Display:
That was great, Colman.

Is it worth adding that, in old money, the ISO was sometimes referred to as the "speed" of a film?

In other words, for a given light level, you can take a picture with a higher shutter speed/shorter exposure if you're loaded with a "fast" (ISO 400) film than a "slow" one (ISO 100).

Where you really notice this is in photographing moving objects that you want to keep in focus.  Like children.

by Sassafras on Sat Mar 22nd, 2008 at 08:24:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Yup: I have a pile of rolls of Ilford XP5, which is ISO 400, ready to load into the Nikon EM, together with the 50mm 1.8 for photography when baby arrives - if I rate it at 800 or 1600 (B&W film speed is more-or-less a suggestion, you can alter the effective speed by changing the develoment time)  I should be able to get smooth enough pictures in available light in the hospital. I don't want to be using much flash on a newborn. I'd like to create some artifacts recording the event, not just collections of photons on a member card.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Sat Mar 22nd, 2008 at 09:49:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I was also trying to avoid too much jargon at once. You'll notice I didn't mention large vs. small apertures as opposed to large vs. small f-numbers.
by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Sat Mar 22nd, 2008 at 09:49:59 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series