Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2011/07/19

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Digital vs. film cost
From: richard at imagecraft.com (Richard Man)
Date: Tue, 19 Jul 2011 12:12:53 -0700
References: <CA4A3527.12141%mark@rabinergroup.com> <28702F42-C73F-4A92-BD28-207F1949F4A5@mac.com> <048FD405-9514-4A94-AA22-82ABBAF3B80D@archiphoto.com> <0B6093E3-19DA-4E7D-B82C-99258E63A34F@mac.com> <6927BF9D-136F-4FCC-8EDE-5FFD27594D86@archiphoto.com> <47FF1A79-6EF0-43BA-801C-5E28082C9650@mac.com>

So with all these war stories about shooting the particular subject in
question (indoor architecture with mixed lighting), does digital make
it easier? I can't imagine it does inherently as sensors have similar
limitations as film; that they are limited in their spectral
responses?

On Tue, Jul 19, 2011 at 9:58 AM, George Lottermoser <imagist3 at mac.com> 
wrote:
>
> On Jul 19, 2011, at 11:24 AM, Henning Wulff wrote:
>
>> I also had (have) a colour meter, along with all the requisite filters. 
>> The main problem is that as lighting of interiors, especially commercial 
>> ones, became more complex with incandescents, flourescents of various 
>> shades, halogen of varying types, HDI and other types plus daylight, 
>> there was often no 'best' filtration; there was only preference for one 
>> shade or another. When there was only incandescent and daylight, as in 
>> older residences, one could balance everything by using flash or blue 
>> photolamps in fixtures, or taking the shots at dusk. With complex 
>> lighting that just wasn't possible.
>
> INDEED!
> Not only did we need complete filter sets for the lens
> but also to cover windows ?and tuck into light fixtures too.
> Do we balance for daylight or tungsten?
>
> We also had to fight for film and processing budgets
> but also for location scouting budgets and test shoots
> just to see how much and what kind of kit would be necessary
> to get the job done on the actual day of the shoot.
>
> Regards,
> George Lottermoser
> george at imagist.com
> http://www.imagist.com
> http://www.imagist.com/blog
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>



-- 
// richard <http://www.imagecraft.com/>
// icc blog: <http://imagecraft.com/blog/>
// richard's personal photo blog: <http://www.5pmlight.com>
[ For technical support on ImageCraft products, please include all
previous replies in your msgs. ]


Replies: Reply from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] Digital vs. film cost)
Reply from henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff) ([Leica] Digital vs. film cost)
In reply to: Message from mark at rabinergroup.com (Mark Rabiner) ([Leica] Digital vs. film cost)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] Digital vs. film cost)
Message from henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff) ([Leica] Digital vs. film cost)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] Digital vs. film cost)
Message from henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff) ([Leica] Digital vs. film cost)
Message from imagist3 at mac.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] Digital vs. film cost)