Gunner Asch fired this volley in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:
gunner, gunner, gunner... I know what the numbers mean. I not only did the full-monte photography thing from the time I was 15 until 22, but I also have built and use telescopes. Focal-length/aperture ratio (f-stop) is one of those, um... 'entry level' things.
Richard fired this volley in news:xLudnZIHlfrUROjMnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@earthlink.com:
Dodging, vignetting, solarization, toning... it was a richly-complex hobby. Just the sort of thing to keep a nerdy kid engrossed for years. I was also our high school photographer, so I had 'smoking privileges' (not really, but when they knocked to check up, I always had "some film out!".)
The dean of boys had never heard of a modern film tank, so didn't know you could develop in full shop light.
I think you completely mis-read what he said. You just _repeated_ it (correctly), except for disallowing that small apertures require longer exposure, which he had wrong and you correct.
But you were wrong about one thing: For a given 'speed' (film, CCD, anything), shutter speed IS directly involved. The smaller the aperture, the longer the exposure for a given level of illumination.
Gunner Asch fired this volley in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:
Is that the Apologetic Italian version of SCSI?
Look... no common desktop scanner will give you anything even close to the resolution that's on the film. 3600 or 4800dpi will look pretty good, but a 35mm negative is small... that doesn't end up being a lot of X by Y.
There are excellent lens-adapter attachments that will fit or be adapted to most SLR-type digital cameras that will allow the negative or slide to fill the frame, and give you better resolution than a flatbed scanner can.
Also, most photo shops (the few there are) usually have high-resolution slide scanners for doing exactly what you want.
If from prints... it depends upon what you have. You can do a pretty good job on a cheap desktop scanner on formats as large or larger than
5x7.
I wish I could haul a scanner and my computer/software back to 1969. I made nice money (for a kid) back then hand-retouching damaged or carelessly printed original prints. It would've been a 'miracle shop' if I'd had the digital tools of today!
I did photography from the age of about 11 till my mid 40s..both as a amature, as a professional and as an instructor at the local JC
When I started being gone from home 5-14 days at a time doing machine repair...I largely fell away from the technical aspects and became a snap shot shooter.. Then I bought my first digital...
The stroke I had 4 yrs ago..put some small holes in the old memory thingy..but it didnt wipe it all out...thanks be to Crom!!
I see Im going to have to start scanning the Best of...the 10,000 slides and negatives (or more) that Ive got tucked away in boxes. I cant scan most of my prints...I dont have a big enough scanner. Shrug
I do miss a lot of it..but its been 16 or more years since I started the machine repair business...and there wasnt a lot of time to do serious photography during that period. And I closed down the darkroom and packed it all up..gave a lot of it away. Still have some film tanks and whatnot...enlarging easels...etc etc. I loaned out a full darkroom to a local lady..who 5 yrs later...left town and didnt bother to talk to me about the stuff Id loaned her..including the color enlargers
Correct. Historically...the bigger the number meant the smaller the hole. 1 is on the top....64 is on the bottom...when you "stopped down"...you were going farther down the list..and making the hole smaller...letting in less light...
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.