I like grain in film very much. Especially b&w. Sharp grain in a b&w print
is for me a must (I'm talking about my pictures on Kodak T-max 3200, Ilford
Delta 100/400, HP5Plus, not my Pentax 6x7 where I want grainless pictures).
Can I hope that after having scanned a negative (color or b&w) and having
made some necessary corrections (i.e. removing unwanted details) and
exposing on the Fuji Frontier minilab I get the same quality picture as if I
made the print straight from the negative? Or will I get softer pictures/
lesser color balance/with faults in contrast?
Professionally I do stage photography and sometimes to get a perfect
pictures I'd have to combine two fragments from two negatives into one
picture. Another (and main) use for a film scanner in my case would be
archivisation of pictures on CD-R. Sometime I also have to correct contrast
when I happen to underexpose the negative.
I suspect that my negatives will be a challenge to filmscanners, because
when it's too dark for ISO 800 Fuji Superia film, I push it to ISO 1600 or
even ISO 3200 with inevitable increase in contrast. And to reduce the
tungsten color cast in the printing stage I expose quite dense negatives -
this also helps to achieve dense blacks on print and hide grain (you
discussed it a few days ago).
As for my private work: it's mainly color and b&w negatives. No extreme
density, so I suspect that they will not be a problem for any 4000dpi
scanner. And my slides are also "normal".
Those experience of you - please comment.
As for the choice of scanner - I'm very, very impressed by the grain
sharpness in the "musicains" example from
I only have to check the density range of this scanner, and this would be
something for me (the "train" trannie doesnt't tell me much.
If only the scanning times were shorter - but I can sacrifice speed in
favour of less expense and great quality.