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