Re: filmscanners: Sprintscan 120 and new negative proile scheme

[Isaac Crawford <isaac@visi.net>]

Austin Franklin wrote:
> 
> > Austin Franklin wrote:
> > >
> > > I do not believe you can characterize a film such that you are color
> > > managing it in the same way you are with the monitor/printer
> > etc.  Those are
> > > all deterministic.  Film is image dependant, and is far from
> > deterministic.
> > > Too many variables, lighting, exposure, development etc.
> >
> >       But a properly developed neg will usually have a standard "general"
> > correction. In my RA-4 days, I had a different basic filter pack for
> > each film, sounds a lot like profiling to me...
> 
> Absolutely, but it can really only be used as a starting point, I believe,
> unless you do your own development.

        Right, but it saved a lot of time... I could then concentrate on
tweaking instead of starting all over again for every image. I believe
that this is what Polaroid is after...
> 
> > > Unless you truly profile/characterize a film/system (which I do
> > BTW) for a
> > > consistent set of conditions (or include a color chart on every
> > frame), I
> > > believe it just can't "work".  There is far more to it than
> > providing one
> > > film profile for everyone to use!
> >
> >       I believe that this system is how most of the minilabs are run...
> > Obviously a profile won't give you a perfect result, but what does? It's
> > not like they're going to prevent you from adjusting parameters...
> > sheesh. Profiling neg films is a potentially good way to get in the
> > ballpark, you'd be surprsied how accurate they can be, as long as there
> > are updates on a regular basis... Besides, why make such a fuss? This
> > may help some people out, and if you don't like it, don't use it! It is
> > always better to have more optioons than less. I'm happy to see a
> > scanner manufacturer trying to improve their product and including us in
> > the testing phase...
> 
> I guess for someone who doesn't want to go beyond pushbutton scanning (or as
> I said above, as a starting point), it is probably better for them.  I'd
> prefer to lessen the automation, and teach people how to do the basics, that
> way they can get a perfect scan most every time...and rely on themselves.

        I don't mean to sound argumentative, but I don't really understand what
you're after... A raw scan every time? Once again, we're talking about
options. For the people that want to get really involved, there are the
raw scans from vuescan to work with. For people that don't want to
bother, there are a variety of programs available that can get pretty
decent results right off the bat, and for many people that's all they
need. This is all Polaroid is offering, another option...
> 
> Typically, people don't know what good results look like, and when shown, it
> opens up a whole new world for them...  Ever think something you did was
> just great (even a print you made) and you saw someone else's, and saw just
> how not so great yours was?  Most people have nothing to compare their work
> to, and that's a shame.  Even though it's humbling, I think it'll make you
> better at what you're doing ;-)

        Yeah, but you gotta start somewhere... I am all in favor of making
technology more accessible to people. There are many that refer to this
as "dumbing down", but without exception, the people that use that
phrase already know how to use that piece of equipment...:-) 

Isaac