Taking photos of displays...

On Mon, 28 Feb 2005, Bryan Pope wrote: With chemical photography: When I had some artwork professionally photographed, to catch all the indicators etc the photographer did multiple-exposures, as suggested here. "Static" display equiv. The stuff was operating, and illuminated and photographed normally, then again with lights-out, longer exposure, enhanced the light-generating parts. He did a number of exposures, I picked out the ones that looked best (slides). That way also you don't get color reciprocity failure; with really long low-light exposures, the dyes in the color film don't all react at the same rate, so the colors get all muddy. Don't use a "one hour" developer under any circumstances, pro developers don't charge much more, take a few days, and do excellent work. "One hour" places work by literally turning up the heat on the development process, which ruins grain. I suspect they don't change chemicals as often and I can tell you, my pro photos look great after 10 years while the "one hour" photos look like crap at 10 years. It really makes a huge difference. Pretty much all "brand" film these days is pretty good, its all in the development, even with a relatively crappy camera. I've noticed my low-light digital photos look muddy too, I don't know what's goin on there, maybe someone here does.