[photo-3d] Re: XA Twin Rig/Elite Chrome 200

[Mark Shields <beamsplitter@xxxxxxxx>]

=The Elite Chrome 200 that you used with the XAs is probably not =the
=same film that you used a few years ago.  Kodak and Fuji have the =bad
=habit of changing films without changing their names, =reintroducing an
=old name for a new film, or changing names for new marketing
=campaigns.  They also use similar names for very different films
=(Tri-X vs. Tri-X Pro).  That's why I tend to use the catalog
=designation (e.g., EPP) and not the general name (Ektachrome 100
=Plus).

There's no doubt in my mind it's a different film--drastic
difference under fluorescent--unless it was the processing.

=Elite Chrome 200 is a pretty nice film. 

I agree.

=(+3), but I haven't tried that yet.  I don't find the grain
=bothersome.  Larger formats do have the advantage that as the film
=size increases the grain is less important because the viewing
=magnification is lower.  And it has very good reciprocity
=characteristics.

That's the thing--I'm really shooting half-frame, even though
the XA's are full frame--I crop down to the half-frame
beamsplitter format.

I agree about the reciprocity characteristics.

=I haven't seen a problem with sharpness with E200.  Any pairs I =have
=that aren't sharp are definitely out of focus.  I have some very =sharp
=E200 images (blades of grass receding into the background, engine
=details on hot rods and airplanes, etc.).

I doubt you would see a problem with sharpness in your larger
format. It's just that with my small one, it's much more critical.
And I do like my format--the beamsplitter is still the center of
it all with its film economy and ease of mounting. Also, _one_
SLR with the beamsplitter attached is as much as I want to carry
at any one time. But I'm sure you find the larger format slides
you take do make your bigger equipment worthwhile to you.

=Are you using color correcting filters while photographing under
=fluorescent lighting?  I wouldn't expect anything but strange =colors
=without the proper CC filter, unless you use a flash to over power =the
=ambient light.

I do have 49mm FL-B and FL-D filters that I could use with the
beamsplitter, but never have. They just take away too much light.
If the new Provia 400F turns out to be a really good film, but
needs filtering under fluorescent, as the 100F does, I may push
it to 800 and use the filters. I don't use flash.

One of the things I like most about Kodachrome 200 is that it
doesn't need filtering under fluorescent. It's not absolutely
perfect--traces of green can be found in some shadow areas,
but with the light source I use for viewing my slides, anyway,
it's hardly noticeable. I did find this particular roll of
Elite Chrome 200 to be almost as good--it looked a little greener
than the Kodachrome 200 in some shots, but not bad. I do find
that I'm constantly shooting on the very edge in terms of shutter
speed and depth of field, so I really don't want to make things
worse with heavy filtration. The only thing I consistently use
is an 80C for partial correction under incandescent. And even that
is hard to deal with.

In contrast to the Kodachrome 200 and the Elite Chrome 200, the Provia
100F that I tried, pushed one stop, was violently and
unacceptably green under fluorescent. I did find it to be finer
grained and sharper than the Elite Chrome 200; it also has more
contrast--that's a matter of taste. Some people may like the
lower contrast of Elite Chrome 200, and it does help give the
film more exposure latitude.

Mark
  |\       _,,,---,,_         |\	_,,,---,,_     
  / ,`.'`'    -.  ;-;;,_      /,`.-'`'    -.   ;-;;,_ 
 | ,4- ) )-,_..; \ ( `'-'    |,4-  ) )-,_..;\ (   `'-'
'---''(_/--'  `-` \_)       '---''(_/--'  `-'\_)

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.