>>>>> \KM\ == Kennedy McEwen <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:|
KM> In article <email@example.com>, Ole-Hjalmar Kristensen
KM> <ole-hjalmar.kristensen@substitute_employer_here.com> writes
>> The main point was that it has survived unfaded.
KM> How are you so sure? You have said your assessment is by eye, so you
KM> have no firm data to back your statement. You acknowledge the
I *said* it was by eye, so I don't really need any firm data to back
it up, do I? Yes, it has probably degraded, but not so much as to make
much of a difference to my eye, and there is no problem at all
scanning it, and the histograms indicate there is plenty of
information in all three colors. I have negatives from the same period
which now are essentially monochrome, though, stored under identical
conditions in the dark. The color rendition is certainly not
completely accurate, but then it never was.
KM> limitations of the emulsion of the time, so how do you know it has not
KM> degraded? The Ektachrome emulsion of that time is known to fade, even
KM> in dark storage, so what makes you so confident that your slides
KM> haven't? What special precautions have you taken, because unless you
KM> stored them under archive conditions by accident (since the ideal
KM> conditions were not even identified at the time your storage started)
KM> then they certainly will have faded - even if you *think* they look
I mainly take pictures to look at them, so if they *look* good, they
*are* good. As I said before, good enough for me :-)
KM> Or do they just look like you recall they should? It is surprising
KM> how many people believe that colours are so much more brilliant these
KM> days than they were in the 50s and 60s - because that is the diet of
KM> images from that period that they are fed on.
If I place these slides on the light table, side by side with other
slides taken within the last few years, lots of the newer slides have
more brilliant colors. I can also find quite a few examples of the
opposite. As you said yourself in a previous post, the Ektachrome
emulsion has been improved, so it is difficult to know which
differences can be attributed to aging, and which are just the
consequence of using another emulsion.
KM> Yes, Socrates himself is particularly missed;
KM> A lovely little thinker, but a bugger when he's ****ed.
KM> Python Philosophers (replace 'nospam' with 'kennedym' when replying)
The Sun also rises