing B&W with some color mixed in...all film
since then. Granted..I won a number of awards and took the county fair
prizes a few times...but...it wasnt with digital. I wasnt half bad at
all. And I still have the "eye", still remember what the "rule of
thirds" is and so forth.

I just read an ad that was pushing a rather neat folding lightbox in a
briefcase and they were using florescent tubes...and a small Sony
digital camera..and it just simply CLICKED..that all that film stuff
I learned..doesnt apply today. That ad for the backround setup that
you guys posted..had spiral florescents..wondering what the hell those
were for..not bright enough for primary lighting..and Im scratching my
head looking for the strobes..and..there wasnt any. CLICK!!

Thanks guys. It took a bit..but..I think Im catching on...finally.

Gunner



There is a lot of film stuff that applies to digital. But these days
it's really easy to do editing outside the lab. One of the great things
with digital is it almost eliminates the old exposure bracketing of
film. No need to shoot over/under and then search for the correct one in
a stack of film. Instead you can see the image you have real time and
deal with it.

As far as color shifts caused by lights. There can be an entire new set
of rules depending on the sensors in the camera, the color settings of
the monitor and printer. There are also finite color settings to deal
with, unlike film with it's infinite color spectrum. Same issue with B/W.

I switched to a pair of Smith Victor 4-bulb heads that use
150-Watt-equivalent daylight fluorescents. The suckers were pricey as
hell but they're saving my back. That's 1200 Watts of equivalent light
(from incandescents) at 280 actual Watts (efficiency is lower for the
daylights) and maybe 25 pounds instead of close to 100. I'm also using
one of those bulbs in an overhead kicker.

Last September I shot a cover for Amada's S-10 multi-function machine
brochure using those lights, in digital, in Fuji slide film, and in
Fuji negative film. The colors were just fine in each. The lab did a
densitometer analysis of my film for me, and found no significant
spectral holes.

I'm a convert.

--
Ed Huntress