Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: nyu notesfiles V1.1 4/1/84; site rocksvax.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!ittvax!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!hplabs!hao!seismo!rochester!rocksvax!dave
From: dave@rocksvax.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.rec.photo
Subject: Re: Snow Pictures
Message-ID: <900001@rocksvax.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 30-Sep-84 16:57:00 EDT
Article-I.D.: rocksvax.900001
Posted: Sun Sep 30 16:57:00 1984
Date-Received: Tue, 2-Oct-84 06:27:04 EDT
References: <1481@wateng.UUCP>
Lines: 26
Nf-ID: #R:wateng:-148100:rocksvax:900001:000:1224
Nf-From: rocksvax!dave    Sep 30 16:57:00 1984

I don't think you can get good snow and people shots,  the best I ever
try for is to get the people or the background correctly exposed.  The
film just doesn't have enough dynamic range as they would say in the
audio world.  I found that Kodak seems to process snow shots very well,
they usually end up white.  The Fogomats and the like seem to give you
brown snow...  I think their auto-color corrector are not programmed to 
understand snow, it might have been designed in California.

If your area has a rental color darkroom you might try playing with rolling 
your own print.  You may not get brown snow, but you might be able to get it
correct or even make magenta snow.

I also wonder if any other areas have rental darkrooms, the one in
Buffalo and Rochester charges $5/hour + 0.25 an 8x10 chemistry fee.
Seemed pretty reasonable to me, but sometimes you wonder!!  They have
processing machine that you feed the paper into and it drops out the
other end 11 minutes later, so that you can pipeline some prints
processing with some darkroom time to keep the $5/hour fee reasonable
for a bunch of prints.

Hope this helps a bit...

Dave

arpa: Sewhuk.HENR@Xerox.ARPA
uucp: {allegra,rochester,amd,sunybcs}!rocksvax!dave