Re: coil photography

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: Yurtle Turtle <yurtle_t@xxxxxxxxx>

Also cool is the "Night Vision" setting on many
camcorders. While it loses the color, it really looks
much more intense than the visible light mode.

Adam

--- Tesla list <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Original poster: "Barton B. Anderson"
> <bartb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
> Hi Nick,
>
> Yep, I understand completely. BTW, when it comes to
> spark
> photography, I find that B&W is very impressive in
> most instances
> (but not all). My best pics are B&W. I think it
> makes the sparks look
> great without all the color clutter. Just my opinion
> and preference.
> It's especially effective for long exposure sparks.
>
> Take care,
> Bart
>
> Tesla list wrote:
>
> >Original poster: Nick Andrews
> <nicothefabulous@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> >Hello Bart,
> >
> >I would agree that 35mm is far better.  I bulk load
> mu own film,
> >both color and B&W from 100' rolls.  Costco in
> Denver wouldn't
> >develop the film because the black reloadable cans
> did not have the
> >film type printed on them, and my masking tape tags
> weren't enough
> >for the moron manger.  I told him it was pro grade
> film, but still
> >C-41 process.  I ended up taking about 16 rolls
> from a bike trip to
> >a place up in Brighton.  It was a real photo shop.
> Cost more, but
> >got good prints, and the people there were
> impressed by my pics, so
> >that was nice.
> >Better prints anyway from them.  I develop my own
> B&W film, so can
> >control the whole process.
> >
> >Nick A
> >
> >
> >----------
> > > Date: Thu, 19 Apr 2007 00:03:36 -0600
> > > To: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
> > > From: tesla@xxxxxxxxxx
> > > Subject: Re: coil photography
> > >
> > > Original poster: "Barton B. Anderson"
> <bartb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > >
> > > Hi Scott,
> > >
> > > I've got a decent Canon Digital, but still,
> there is no comparison to
> > > using my old Minolta XG1 35mm Film Camera
> (IMHO). If you have or can
> > > find a 35mm film camera with a half decent lens,
> it's really hard to
> > > beat. The problem with 35mm camera's is that
> developing businesses
> > > are going out of business due to the digital
> craze. The art of
> > > development is being lost. Nowadays, the set
> parameters of a
> > > developing machine determine the quality of your
> pics. Often, if the
> > > light level is too low, they won't even print
> the pic (I have to tell
> > > them to print everything regardless of exposure)
> and when I see them
> > > looking for the manual to the system to set the
> parameters, I know I
> > > went to the wrong place. So, I have chosen these
> days for
> > > convenience, to swap quality pics for something
> I can at least
> > > control (my digital).
> > >
> > > The camera is important (especially digital).
> Having control over
> > > exposure is very helpful. Good digitals are
> expensive however. If you
> > > do have a developing business near you that is
> good, 35mm is the way
> > > to go. But, if the people running the system are
> high school age
> > > getting paid minimum wage, chances are they
> won't know anything about
> > > the systems their using (just a monkey throwing
> the switch).
> > >
> > > Some of the film developers will copy the files
> to CD (including
> > > film). So, scanner is not a requirement.
> Somewhat larger cities will
> > > usually have a decent development house where
> the employees actually
> > > know what their doing. You just have to find it.
> Often, if you walk
> > > in and there's a single machine and 1 or 2
> employees, don't even
> > > waist your time. Walk out and find a development
> house that has
> > > several systems. BTW, really good development
> houses also do many
> > > other types of printing technology. So, if you
> see a lot of machines,
> > > there's a good chance they actually know what
> their doing and can
> > > develop the film to your taste.
> > >
> > > Take care,
> > > Bart
> > >
> > > Tesla list wrote:
> > >
> > > >Original poster: "Scott Bogard"
> <teslas-intern@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >
> > > >Greetings all,
> > > > I am having trouble getting good pictures of
> my Tesla coil in
> > > > operation. It seems the cameras I have
> available, do not have a
> > > > very adjustable exposure time (and I don't
> have any clue how to
> > > > take a double exposure, without using
> conventional film, which is
> > > > useless to me as I don't have a scanner, so I
> cannot put my
> > > > pictures on the computer). I can get "decent"
> videos, but still
> > > > shots captured from them generally only show
> the arcs, and not the
> > > > coil (which gives no perspective of actual
> size), plus the DPI is
> > > > too low for my taste anyway. Any suggestions
> would be appreciated
> > > > (even referrals to the archives would be
> great, if you could give
> > > > me a general place to look, they are vast, and
> I am pressed for
> > > > time!) Thanks a heap.
> > > >Scott Bogard.
> > > >
> > >
>
>_________________________________________________________________
> > > >Exercise your brain! Try Flexicon.
> > >
>
>http://games.msn.com/en/flexicon/default.htm?icid=flexicon_hmemai
>
> > l taglineapril07
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
>


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com