[filmscanners] RE: color negative/print film advice

["Frank Paris" <frankparis@comcast.net>]

Lately I've been doing nature photography with Portra 400UC and scanning
on my SS4000 using VueScan and have been very pleased with the result --
most of the time. About 25% of the time I get previews in VueScan that
are very low in contrast and I have to fiddle a lot in Photoshop to
strike a balance. Those shots never do "pop" the way the other 75% come
out, which are quite striking. If you try this film, I'd be very curious
to hear your results. I have no idea what causes this 25% anomaly
because visually the density of the negatives appears the same.
Sometimes I rescan and they come out just fine. Other times the rescan
is just as funky. It could be that my scanner is getting flakey because
I've put it through a lot of usage the last couple years. I just scanned
a roll of Provia 100F (slide film) and I could have been experiencing
the same phenomenon only not so obvious. Hard to say.

Frank Paris
frankparis@comcast.net

> -----Original Message-----
> From: filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk
> [mailto:filmscanners_owner@halftone.co.uk] On Behalf Of Sam
> A. McCandless
> Sent: Thursday, July 10, 2003 8:52 AM
> To: frankparis@comcast.net
> Subject: [filmscanners] color negative/print film advice
>
>
> I'd appreciate some advice about which color negative/print
> film(s) to use for landscape and nature photos. I'll be
> scanning it in my Polaroid SprintScan 4000 (not Plus). Or in
> a modest upgrade of my SS4000, but not on an Imacon or a Leaf, etc.
>
> I've been scanning Kodak's Supra, because Kodak represented
> it as scanning especially well, on my SS4000. But Kodak seems
> to have discontinued Supra without replacing it. To replace
> Supra 100, 400 and 800, Kodak recommends Portra 160VC, Portra
> 400UC and Portra 800. But without making much of a case for
> any of them.
>
> Fuji has two ISO-100 Fujicolor Superia negative/print films,
> Superia 100 and Superia Reala 100. Reala is presented as a
> "premium" film and described in a way which makes me think it
> scans better and maybe has more accurate or more neutral or
> more natural colors. If either of those is true, I'd pay the
> premium for Reala 100.
>
> Reala is listed only at ISO 100 while Superia is listed also
> at 200, and - with "X-tra" added to its name - also at 400,
> 800, and 1600. In addition, there's a FujiColor "Press", not
> at ISO 100 or 200, but at 400, 800, and 1600. And Fuji's
> Portrait film, at 160, 400, and 800 and in flavors, like
> Kodak's Portra. So even if Reala is preferred at ISO 100, I
> still can't tell how best to mix and match the various
> options at higher ISOs, which I need when I can't use a
> tripod, sometimes even with an image-stabilized lens. And I'd
> appreciate any advice about the higher ISOs too.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Sam
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------------
> Unsubscribe by mail to listserver@halftone.co.uk, with
> 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe
> filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
>

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