ðòïåëôù 


  áòèé÷ 


Apache-Talk @lexa.ru 

Inet-Admins @info.east.ru 

Filmscanners @halftone.co.uk 

Security-alerts @yandex-team.ru 

nginx-ru @sysoev.ru 

  óôáôøé 


  ðåòóïîáìøîïå 


  ðòïçòáííù 



ðéûéôå
ðéóøíá












     áòèé÷ :: Filmscanners
Filmscanners mailing list archive (filmscanners@halftone.co.uk)

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[filmscanners] Re: Scanning negs vs. slides



on 4/17/02 4:00 PM, TonySleep@halftone.co.uk at TonySleep@halftone.co.uk
wrote:

> On Wed, 17 Apr 2002 08:58:20 -0400  Austin Franklin
> (darkroom@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
>
>> I don't believe those are one in the same...  Yes, the dye densities are
>> higher with slides, but the noise is also higher in a slide (less
>> discernability between tones), and therefore dynamic range lower.
>
> All I can do is speculate, as I simply do not know enough. It seems logical
> to me that the wider dye density range of slide should be able to better
> resolve tonal nuances, albeit across a narrower range of subject
> brightnesses. But that's guesswork.
>
> Equally I don't see why it should have more noise - and can't quite see
> what 'analogue' noise is anyway in terms of film grain, except the
> deviation of individual grain sizes from the median, for any given level of
> illumination. But I haven't a clue what the reality is, except that fast,
> large grained emulsions are worse than slow, fine-grained ones.
>
> All I've figured out is that, for myself, neg is immeasureably easier to
> work with for the sort of photography I do.
>
> Against that background, an argument about absolute capacity for tonal
> discrimination is - well, just not all that important. I haven't looked
> into it, as it has never presented itself as a problem that needs solving,
> with neg.
>
> However the loss of shadows and/or highlights with slide has presented
> itself as a disastrous limitation on many occasions.
>
> So my position is : if slide has or has not superior tonal resolution, I
> don't care as neg's is more than good enough, and neg's capacity for
> recording huge dynamic range is valuable to me where slides' intolerance is
> a pain in the arse. Not very erudite, but practical.
>
>
> Regards
>
> Tony Sleep

I feel the same way.  I shoot in the New Mexico desert, and it is very very
contrasty.  Negative film can handle it.  That's one reason I've not
seriously considered changing to slide film.

Ironically, there are still magazines that only want slides.

Berry

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with 'unsubscribe 
filmscanners'
or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or 
body



 




Copyright © Lexa Software, 1996-2009.