Re: [APML]: Color Film and Filters

[Jack Schmidling <arf@mc.net>]

Chuck Vaughn wrote:
> 
> The same answer applies to all three of the preceding paragraphs and
> that is the nebula really _is_ red. Since your eye has essentially no
> response to low light levels at 656nm you can't see it. It doesn't mean it's not there. 
>Color film that renders nebulae red simply has a flatter 
response in the red as compared to the rest of the spectrum than your eye 
does.

Thank you for the thoughtful response.  It leaves only a few details
to sort out.

The original objection I had was making stars that are not red, red and
I guess we agree that this in not legit because stars are stars.  If
a filter does this, to a color photograph, it presents an untrue 
image even if it brings out other reds that really are there but can
not be seen.  No problem, just a fact that should be pointed out instead
of just saying "wow, what great film". 

The other detail is a question:  Just what color is the sky?

When I print my color negs, I attempt to get at least one known color
correct.  If it is a pair of colorful double stars, I adjust to get one
right and leave the rest to the magic of color photography.  However,
the background sometimes comes out wierd and the tendency is to make
it look black but is it? should it be?

js


-- 
Visit our WEB pages: 
Beer Stuff:  http://dezines.com/@your.service/jsp/
Astronomy:   http://user.mc.net/arf/