From: owner-headline-girl-digest@smoe.org (headline-girl-digest) To: headline-girl-digest@smoe.org Subject: headline-girl-digest V3 #137 Reply-To: headline-girl@smoe.org Sender: owner-headline-girl-digest@smoe.org Errors-To: owner-headline-girl-digest@smoe.org Precedence: bulk headline-girl-digest Friday, May 26 2000 Volume 03 : Number 137 Today's Subjects: ----------------- OAC: London Calling LRC ["Andrea" ] Re: OAC:Quick Photo question [rturingan@dico.com] Re: OAC:Quick Photo question ["just little me" ] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 02:48:28 -0400 From: "Andrea" Subject: OAC: London Calling LRC Hello everyone, This is just a quick e-mail inviting everyone over to London, Ontario to join in a great Living Room Concert featuring the talents of Tricia Concepcion, Chelle, Lindi and more musicians. This is just a part of a house warming party for my roommates and me, so it'll be a blast! Everyone is welcome to stay and party, as there will be "refreshments"...all the details still need to be ironed out, but we just want to get an idea of how many people are interested. So please e-mail me if you'd like more details. When? Saturday June 17th, 2000 approx. 6:30 pm to...? ~Andy the Girl see me... http://home.istar.ca/~andyc/me "The price of a memory is the memory of the sorrow it brings" ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 09:21:04 -0400 From: rturingan@dico.com Subject: Re: OAC:Quick Photo question Well my photos are most definitely BLUE.... What is even more strange is that it's on SLIDE FILM? and I swear to god it was NOT slide film that I used, or at least that is not what the film cartridge had on it. There are a couple of interesting shots but most are too dark to use... ( I swear I used a Flash... ) Anyway, The developers are claiming heat damage to the film... It's all kinda strange... Cheers Rannie (who is tempted to shoot a roll a film that he has run under a hair dryer for 10 mins) umm what sort of film were you using, rannie? hopefully it was your typical daylight type and not tungsten film...and hopefully it wasn't too underexposed...i'm also assuming you were shooting regular print film (i.e. negatives) rather than e6 process transparencies...or doing esoteric stuff like cross-processing, or using some sort of gel or colour filter, or making an "artistic statement"! ;) hmmm, then again maybe the printers were just colour blind?? *lol* have you asked them for an explanation?? *hehe* *fumblecheers!* ~edward :) er, sorry, no cute or clever signatures to be found here. so there :-P ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 25 May 2000 11:54:44 PDT From: "just little me" Subject: Re: OAC:Quick Photo question hmmmm, rather freaky, eh? *strains of the twilight zone theme music echoing eerily in the background...* ;) ummm, by "SLIDE FILM", do you mean that the developers gave you back slides (from what was originally a negative roll), or that you got prints + negatives back (from what was originally a slide film roll)?? can you take a look at the negative/slides, rannie, and tell us the markings on them (which will identify the type of film used)? if you had used negative film, but the developers had *mistakenly* developed the film in e6 (slide) chemistry, the resultant slides would have a very weird colour cast or shift to them, and be dark as if they were underexposed, these effects varying in intensity and quality depending on the type of negative film! i have used this "cross-processing" technique to create some very interesting images in my fashion and model shoots, it's a colourful approach used to great advantage in fashion and pop album covers (tara for example, as well as some sarah promos), if sometimes abused, the trick is you have to compensate for the underexposure side-effect in-camera in addition to pushing the film in developing by 1 to 4 stops... of course, if the cross-processing was accidental/unintentional, the results would be pretty poor... :) *fumblecheers!* ~edward :) er, sorry, no cute or clever signatures to be found here. so there :-P ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com ------------------------------ End of headline-girl-digest V3 #137 ***********************************