RE: RBT and the Realist Custom

[P3D <s.spicer@xxxxxxxxx>]

John Arrowsmith wrote:

>After seeing David's presentation I began to wonder if a Realist camera could
>ever match the quality of an RBT image. The most obvious difference between the
>two is the image format but beyond that I noticed that the RBT appeared to have
>greater image contrast. I like the Realist format and would like to get the
>most out of my camera.



John - there were other photos projected that were also taken with modern
SLR cameras. For instance the show by Tony Bignall (1st show, second night)
was shot with twin SLR's of recent vintage. The difference here is that it
was projected with the older TDC projector. I mention this as all
components in the system need to be considered - with David's show, both
the camera and projector differed from the others. Also the Southern Cross
Exhibition would have contained a mix of cameras (projected with the TDC).
And also, the wide-screen show that was projected used modern optics in the
Widelux cameras (projected with 6x6 medium format projectors).

I'm not trying to defend the Realist. I would agree that Davids show looked
ultra sharp, but am not prepared to attribute a cause without further
information. The work I have seen of Davids in the local Australian slide
folio postal circuit does _not_ in general stand out as the sharpest
images, but it is above average (RBT & Fuji 100 mainly). David Stuckey
consistantly makes comments in the slide folio regarding how impressed he
is with the sharpness of a Belplasca/Kodachrome-25 combination. There are
not yet any people on this slide circuit with a Realist Custom to provide
another basis for comparison.   ;-)

Steve Spicer




------------------------------