Marvin: I shoot architecture using color neg, Fuji Reala, NPS and NPL,
exclusively... I meter everything with an incident meter and will often
overexpose to ensure shadow detail... these films are incredible... I am
currently getting custom prints and machine prints (from a Fuji Frontier)
made... If I take the same neg that I have a custom print made from and scan it
with my Minolta Elite, I will get even greater tonal range.... I am not
familiar with hands on digital camera images, but i do know that my scanned
negs are capable of being enlarged many more times than the Nikon D-1, 990 or
any other reasonable priced digital camera... I also find it extremely hard to
believe that Jay Maisel (who I first met in 1974) has truly given up shooting
on film... there are two many archiving issues as well as enlargement, etc.
I have stopped playing with my scanner for a while (I make my money shooting,
not scanning) but I am planning to keep wortking on perfecting the process
referred to by Tony and others... that of gaining the maximum tonal range from
a given scene through one of at least 2 ways
1. Multiple scans of the same neg, then combine as layers..
2. Multiple shots of the same scene at different exposures, thus capturing an
even greater tonal range, then combine the scans in PShop... this is a
technique that John Paul Caponigro discusses in his book... the rersults are
incredible.. Imagine a Zone System with 100 Zones, not 10.... :)
Marvin Demuth wrote:
> Larry Berman, a list member, along with his associate, Chris Mayer,
> published their interview with Jay Maisel, the noted New York photographer
> who is rapidly moving to digital, in the June 2001 issue of Shutterbug
> <http://bermangraphics.com/press/jaymaisel.htm>. In my zeal to make the
> switch to the digital era, I have read the article three times. One
> section particularly caught my eye:
> <<Chris/Larry: I've read that it's an electronic shutter. (Referring to the
> Nikon D1)
> Jay: Yeah, OK. So I can hold down to a 15th now. I'm an old guy. I don't
> have the shakes but to hold down to a 15th hand held is pretty wild. So,
> with the fact that I'm now shooting 200 ASA, and all my life I've only shot
> 50 or a hundred, tops, and I never liked to push film, I'm now, effectively
> my shutter speed is always higher. Plus the fact that this sucker amplifies
> light. I'm sure you're aware of that.
> Chris/Larry: Well, I know that it certainly has the ability to work at
> different ISO's or ASA speeds.
> Jay: No no, I'm not saying that. I'm saying that if you take a photograph
> at the recommended ISO, in a bad light situation, you will look at it and
> be amazed at how much detail it pulls out.
> Chris/Larry: Opens up the shadow details. The ability of the sensor to see
> into the shadows.
> Jay: It's astonishing.>>
> The phrase, "OPENS UP THE SHADOW DETAILS," strikes me as a real
> bonus. Yesterday in making a C print from a negative, I virtually lost all
> my shadow details in printing for the central theme of the scene. Also,
> yesterday, I received via e-mail a JPEG file made with a Nikon 990 which
> contained more shadow detail than I could have printed with a C print from
> one of my negatives.
> Question: Does the same principle of "opening up the shadow details" work
> with scanned negatives? In asking this, I am aware of the manipulations
> that can be done with shadow details with PhotoShop, et al....which are
> certainly easier to do than with the conventional dodging techniques in
> photographic enlarging.
> Marvin Demuth